Topic: Michael Saylor talks about Bitcoin, and you WILL be disappointed (Read 634 times)

Yes, probably, but I'm a very pragmatic person. Remember the "enemy of your enemy is your friend"? Government shills are using individuals like Saylor to distract and confuse the public make people hate them instead of the governments and banks. Very few understand it.

To me, as long as peeps like Saylor are shilling Bitcoin and helping it grow and succeed, they are more positive than negative. But it's just me.

We can not know his learning progress but people can always change their mindset. As a businessman, he can more flexible with his mind if it brings benefit to his business.

For the educational contents on his Saylor Academy website, it's very possible that those contents were composed by his staffs, not by himself. He even not read all those contents.

He can do what needed for his business and if it helps Bitcoin gets more exposure in community, expands its adoption, I see he is doing good contributions for us.

Use his business products, it depends but I would like to store my bitcoins self custodial.

By "we", he means Wall Street-level corporate psychopaths who don't give a shit about anything but extracting as much wealth as possible from the American public. Stop simping for him. Its embarrassing.

I truly thought that he of all founders/CEOs from legacy, actually understood what Bitcoin is, how it technically works and because of it, I thought he understood how its ethos was derived from how Bitcoin technically worked. It was also because if this educational website, built by the foundation of his, that I thought he might be different from the others.

https://learn.saylor.org/mod/page/view.php?id=30734&forceview=1

He has the educational website, but he didn't learn anything from it.

no institution is talking about monero..
for obvious reasons(anarchists)

as for institutional effects to bitcoin:
we will see the likes of coinbase.com(main custodian) get stricter in regards to 'blacklisting' so that they can keep their custody free from nefarious users coins, because as a custodian of coins that then get allotted to ETF the institutions wont want to be trading shares of criminally linked coins which authorities can seize and kill peoples share allocations

as for actual bitcoiners that use UTXO's not shares.. we will enter a thunder-dome scenario
'two may enter one may leave'
where by middle men services/system/subnetworks will want users to lock funds into their systems and only let the user escape once users have spent the value and hold an empty balance of funds owed to users, leaving all coins to the middlemen
(this is and will be achieved by fooling people intoo spending their value on digital items that cost nothing to make. EG forum hat avatars, junk meme AI gen images.. all so middlemen get coin at costs far far far far lower then minimum cost mining)

i do laugh though
with saylor no longer CEO of microstrategy and is diluting shares... its microstrategy that has over 130k btc not saylor personally
so pointing at microstrategy for having 130k+.. whilst a certain OP always tries to avoid discussions of the coins hoarded by DCG sister companies (coinbase/grayscale) that are over 1million coins, it makes me laugh..
DCG has sponsored more core dev deals that have made bitcoin more annoying.. oops i said it, prepare for backlash

i personally dont like saylor nor dcg.. but its funny how certain people finger point at the less concerning to avoid highlighting the bigger concern

This kind of looks like it's ripped out of context. By 'we' he probably means institutional investors. And that is not his POV or something. That's a fact. At that level you have to be as law abiding as possible (remember what happened to CZ?) But we can't know for sure what Saylor really thinks as an individual.

Michael Saylor is building up a massive automatic profit printer for MicroStrategy. I am not considering him as my idol and anyone similar. I just think about him and his strategy for MicroStrategy and in my opinion, he is a genius.

People can ask questions like, MicroStrategy is getting benefit by their decision to invest in Bitcoin which no doubt has big contribution from Michael Saylor to convince the company board members to spend money for a risky investment in BTC since 2020.

As a clear result of this, the company stock has very good growth in 2023.

People can ask question like, if Bitcoin Spot ETFs will be available, will people continue to buy MicroStrategy stock?
I think they will do because if they buy Bitcoin Spot ETF, they won't have a thing that can bring double benefit like MicroStrategy stock. Buy the stock, see Bitcoin growth to increase your portfolio value and also see the stock increases in value. Double wins.

I am sorry if someone thinks I am shilling MicroStrategy stock. It's not my intention. Just thinking about Michael Saylor as businessman with very smart strategy.

It is a big concern but MicroStrategy and any investor are free to accumulate bitcoin from the market.

core have a roadmap of idea's for the next release and the release after that

and seeing how core devs prefer adding code that TRY to make subnetworks operate better. but close issues regarding making bitcoin less annoying.. i dont see them desiring scaling bitcoin any time soon.
most paid devs have the mindset that the junk/spam is needed as it pays miners....
yet, miners were never poor even when btc market was $17k.. nor do they need subsidy when market economics of btc price can take care of them.. so they dont need extra payments anytime soon. but .. dev politics overalls logic, economics

inshort
they have no desire to make transactions lean or allow more transactions per block nor remove the spam anytime soon

The bottom line question is Will the scaling problem be addressed and is it necessary now?

wow he learned something in 2024.. im shocked, but in a pleased way
now he should apply that knowledge to core devs that are paid by a business..
and then look specifically at their "force merge" code upgrades those devs done

Seems I overlooked this topic first time around.

I'd say that, in order to be disappointed, you'd first have to have some level of expectation.  People, especially those in business, have agendas.  If you hold the expectation that such people are "on your side", then you probably are going to be disappointed at some point or another.  Because such people will always serve their own interests first.  I suspect Bitcoin is largely a means-to-an-end for Saylor.  He's just using it to get what he wants.  Don't pin your hopes and dreams on him, or people like him.  Then you won't be disappointed.

And you definitely can't assume people are allies just because they sometimes say nice things.

He's certainly a controversial figure, and I don't particularly like him, but the fact is he has wormed his way into the hearts of permabull maxis everywhere. Thus, we have to accept the fact that he's here to stay.

He straddles the line between iconic leadership figure and hapless cheerleader, just as he is somewhere between brilliant corporate strategist and shrewd megalomaniac sociopath. Even if his conviction is all for show, its conviction nonetheless, and I've come around to respecting that.

Although I'm still giving Michael Saylor some benefit of the doubt, the kind of mindset that he exposed of himself truly having about Bitcoin is a sign that he wants Bitcoin to become like a corporate-controlled settlement layer for the wealthy and the elite, instead of what it was intended to be as a decentralized, censorship-resistant, self-sovereign cryptocurrency for everyone.

Plus don't forget the question of, "How much of the total supply must be held in centralized third-parties' vaults before we start to worry? What's the threshold?"

Does support anarchist mean it is a centralized or censored network?

The network is centralized and should be centralized in future. Censorship will need a long time with deep on-chain analytic tools to do it. Sometimes it is too late to detect a laundering money from a hack and want to block all money from darknet is impossible.

Like governments and central banks fail to block all money flow in and out of darknet with cash. It is unfair and unrealistic to want to have a perfect tool do to that with blockchains. They only want to show off their power and say they want to control things in their nations including blockchains and money flows through blockchains.

How can someone just go by what the media said about Michael and he's also boosting on the same wrong idea and expect us to believe in whatever thing he said, Michael Saylor is wrong here totally and i completely disagree with him, we don't need censorship for whatsoever reason, if this had been in place, maybe someone like him wouldn't have accumulated this far from where he's now with his bitcoin holdings, this means he has been deceiving himself and not us all these while that he make posts about bitcoin saying alot of things that makes it a better Investment and global asset.

Are you saying that you agree that Michael Saylor is right that we don't need censorship-resistance? Would you agree that Bitcoin should throw POW out of the window and let a group of "trusted individuals" edit and append the ledger?

I could see an argument that Bitcoin doesn't really need to be private/fungible on-chain - But that's another debate for another topic. BUT censorship-resistance, NOT needed? What has everyone been doing here?

I'm experienced and knowledgeable enough to not get disappointed because of a businessman going against Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies. After all, I know that their support or opposing it wouldn't make things different for me if I had started using Bitcoin because I like the idea or the technology it has been built with and the purpose it serves for us as users or even investors. Their views regarding Bitcoin won't change my views regarding it since my views aren't influenced by what they say or think about it.

Michael Saylor or any other businessmen who are actively involved in Bitcoin investments might say things that will be useful for them in terms of profits in the long run, and it's understandable since all they care about is profit and they aren't backing Bitcoin or cryptocurrencies because they like them in other ways, which might be the case, but it might not, for most people.

I mean. He's true in what he's saying. The appeal of bitcoin only applies to those who aren't lined with deep pockets. After all, the billionaires in this economy got from where they are right now thanks to their manipulation of customer information, something that bitcoin withholds. It's poignant and painful but at the same time Michael's only saying the truth in here. Sure there will be billionaire deviants who would still dip their toes in the crypto industry despite it not giving them true monetary value, but they wouldn't be significant enough to count amongst the hundreds if not thousands of billionaires right now who aren't keen on the protection and anonymity/censorship that bitcoin is providing its users.

Although Mr. Saylor is pretty understanding to the causes of Bitcoin and its stated goals, one shouldn't expect much more from a listed company CEO. He has a position to guide a company to success and can't really stand behind political and revolutionary causes such as anarchism so freely from where he stands. If you want to hear libertarian or revolutionary takes on bitcoin, there's all kind of party conferences to take yourself to.

By all means, political takes on bitcoin are more than welcome. Bitcoin's place in society is a subject that could be debated forever and these conversations are meaningful. But if you ask Mr. Saylor about a political take, he probably isn't the right person for it.

No matter how they interpret the people will gonna believe what they see and what they are witnessing for themselves. that's why the price of bitcoins is not affected by whatever opinions they have and when you have enough resources to do your own personal research regarding bitcoins, you will know that their opinions are not worth considering because you already know the truth and you know that when you have bitcoins in your personal wallet, no one can control it except you. We didn't have as much financial freedom before and to have it right now is a huge success towards financial privacy and secured assets.

I'm not designating Bitcoin with a belief-system or a philosophy. I'm merely describing it as what and how it's actually designed technically. What do you think should self-sovereignty and censorship-resistance necessitate? For everyone to follow the government? Or real embodiment of freedom from the State?

Plus Anarchy doesn't necessarily mean "chaos and disorder", but that's a debate for another topic.


Or to give him some benefit of the doubt, he probably is playing 4D Chess. Haha.

What happens to saylor! Bitcoin has any technical changes that make him think like this or is he depressed about this long bear market? He is a whale and the only thing that matters to him is profit. You need to understand why saylor makes announcements about his purchases. This gives them an influence over the market because he is one of the biggest holders of bitcoin and he can crash the market with his bitcoin if he wants to. So it is obvious that people will start following his every move if someone is a bitcoin investor. 

We are very close to the halving and saylor knows that. He is just trying to spread fear to the market so that he can accumulate more bitcoin at a cheap price before the bitcoin halving. This is what whales do, first they make people greedy and confident about bitcoins positive outcome then they crash the market to spread fear so that people start selling their bitcoin at a loss.

Saylor doesn't give a damn about what is behind Bitcoin, the technicals have not changed since he said that, the only thing that changed is the amount of money the pos smelled he can make with it! The moment he realizes there is not so much more money to be made he will dump it and flee to the next opportunity!

Just think for a moment how is he buying coins in the name of a company, filling each time SEC papers and distributing information to shareholders while storing coins in some cold wallet doing anything to annoymity? The guy is just holding Bitcoin as he would be holding gold waiting for the moment he can take a profit out of it, he would be doing the same with real estate, stock shares or metals, he is not interested in anything else but the $ in gained value!
If he would be so amazed by the features he is advertising that much he would be using the coin, guess what, he's not!


Then how about this:
https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/15-s12-blockchain-and-money-fall-2018/
If you think Saylor is true to his word because of that course, what about Gensler?  
Let's see how you can split two, especially since Gensler had no 4 billion financial motivation behind it!

Sailor’s attitude towards Bitcoin is fanatical, he is so confident that Bitcoin will cost millions that he is now ready to buy it at any price. I understand that this is his strategy, and he buys when he has the money to do so. But it seems to me that if he had focused his purchases on a bear market, his results would have been even better. Although it is obvious that he does not care and it is most likely that Sailor will make a mega profit at the upcoming bull run.

I've never considered him a friend, to be honest, so this switch doesn't surprise me. I guess I'm just generally not very trusting toward extremely rich people, and, as usual, he's been in some controversies, including investigations for financial crimes.
Guys like this are only interested in profit, they don't care about anything else. If it suits him to invest in Bitcoin to make even more money, that's what he does. But it doesn't mean he believes in Bitcoin and in its mission.
Also, a really nice catch by Helena Yu that this particular article is actually old, from 2020. But it doesn't change the matter of untrustworthiness of Saylor to me.

If Bitcoin is equal to anarchy, then it may not be good. Anarchy means chaos and disorder. But Bitcoin isn't anarchy or a currency for the anarchists. Bitcoin is just a currency that embodies freedom. There's nothing wrong with it.

Saylor is only after Bitcoin as an asset, something which he can earn from. With his words, it's clear that Saylor is in favor of censorship. He seems to be against privacy also. But should we be surprised? Saylor belongs to the traditional elite.

But what's the point/context? Are you saying that Michael Saylor is merely naive and foolish, and therefore he can't be blamed for making false claims? I believe he should be corrected, and educated about what Bitcoin truly is, and what its real value proposition is. OR he probably is acting that way because he knows that Bitcoin as a censorship-resistant cryptocurrency, and a breaker of political strongholds won't get the approval of the government.

But being a person who educates people about Bitcoin through his own site, he should truly know what Bitcoin is and must merely be pretending to be stupid and foolish, https://learn.saylor.org/mod/page/view.php?id=30734&forceview=1

If I called you naive and foolish and a true enemy of BTC would you be angry?

@pixie85. Agreed. We should idolize him on his skill on women and how they become Saylor's jerkers hehehehe. In the cryptospace I reckon this has also worked on men hehehe. Saylor's jerkers form a circle to continue the jerking and tell everyone that there is no second best.

These are pictures of younger Michael with women. You can google him and see all of them because there's a lot more than this.

I have nothing against him and I see no reason not to call him a friend of bitcoin. As you said, money talks and his money is telling a whole story. It's completely opposite to many people who praise cryptocurrencies and only see the dollars in it, like Kevin O'Leary, or McAfee.

At least Saylor isn't bullshitting us.

The good from them and from anyone please take it. They seek profits from the business they run, we also seek profits from the investments we make.
Since Saylor came into play with his positive knowledge on Bitcoin, I have always followed and taken positive points from him. Not everything that is heard from them directly influences my decisions, but is filtered before entering the decision that will be taken.
People in listening and hearing them are probably the same as me. Full of filters.

Not disappointed.

Everyone will always have their own opinions, but at the end of the day, money talks. People and companies will see Bitcoin price rising like crazy and they will run like sheep to catch the wave before it ends, just like they did in 2021. Although one thing that remains constant (for now) is Microstrategy DCAing bitcoin purchases.

@bbc.reporter, I don't recognize those two people. Who are they?

Saylor is a businessman, he moves according to his interests and what benefits him. If he feels that Bitcoin is beneficial to him, he will probably side with Bitcoin and if he feels that it is not beneficial for him, he will probably leave it. And do you think that I would be disappointed by the words of a businessman? of course not. Whatever opinion he has on Bitcoin, it will not change my perception of Bitcoin.

What Michael Saylor Moon will certainly not disdain is how much money he will make from hoarding and holding bitcoin hehehe.

What does everyone predict, will he dump or will he use his bitcoin as collateral to sell bitcoin short very much similar when he used Microstrategy stocks as collateral to buy bitcoin long?

In any case, he will be one of the richest people who has larped about bitcoin in the cryptospace.

We can't avoid this kind of thought where we question one's stand point when we knew that the person is heavily invested on Bitcoin.  I read the article and I find it not disappointing since he is only giving his point of view on how Bitcoin market will grow.  He has some point even though it is disappointing for the Bitcoin fanatics.  But after all it is just a personal point of view and we have our own.  We shouldn't be affected by these kind of article or any influential people when it comes to our investment.  Let them share their thought and let us continue our own research about the truth behind Bitcoin, after all it is our investment, our own decision to make.


Any kind of things that needs adoption needs a charismatic advertisers.  It is not necessarily a leader since Bitcoin is decentralized and we know it has no central authority but for it to promulgate, simply telling information is not enough.  A charismatic marketing is needed for the people to easily accept and adopt Bitcoin but of course we should not create our own version of definition of what Bitcoin is and should stick to fact about Bitcoin and why it is created.

Regardless of the truth people need to stop following people like Elon and Saylor and begin to take decisions on their own, the community does not need some kind of charismatic leader at the top, each person needs to take a look at what bitcoin offers and see if there is anything there that interest them, right now the main motivation to buy bitcoin has been to invest in it in order to make money, however as the economy gets worse and governments get more restrictive with their policies, people will begin to appreciate way more the characteristics of bitcoin that allows it to get around such censorship.

You both are right, everyone holding BTC including Saylor will try to sell some of the BTC either to book some seed profit or to avoid from taxation, I have read a few times that, Michael used to sell some of his BTC at the end of the year to avoid huge tax that's one of the strategy of him. Well, but that selling did not have that much impact on the market.

And to be honest, I don't think now Michael has any need to sell those BTC because he is already earning a lot, from his company's Micro strategy, but still, he can book some profit but selling all the BTC and going against BTC is not an option for him now. Many investors have trusted him with their money. While they can trust BTC directly but I think people of old mindsets trust people more than algorithms.

Your DCA exit plan looks nice, and OTC trading can also avoid panic in the market, there are many ways if he wants to sell BTC but doesn't want to create huge panic or fud out of it, like he can sell it privately, etc. But let's just not discuss possibilities that are not even going to happen in any scenario. This SSS plan looks old, don't you think?

whales do the opposite to their own trading patterns..
when they want the price to be low, so they can buy. they will not want competition pumping the price so they dont talk ultra positive about it.
however when its time for them to sell they want the competition to pump the price even higher so they can sell at max.

you can usually spot a whales trade plan via how pro-con they are about an asset con=buyer pro=seller

Michael Saylor is a good example why people need to start taking decisions themselves, this man never liked Bitcoin and he have said a lot of wrong things about Bitcoin, many people are mislead by him because after, he later full embarrassed Bitcoin, OP you should always look at the date that people share that nonsense about Bitcoin, it's possible that it's old already.

Today this man have learned his lesson, he now talk about Bitcoin in the open and advice people to invest too, I believe he is was judging something he has no idea about it's purpose but it's good he learned.

Even if this comment about Bitcoin was new it changes nothing, people like Saylor can do this to scare people away so that they can keep buying, stop been controlled by people like Saylor, find answers yourself and make your decision.

Lolz  . See comment. Yet he becomes one of the biggest hodler of that the same gambling fate coin. smile!! Well at the initial time of the technology many people disdain and hate it, but when some discovered that bitcoin network is much more better than keeping their money in fiat bank, they started using as their investment coin. Well this not a new news so Uncle Saylor will say "that was then and not now". And I don't think he will still disdain bitcoin when he has seen the benefits and the important which he has kept his money in anonymous. Saylor now preach the goodness of bitcoin nd not the reverse part. Though I am not following on IG and Twitter but I believe he does not hate bitcoin again.

we just fail to realize that bitcoin don't need these influencers for it to go to the horizon as many of us have expected. It's high time we change the belief system that it moat be billion businessmen like Saylor getting involve before bitcoin can do better, get better with price and expensive adoption.

Saylor didn't intentionally chose to adopt bitcoin because he wanted to he did so because the government had access to  his asset which got seized back then by the government and he felt the only best shot he has to avert reiteration of that seizure in future was with bitcoin.

Am sure if the government give such persons a better deal tomorrow that's in their favour  they won't resist.  Businessmen are forever in for any negotiation that still keeps them in good business.

I totally agree with this. Bitcoin does not care about who holds it nor does it have an entry barrier to accommodate the rich. It only recognizes the data and ensures that data is immutable.

People who hold bitcoin also should not care who else is holding and should not allow anyone else determine their decisions made. Check the data which is publicly available and make a decision on it. Someone being rich enough to buy a bunch of bitcoins and influential enough to make a public show of it does not mean you should take advice from them.

Do your own research!

- Jay -

What is known about Michael Saylor today is that he is an entrepreneur who continually says Bitcoin is great. Saylor always explains the greatness of Bitcoin at various events he attends.
My assessment of Saylor is the same that he is a person who always supports Bitcoin as a savior of currency value.

If Saylor's report was disappointed with Bitcoin which was published three years ago, perhaps he was playing a drama or he at that time did not understand bitcoin like he does now, who always continuously expresses support for bitcoin.

I don't know why you've brought this old post up, from 2020. If you post about public figures who think BTC doesn't have any value, the community would oppose such ideas, if you post about public figures who praise BTC, the community would appreciate them for their understanding of the network, that would always be the reaction because this is a BTC community. Michael Saylor was in the first category of people above, before he changed his ideas about BTC, and he is free to do that.

I feel that since people can change their ideas at anytime, we should not dwell on what public figures say or do about BTC, for example Tesla were accepting BTC at one time, then they stopped saying nonsense about BTC destroying the enviroment. If you understand the BTC network so well, you'll not be disappointed or care about what anyone says.

he invests in bitcoin, but hypes up a subnetwork. yet he does not hold substancial % of his hoard as liquidity locks in the promoted subnetwork to show he trusts his value to be locked in the subnetwork.. so what does that really say about the subnetwork he prefers people to use for payments

Saylor was not the first investor to change his orientation because he found a way to achieve more profits, and he will not be the only one. In the history of Bitcoin, we have witnessed people who were enthusiastic about Bitcoin and suddenly changed everything for the sake of profits. For example, we have Roger Ver.
In short, look for ideas that you believe in and invest, and do not invest because someone thinks that Bitcoin is good.

though many comments are repeated from years ago
salyors game for years is to think of his favoured subnetwork as the payment/currency network, where as thinking the bitcoin network as just the reserves settlement/audit network

I was also confused for a bit because the latest video (interview) from Michael Saylor was three days ago and in that video, he did not say anything bad about decentralization or BTC. I also searched the quotes of Saylor on the internet but they did not show up, At first I thought, the OP had mistaken it, but to be honest I don't trust the new website, as the BTCTimes website has few visitors (less than 50k).

I think Op might have come to know about this news from this tweet of Paul Sztorc:
https://twitter.com/Truthcoin/status/1716674000938512681
As this post is only 1 day old. Well, thanks you for confirming the date, as I did not notice the date in the first place. Overall, you have already said to OP that Saylor has supported the BTC maybe back then he doesn't but the present and the future that most matter.

Saylor is doing Dollar Cost Averaging for buying Bitcoin and he will apply DCA for taking profit his bitcoin too.

I agree with you that he is smart enough to not dump all bitcoins he has on the market with one order or within one day or a couple of days. Doing DCA for exit price will help him to get better profit by don't have to find market tops and can avoid panic on the market because of selling pressure from Saylor and Micro Strategy.

(SSS) - A Sane and Simple bitcoin Savings plan.

SSS plan looks good for Saylor to take profit.

Saylor and his company are specific because they don't hide that they invest in Bitcoin, and I'm sure there are those who do it in secret for various reasons, whether it's that they want to protect their privacy or maybe in the past they spoke very ugly about BTC, and they don't want to admit that today they think differently.

Regardless of the fact that some consider Saylor a very smart man with business sense - it is hard to imagine that 10 years ago he was quite pessimistic not only about Bitcoin, but also about online gambling. Even then, he was an adult with enough knowledge to understand that people will always gamble, as they have been doing for thousands of years.

Of course, it is not realistic to believe that he will never sell the BTC he bought (and is still buying), but maybe he will sell only a part when the price is such that he will be able to return his total investment, and at the same time he will still have enough BTC left.

People can change their minds and businessmen can change their minds very quickly. People who are experienced in financial markets don't publicly tell you what they are doing. When they tell you about that, they already did something before that, secretly and only let you and the crowd know when their plan is mostly done and they want to go to a net phase, hype the market and take profit.

Saylor said many times that he will not sell Bitcoin but is it realistic to believe him?

He and MicroStrategy did not buy Bitcoin like their jewelries and consider Bitcoin as what they will bring down to earth when they die. They bought Bitcoin to take profit, enrich their wealth so they will take profit in future.

If you want to know how enthusiastic Micheal Saylor is about bitcoin, just follow him on X (formerly known as Twitter) and see what he is tweeting. He is always tweeting mostly about bitcoin and how it is better.

Since when I have known Micheal Saylor in 2020, when he compared bitcoin with gold, he has been investing and encouraging people to invest in bitcoin.

Those that i pity most are the ones that always follow Michael Saylor back to back and took him as their role model, this man have always been sitting at the fence, sometimes you will find him talking well about bitcoin and making investment in it, while some other time you will still be surprised seing him talking as if he wasn't the same Michael everyone knows, what i can say about him is that he always seeks tractions through social media appearances and must be doing all these on purpose.

I am not disappointed by what Saylor or anyone says. I like Michael Saylor because he has a very clear mind in general. He is an engineer and has a strong fundamental knowledge over Bitcoin in terms of energy consumption, which is exactly what makes Bitcoin valuable.

I have seen people changing opinions in regards to bitcoin. The more you learn, the more you understand Bitcoin.

Finally, Saylor is a businessman, so don't forget that anything he says can also be driven by that fact.

Why would I be disappointed by anything Saylor or anyone like him says? I don't want to go into whether he invested in Bitcoin because he thinks it is something unique and superior, or if he just wants to earn a few billion more dollars (because everything revolves around profit). If today Saylor were to dump all the BTC he bought in the last few years, should that mean we should all sell and forget that Bitcoin even exists?

If we're going to talk about disappointment, why go back only 3 years, maybe we should go much further so we can be "disappointed" much more

The honest truth is, all these people peddle fake news as influencers to get better entry and once they're in, they start pushing it again.

I take whatever influencers says about Bitcoin with a grain of salt. They have no love for the technology but just to make money off it. Whatever you're building isn't their concern, as long as they make money, anyone else can burn. They have no moral values towards it. I can't depend on such a person to give me the right opinions.

Some investors are quite active in expressing their motivation to encourage others to become aware of Bitcoin. I appreciate that. However, other things like idolizing him are definitely not my type. In this case I am neutral and do not care whether those words apply to him or whether Saylor is currently the largest investor in Bitcoin. He was a businessman and as long as the money he spent had significant profits, then so far he had only seen one side.

Although this is old news we can expect this to come up on the mouth of huge bitcoin accumulators since this is how they create some news so they can manipulate the mind of the people following them. If we really don't give any damn on statement they are saying and just forget about what possible actions they wanna do then for sure it cannot create any impact to the market and we can't change those people to always think positive even at this point where bitcoin is so strong since for them having bitcoin is just an invest so they will do anything they can to take advantage of everything and possible to take advantage on possible news that they can create.

Lets value all the positive news they release but ignore those possible negative approach they create since for sure they just want to stir up something and spread negativity so that they can possibly move bitcoin at the lowest price so they can accumulate more of it at cheaper price as they can.

Saylor is an extremely shrewd businessman who, like many other megalomaniac CEOs, is obsessed with obtaining as much wealth and power as he can before he dies. And that's it: that's what he wants to do with his life. He will say or do anything for the sake of making a dollar, and I doubt he actually holds many convictions.

Its fine to root for Saylor as a voice for Bitcoin to help number go up, but all the simping for him I've seen over the years makes me nauseous. I wish bitcoiners would think for themselves & stop idolizing this type of behavior.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-02/microstrategy-s-mstr-saylor-loses-motion-to-dismiss-income-tax-suit

You need to check the date, it was published on December 4, 2020, it's already three years.

I check his recent tweet, he's still supporting Bitcoin.


Actually I don't really care with any influencers, he might change his view and support privacy concerns, just like how he hate Bitcoin and now he already own many Bitcoins.

Is this the same person who was telling everyone about appreciating the power of Bitcoin because he experienced having $1,000,000 of his own money locked in Argentina with no way to send it out of the country? Didn't he need censorship-resistance to send that money out?

Plus it's understandable that the largest Bitcoin HODLers should not say anything that might get them and their investment in some inconveniences, but actually saying the censorship-resistance is a "bad idea"?

Remove the "Chad", just "Saylor", he is not a friend to the Bitcoin community. He doesn't support its ethos.