I'm not sure that I'd lead with speculation from the Winklevosses in order to convince a skeptic. Your other three points are much stronger.

Also, only the latter two are actual economic developments, rather than analysis. The upcoming Congressional hearings might be newsworthy too.

lol at a couple of dudes who are publicly known to be existing large amounts in bitcoin stating that it "should be worth a lot more!".

If they did not hold bitcoins, you would fault them saying they did not put their money where their mouth is...

One can never be right against the HN crowd. sigh

Their speculation might not be worth much, but if they succeed in setting up a bitcoin ETF it could definitely boost bitcoin's credibility.

1. The Winklevoss name doesnt exactly boost credibility.

2. What you're describing already exists.

https://www.secondmarket.com

Don't the Winkelvii have large Bitcoin holdings, whose value they presumably wish to drive upwards? Sorry, but I think this is a case of a market remaining irrational for longer than some people can remain solvent. I don't intend to waste money betting against it, but I'm not impressed. A couple of years ago people were predicting the price of gold was headed for the stars too, and a lot of them have lost money since.

depends how far you go back on gold prices, 50 years ago buying into gold was a great idea. 10 years ago, maybe not so much, bitcoin is currently at the very early stages so buying in now could be considered cheap in 10 years time.

Buying into stocks 50 years ago was also a good idea, though.