Topic: MicroStrategy Buys $250M in Bitcoin, Calling the Crypto ‘Superior to Cash’ - page 14. (Read 24188 times)

Does anyone know a website where we can see a chart like GBTC's discount or premium to N.A.V. chart but for MicroStrategy? That could be another opportunity for those people who want to earn more units in Bitcoin, but who are also less-inclined to walk on the path towards shitcoining.

Plus this chart isn't free anymore? https://ycharts.com/companies/GBTC/discount_or_premium_to_nav

If anyone was not very clear on a strategy to accumulate bitcoin, in these recent posts is a summary of JJG's strategy that he has been explaining in other threads as well.


On this point you are right but I have not advocated exactly the same thing and I will explain why. If a guy starts accumulating bitcoin and has a modest salary, of which he can save let's say 10%, to buy bitcoin it's going to be many years before he can accumulate enough for a fuck-you status. Then let's say that, being generous, that person reaches more than enough bitcoin in three cycles (we can assume that during that time he receives raises at his job and extra money in bonuses or other forms). 12 years saving without being able to enjoy the profits is a long time, although the most profitable thing in investments in general is not to touch them, and I would bet that very few people keep an investment 12 years without touching it that is not in a retirement fund. But apart from that, it's 12 years without having made a single bitcoin transaction.

So, what you say is mathematically the most reasonable, accumulate aggressively until you are sure you have more than enough, but in my case what I have done is to take advantage of the bull markets to make partial sales, sometimes directly spending the bitcoin to buy something, which seems to me to have two advantages.

1. You can enjoy a little the profits of the investment. It's more of a psychological issue than anything else for me.
2. You learn how bitcoin transactions work in a practical way. You know what it is like to send a transaction with the average fee at that moment and it stays stuck in the mempool for a while because there is a huge dump of transactions from a casino, an exchange or spammers with their images. You learn and perform RBF, for example.

This I have always done with small amounts of my total bitcoin, which from a mathematical point of view is stupid, I admit. Because if I use a tiny part of what I have when the price reaches $120K, I will keep buying later when it reaches $200K, but being very small parts of what you have I do not see it wrong for the above. I already have two investments in which I put money and I don't enjoy the profits such as paying the mortgage and putting money in retirement funds, so enjoying a little of the bull market doesn't seem bad to me, and at the end of the day my total net worth, whether in bull or bear market, whether I have sold a little of my bitcoin or not, continues to grow, which I think is what is important.

Although, yes, I admit that what you propose, not selling/spending any of your bitcoin until you have more than enough, is the most mathematically correct thing to do. Although for me, if someone like bitmover for whatever reasons has been selling parts of his bitcoin but always keeps part of his net worth in it, it is OK, although he himself admits that he sold more than he should have in the past.

I addressed this point too.

A guy with 7 BTC does not need to buy 14 BTC more to reach the equivalent of a guy at 21 BTC today.

yeah, sure he is not going to get to 21 BTC, yet in 5-6 years, his 7 BTC, and anything that he accumulates in the next 5-6 years is likely going to be equivalent to 21 BTC today (at least in dollar terms - not counting the debasement of the dollar).  

So today 21 BTC is equal to 885k under the 200-WMA, and $2.13 million under spot price.  

Today 7 BTC is equal to $295k under the 200-WMA and $710k under spot price.

Sure, it is not guaranteed where we are going to be in 5-6 years, yet I would think that we are likely going to be damned close if not exceeding in terms of what the 7 bitcoin is going to be worth in 5-6 years including being able to get the same guy to fuck you status as long as he sticks with the bitcoin, and surely we have to have some flexibility in our timeline and we likely need to continue to keep on accumulating rather than resting on our laurels.. .. and sure, nothing wrong with diversifying too if that makes you more comfortable.....

and yeah, if it had taken you 7.5 years to get to nearly 7 BTC, which would be at about $200 per week on average and nearly $80k invested into bitcoin, if you stuck with around $300 per week for the coming 5 years, then that would be $15,600 per year and maybe around $86k for the next 5.5 years.. .which might get you another 0.5 BTC, perhaps.

So I am not even suggesting that you need to build your BTC up by very much, just let bitcoin continue to compound and stack what you can, even if you cannot stack at the same rate that you had stacked in your first 7.5 years.

And, sure, by the way, these numbers are all fictional in terms of just giving some ballpark ideas of what might have had happened, and how to consider how much progress had been made historically and potentially how to deal with the current situation in order to prepare for something like 5-6 years down the road.

We cannot be whining that some guys are at their goals and we are not at our goals, since everyone starts from different places, and each of us can ONLY do as much as we can do, including that if we had made some past mistakes by selling, trading or even by being more whimpy (less aggressive) than we should have had been in our BTC accumulation.  We have to deal with our own choices in terms of what we did or did not do and just continue to do what we believe is best, since we cannot turn back the clocks.


This must be our first fight.. hahahahahaha

I use $2 million as default entry-level fuck you status for folks with western incomes and western standards of living expectations, and even in the west people might consider their entry-level fuck you status differently, and I think that part of the reason that I use $2 million as the entry-level is that I thought that I had to double millionaire status to account for events around early 2020.. so I think pretty much we realized that the millionaire had to have $2 million and not $1 million, and sure some folks hypothesize that the hit is much worse than a doubling.. but for now I am just going to stick with $2 million to be default entry-level fuck you status.

The more appropriate and individually-tailored mark would be to go by your standard of income or how much income you need to get to fuck you status.  Under traditional investment assets, generally you need 25 years of income in order to live passively off of it at 4% per year.

I personally believe with bitcoin that you can have 10 years of income measured at the 200-WMA and then withdraw 10% per year (of the dollar value not the BTC value, which is a mistake that we have in the website)... .. so anyhow, the guy withdrawing 4% per year at $2 million would withdraw $80k per year, and the guy withdrawing 10% per year would need to have his BTC valued at $800k at the 200-WMA price in order to withdraw the dollar value... and of course, under the way that it is charted in the sustainable withdrawal website, my proposition is that he can ONLY withdraw the full dollar amount of $80k per year as long as the BTC spot price was at least 25% higher than the 200-WMA... which by the way, right now $800k is reached by having 19 BTC, and currently BTC's spot price is right around 141% higher than the 200-WMA.

The punchline is to pick out your cost of living and how much income do you want to have.  If you are not making $80k per year and you do not expect that you need $80k per year to get to your entry-level fuck you status, then surely you can pick your number.  Is $40k enough?  another number?  You should figure that out, and also figure out if you are going to want to have an increase in that number, so even if you had been used to earning somewhere around $20k per year, maybe you want to make sure that by the time you enter entry level fuck you status or that you start to employ it (pull the fuck you lever), that maybe you want to have 50% higher.. such as $30k per year for some one who had been accustomed to living off of $20k per year.. and sure, if my numbers are still not correct, you can still adjust them to yourself, it is not like I am trying to impose my standards of living kinds of numbers on you, and you should not even accept my standard of living numbers being imposed upon you, since you have your own standard of living numbers.  I am not even proclaiming that my own standard of living numbers are the same as the default standard of living numbers that I suggest that we use.  It is just good to have a reference, and there are surely some folks that may well consider their fuck you status to be 1/10th the level that I proclaim them to be... so he would reach fuck you status at $200k rather than $2 million under traditional systems, and at $80k rather than $800k using bitcoin as the measure (which I again suggest to be using the 200-WMA rather than spot price to valuate BTC holdings, even though so many folks valuate based on spot price which leads to the kinds of selling too much too early errors that I had already gone over).


The reason that we should be using the 200-WMA to valuate our BTC holdings, then that means that we are accounting for bottom BTC prices, and we don't over valuate our BTC in terms of selling too many too soon or presuming that our BTC is going to hold value at spot prices.  If we use the 200-WMA then we account for the bottom BTC prices and we structure our management of our holdings based on that... I already went over this, but having 7 BTC would be valuated at $295k under the 200-WMA, even though we could sell them at $710k at spot price right now, so if we might be trying to get our BTC to be valued at $800k or more under the 200-WMA, then we need to keep accumulating, and surely in 5-6 years, even if we don't accumulate much more, with the passage of time, the 200-WMA will likely bring our 7 BTC at or close to $800k, and perhaps even higher than  $800k  by then, yet if we want to keep stacking then we might not need as many BTC in order to get to such $800k plus valuation.. and yeah, each of us has to plug in our own numbers, but I think that a person with 7 BTC or even 1/3 of the way to his fuck you status based on the 200-WMA has decent chances of reaching or exceeding his fuck you status 5-6 years from now as long as he does not screw it up.. and screwing up probably has to do with selling rather than buying.. if he keeps buying he should be in better shape.. but yes a lot of people never make it to fuck you status because they screw up... the spend too much too soon.. which is also true in bitcoinlandia.. with temptations to trade or to buy back cheaper or get involved in shitcoins or various other practices that take guys away from what should be their goals to continuously, ongoingly and persistently and perhaps even aggressively continue to stack cornz.

Another mistake that guys tend to do might be what you seem to be doing is to act as if accumulating bitcoin is futile or trying to rationalize that the price is too high and blah blah blah.. so even if you don't sell any BTC around these here prices, you are likely ongoingly failing and/or refusing to buy bitcoin as persistently, consistently, ongoingly and aggressively as you should be.  Ultimately, you do what you want, but there are consequences to failures and refusals to continue to buy BTC, including that there are likely many folks who were not stacking as much BTC as they should have had been between March 2024 and October 2024 when we were largely bouncing around between $55k and $70k.  I am not specifically suggesting that you were doing that, but you could have had been...

I have frequently tried to suggest that guys need to be as aggressive as they are able to be in terms of their ongoing bitcoin accumulation without overdoing it.. or without recking themselves.  It can be difficult to know where the grounds are in regards to ongoing BTC accumulation, since each of has to make sure that we are not spending beyond our discretionary income, and we have to maintain some back up funds, and we also likely have obligations (and desires) in our lives that draw us towards not overly spending our discretionary income completely on bitcoin.

I think your thoughts are very good and I agree with most of you said in the post. Certainly, I might have sold more than I should in the past (which I don't bother much, except that I didn't bought back all I could have). But I am fine with that.

However, I want to point out that it is not possible for a guy with 7 BTC to accumulate to 14 more BTC in the current prices. That would mean 1.5 million dollars.

Unless you are talking about someone already in the fuck-you status (i think that is the term you use), it is impossible to someone just save 2 millions and invest it in bitcoin. Unless the guy earn like $ 300,000 per year, which definitely not my case.

Even if you are talking about 200 WMA price (42k), that would mean 600 thousand dollars (this would literally mean timing the market and buying the correct DIP, statistically impossible). And 600 thousand dollars is a lot of money for a person who owns "only" 7 BTC.

We might be deviating a bit from the topic of the thread, since earlier I was trying to provide an example to attempt to describe how one person might be willing (and motivated) to diversify into something like MSTR in order to try to build their BTC holdings faster (which may or may not even be prudent anyhow, yet the person is motivated), and another person might consider that he is in a high enough value of a position that he would not feel any necessity to diversify into something like MSTR.

Yet if we think about the matter, the guy who is already established is probably even in a better position to fuck around with something like MSTR as compared with the guy who is still building his investment portfolio, who might need to stay more conservative until he builds his investment portfolio...

AT the same time, nothing is really black and white in terms of how much risk or how much diversification a guy might want to have in his portfolio while he is building it and then once he reaches certain value thresholds there might be a decent amount of utility to balance out his desires for growth into diversification strategies that are meant to preserve rather than grow value.

I have some personal issues with ideas that growth would come from investing into something like MSTR rather than starting with BTC first, especially since the MSTR is already known to be an additional risk on top of bitcoin, and my own ideas have been that any newbie investor should be able to start out by merely investing only in bitcoin, so they would just balance out their investment with bitcoin and cash, and so depending on how aggressive that they might be in their investment, it could take them 10 years to just build up 1 year's investment of their income into their investment portfolio (10% per year adds up to 10 years), and surely some guys are capable of investing more aggressively, so they will be able to progress more rapidly in terms of the size of their investment portfolio.  

I am not really sure if there are any needs to diversify prior to getting your investment portfolio up to some thing close to a year of your income/expenses.  Sure if the investment portfolio is also changing value based on changes in BTC prices, then your calculation could also be influenced by such BTC price appreciation while you are building your BTC stash.

Ultimately there is quite a bit of discretion regarding when and how much to diversify.. and if so? into what?

Back to some overall ideas of your description of your own situation.  I gather that you are suggesting that if the goal were 21 BTC, you are more like the 7 BTC guy rather than the 35 BTC guy... so you are feeling that you are making progress in your BTC accumulation, yet it is taking a while to build your BTC stash, so you are maybe 1/3 of the way towards what you perceive to be your goal... yet at the same time, from your description, you are valuating your BTC based on spot prices rather than the 200-WMA since in your subsequent (below) remark, you said that you might be close to reaching your goal (which you call FIRE (Financially independent, retire early) - and I frequently refer to as fuck you status) if BTC prices were to reach $250k.  Of course, I find that problematic for anyone to be relying on BTC spot prices for valuating their BTC, since from my perspective, it seems to motivate guys to sell large portions (if not all) of their BTC rather than mostly holding onto it and figuring out ways to engage in sustainable withdrawal (whether price based sustainable withdrawal or time based sustainable withdrawal).  

Surely when you are describing your own situation as being 40% in bitcoin, surely, that is not any kind of a whimpy BTC allocation, yet part of the problem is that you may well be allowing BTC's price appreciation affect your assessment, since maybe you had not been allocating into bitcoin at 40%, yet bitcoin's growth has caused your portfolio to be 40% bitcoin, and maybe I am also a bit confused by your other 60%, unless you are saying that your investment portfolio is 40% bitcoin, 40% Brazilian bonds and then 20% some other things.  Doesn't it feel like we are deviating a bit from this topic, unless you are saying that you might be considering the extent to which MSTR might fit in there?    and surely  I would not be totally opposed to such an idea, even though I am maybe a little bothered by some of your assessments that might have been allowing your to be reallocating your BTC or selling your BTC at various points in time prior to reaching overallocation.

As you likely realize that my own position is that no one should be selling any of their BTC until they get to a point of overallocation, and surely even my own position can be quite ambiguous when trying to apply to situations in which guys might be still in fairly early stages of building their overall investment portfolio and trying to figure out their fuck you status.  I would imagine that if you are using something like $250k BTC as allowing your to reach fuck you status, then how do those numbers come out when you consider the 200-WMA and BTC valuations that are based on the 200-WMA that is currently at about $42,133?

You can do whatever you like, yet I personally believe that in order to figure out how many BTC that you need to reach whatever happens to be your FIRE number, you should be valuating how many BTC that you believe that you need based on the 200-WMA rather than based on BTC spot prices, so that you don't get too carried away by BTC spot prices, make sure you keep building your BTC stash and you are not overly selling too many BTC prior to your actually reaching a status of having more than enough.

I don't want to get too much into your own personal circumstances, yet if we continue to use the idea of 7 BTC and then we look at our current spot price, we get a valuation of right around $700k, and if we look at a BTC spot price of $250k for that same 7 BTC, we have $1.75 million... yet if we look at the 200-WMA for the same 7 BTC, we have a valuation of about $300k  I am not sure what those valuations would mean for you, since you would have to figure out your own numbers, and sure within that I have no problem with the idea of diversifying your portfolio including Brazilian bonds, anything else that you have and/or if you might be considering having MSTR in the mix, and surely your goal for BTC might ONLY be one part of your overall investments, and some parts of your investment portfolio would likely be considered as more valuable and other parts less valuable... but hopefully any part of the investment portfolio that you are maintaining has justification in your own ways of thinking for why it is in there and that you are properly assessing its valuation.


It sounds to me that you are planning to overly sell your BTC for less valuable assets, so I am not really sure what to say.  Nothing wrong with having a house, either.

Many times I suggest that guys mostly let the BTC portion of their investment ride, so I don't really agree with ideas of reallocating of BTC, except maybe very little along the way, but surely only having had clearly reached overallocation.. yet I get the sense that you might be continuously reallocating, so taking out of your winners (BTC) and allocating to your various other losers in order to stay balanced.  It is like having a lawn and watering the weeds so that they can keep up with the grass (or whatever your good plants are).

We already know that bitcoin is a killer asset, even though it is quite volatile, yet it is largely volatile to the upside, especially if we are zooming out more than 4 years.  Sure it is not guaranteed to go up on a 4-year timeline, but the investment thesis for bitcoin remains quite strong, including that even though BTC prices seem outrageously high right now, there is no evidence that bitcoin's investment thesis is getting any weaker in recent times, even though rich people, institutions and governments seem to be wanting to crowd out retail with their recent attention to bitcoin, but many of the rich people, institutions and governments remain slow to act, and so in that sense normies like us can continue to front-run them by focusing on stacking sats and don't be fucking around with selling any until you clearly have gotten to a state of overallocation... which you have to figure out how many BTC is your "overallocation" level.  Again, if we are getting a wee bit too off topic, since I am not even sure if you are considering whether to have MSTR in your investment portfolio, then I don't mind taking this to another thread since it truly seem to have a lot of juicy considerations that a lot of guys likely end up having to weigh out in terms of both their bitcoin accumulation journey, yet also how to maintain such BTC allocation in light of some other investments that they have, too.


I think that you are saying the same thing as me, Poker Player (or at least something very similar), but you are saying it differently.

I would say, that you should not be authorizing yourself to be selling any of your bitcoin until you have clearly reached a state of overaccumulation, and since there are so many ways to measure overaccumulation, guys seem like they wrongly assess that they have reached such status of overaccumulation before they have, since they are tied to some of the traditional ideas of reallocating their bitcoin, which seems to be somewhat how bitmover is thinking about his BTC stash.  Sure, in the end, bitmover, and any other forum member can do whatever they like, yet to me it seems quite short sighted to be reallocating out of BTC based on BTC price appreciation rather than ongoingly, persistently and consistently buying BTC until they are really sure that they have more than enough.

So, getting back to the 7 BTC versus 21 BTC versus 35 BTC example, if a guy has concluded that 21 BTC is currently enough or more than enough, then anywhere higher than 21 BTC would allow him to start to shave off some of his BTC from time to time, and if he is really conservative in his shaving off of his BTC then his BTC value is likely to continue to grow in value faster than he is shaving it off, and then perhaps later he might feel like he can shave off more aggressively.

Yet a guy with only 7 BTC has not yet gotten there, but he knows his target, so he knows that he has to keep accumulating, and even in the less preferable  scenarios that he spends several years attempting to accumulate more BTC and he only moves from 7 BTC to 7.25 BTC after another 5 years of accumulating, he likely realizes that another 5-ish or 6-ish years down the road, 7.25 BTC may well be of a similar valuation (including calculating the likely ongoing debasement of the dollar) as the 21 BTC is valued today.. especially if we are using the 200-WMA rather than getting distracted by BTC spot prices.  Yes, it is not guaranteed to increase in value as much as we expect, but still, bitcoin remains amongst the best, if not the best investments currently available, so as you mentioned @Poker Player, it would likely be in our best interests to attempt to remain focused on the accumulation of bitcoin rather than fucking around with other assets, at least until we reach a status of having more than enough bitcoin.  Sure the accumulation of some other assets, may well be fine and dandy just to offset some potential and likely ongoing volatility issues of bitcoin, yet keeping our eye on the prize (which is bitcoin) seems to be central to making sure that we are making progress to our own financial freedom (and having more options) kinds of goals.

That's one thing that both JJG and I (me later, as I came later to the forum) have repeated countless times: never sell all your bitcoin. Especially now that it is truly proving to be the best asset you can have. If it continues, as it seems to, to appreciate over time as fiat currencies devalue, you will be able to make partial sales while maintaining a nice equity with the remaining bitcoin.

I find myself in pretty much that situation.

I bought about 5% of my overal portfolio in bitcoin in 2017. I was able to duplicate that stash with signature and other campaigns here. I realized about 20% of it in 2021 bull run (avg price about 55k)

In the end, I have about 40% of bitcoin now, and 60% of a diversified portfolio (about 40% in Brazil bonds, but I feel safe).

I won't be able to accumulate much more bitcoin. Maybe I can buy some more in the crypto winter if the price goes below 50k (which may not happen), but even at $50k it would be very hard to buy one whole bitcoin ( I don't know if I need to add that risk)


Maybe in the end, I hope to achieve my FIRE status with just my little btc stash. If BTC price can maintain itself above 250k I will probably retire (I will need to sell some, to make a diversified and solid portfolio to leave my job. Maybe even a house).

But my plan is to always keep at least 20-25% of bitcoin

Building an investment portfolio takes time, and surely we might need to adapt our goals with changes in various aspects of our circumstances and/or even changes in our target asset versus other possible places that we might choose to put our value.  There is no real right answer, even for any specific person since a guy may even assess his own particular circumstances badly (or wrongly) and need to make adjustments along the way.

With the 7 BTC example verus the 21 BTC goal versus the 35 BTC example, I was not necessarily wanting to comment on whether 7 BTC might already be enough, yet I was trying to frame it with a hypothetical framework in which each person had considered 21 BTC to be enough bitcoin right now (at this time in the market), yet 1 person was still way under that target (only around 33% to the target) and the other person was right around 66% above the target, and to flush out the example even further, I am not even presuming valuations of the BTC holdings based on BTC spot prices, but instead considering the 200WMA as a way to valuate holdings..

Since our 200-WMA is current at right about $42.2k, 7 BTC would reflect about a $300k valuation, 21 BTC would reflect about a $900k valuation and 35 BTC would represent about a $1.5 million valuation.   Yes, I know that spot price is about 142% higher than the 200 WMA, yet any plan that I consider would not be cashing out BTC for cash but instead engaging in some kind of attempt at sustained withdrawal.

In regards to diversification, it may well be questionable the extent to which MSTR represents diversification, since generally the idea of diversification would be outside of the same sector, and surely, I don't have any problem of splitting up some exposure, but the level of diversification would not really be very great between BTC and MSTR... even though MSTR seems to leverage someone what BTC's already existing volatility.

You’ve highlighted some great points about Bitcoin’s appeal as a stable, straightforward investment that avoids third-party risks. The simplicity of holding BTC directly is undeniably attractive, especially when paired with its scarcity and potential for massive future value. While holding 7 BTC could still provide significant financial freedom in the right market conditions, a larger cushion like 35 BTC offers greater flexibility and security, particularly in volatile times. It’s all about finding the level of holdings that aligns with your financial comfort and goals.

Diversification, however, is worth considering. Investments like MicroStrategy (MSTR) can provide indirect exposure to BTC with potential additional upside, but they also come with added corporate risks. Balancing simplicity with calculated risks could be the key to optimizing your strategy. Whether you stick to BTC alone or explore other vehicles, the focus should be on aligning with your risk tolerance while staying adaptable to market dynamics. Ultimately, it’s about achieving both financial freedom and peace of mind.

MSTR to be added to Nasdaq100 in 10 days:

Bitcoin proxy MicroStrategy to join the Nasdaq 100 and heavily traded ‘QQQ’ ETF

Big for MSTR which will see 2.1billions shares being bought, rather than for Bitcoin.

Firms Ride Bitcoin Wave to Raise Billions From Convertible Debt



A rally across cryptocurrencies has made winners out of a handful of firms in the sector that followed MicroStrategy Inc.’s playbook of selling convertible bonds, thanks to President-elect Donald Trump choosing a crypto-friendly financier to head the top US financial regulator.
Investors have been piling into companies with ties to the industry, opening the floodgates for fundraising. MicroStrategy’s $6.2 billion worth of convertibles issued this year is just the start, as part of its latest plan to raise $21 billion through fixed income issuance.

Source link: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/firms-ride-bitcoin-wave-raise-140625696.html

MicroStrategy Company is rapidly moving towards collecting more Bitcoins, considering their Bitcoin collection and how they will move forward in the future. And currently many big companies are following MicroStrategy Company. At present, I find this Bitcoin holding to be the most suitable.

On a personal level, I am good enough with just the returns on BTC without the extra complications of third party execution risks, and unknown unknowns that are associated with adding an additional layer of risk - even though surely Saylor seems to have had structured his debt instruments quite ingeniously.

I used some variation of this example earlier.  Let's say that I have 35-ish BTC and you only have 7-ish BTC, and both of us have a target to reach about 21 BTC in order to feel that we are at entry-level fuck you status (based on current market conditions and wherever we might be in our lives), so maybe I am sitting back and I am content because I have about 66% more than what both of us consider to be entry-level fuck you status, and maybe I am already living off my BTC and not necessarily earning income from other places. 

You on the other hand are about ONLY 1/3 towards your goal, even though we know that with the passage of time, maybe even by mid 2029-ish (it may well be the case that 7 BTC will then be worth the equivalent of today's 21 BTC, so less preferred scenario, you consider that you might be wanting to at least get to entry-level fuck you status, and you might even want to get to a similar situation as me, in which you have around 60% or more extra cushion in the size of your stash, so you keep stacking and you are willing to take some chances, since you might not even be urgently wanting to get into fuck you status until you are sure that you have a large enough BTC cushion.. so if 7 BTC is entry-level fuck you status in mid-2029, you would prefer to have double entry level fuck you status, just to feel sufficiently comfortable when you might start to spend from your BTC stash (rather than being in the process of accumulating it).

I am just suggesting that there could be reasons that guys might not want to overly complicate their investment portfolio, even though MSTR does seem like a good place to potentially outperform BTC, perhaps? 

I was horribly wrong on that trade, and the blue line is a testimony of that.
According to my understanding prior to the ETF launch, the blue line should have collapsed to 1, as the ETF would have been a far superior way to track BTC.
The reality is that Micheal Saylor was very good at selling the "BTC YIELD" thesis, so the blue line increased over time.
I had to stop on that trade and lick my wounds.
Now, after having listened to every possible speech from MS, I am actually pondering reversing it and using MSTR as a leverage bet on BTC, accruing more sats per unit. I am not sure I am degenerate enough to do so, tough.

I think that it is a bit less unclear, at least what the lines are meant to signify, and I was just a bit confused by some of it..  Thanks. 

I don't have any problem with the idea that you might be taking from some various sources that you aren't able to disclose, so I would not consider that you would be purposefully attempting to mislead, yet any of us could make mistakes in terms of interpreting data, or how we might put the data together or even drawing wrong conclusions from any data that we might put together. 

I would not presume that you would do any of that on purpose.. except remember the trade that you were considering as a good one?  something like shorting MSTR... and going long on GBTC... sure there might have been some aspects of that that might have had worked out, if I am remembering correctly... .. but yeah, I don't trade  or buy any of these stocks/ETFs anyhow .. even though surely there may be needs to try to keep track of some of these matters since they are popular in the space, and even some normies that I meet in the real world have gotten involved in various bitcoin related stocks and ETFs, and frequently they are just trying to get BTC price exposure, and trying to play various price waves.

A lot of times, I attempt to recommend not to buy secondary products and to buy bitcoin directly, even though surely we know that some folks have some difficulties getting their heads around how to buy bitcoin directly versus some kind of already existing account(s) that they might have that offer such BTC -related product options.

Answering all your questions:

• The graph is mine, based on my elaboration on some quasi-private data, and thus, I am not sure I can (yet) share it unless I can protect my source. For the moment, I was hoping you could take it as an image and trust me a little bit.
• The Blue Line (left-hand axis)is the "ratio". The ratio is the total Value Enterprise of MicroStrategy (Equity+ Debt (fully diluted)- cash) divided by the Bitcoin Stash valuation. A ratio of two means that MicroStrategy is valued 2 times the Bitcoins they own.
• The Red Line (right-hand axis) represents the number of Satoshi per equity shares (fully diluted).
• I decided to start the graph from 2023 to zoom in on the recent developments. And also, the graph in the initial phases was too errand. I can eventually post the "long version" of the graph.

I am not sure if I understand the graph and even the difference between the blue and red lines.  I understand your point about a fee from an ETF causing the yield to go down. more than holding MSTR shares.

Also, how come the graph starts January 2023 rather than starting when MSTR started buying bitcoin, which would be August 2021.  Is the information being selective?  I understand performance might not be consistent since more aggressiveness has come out of the strategy in recent times, and also more creativeness in the kinds of financial tools that were being used, including that with Saylor's reputation growing, MSTR has become a bit of a magnet for certain kinds of investors.

The only way you can interpret the MSTR price is through the following graph:


Sorry, this graph hasn't been added to the spreadsheet yet.


This graph shows the number of satoshi held in a single Microstrategy share. It's clear that this number has been constantly growing over the last few years and accelerated after the announcement of Plan 42.

Saylor has steadily increased the number of Satoshi per share over the last few years, returning the investor to a positive BTC yield.
An ETF would instead deliver a negative BTC yield, as the ETF would gradually reduce your shares per share because of the fees to be paid.
If you get a 40% yearly yield, like this year, you can justify a premium of 2.25 with roughly 3.2 years of such a positive BTC yield!

JUST IN: MicroStrategy $MSTR will likely enter the Nasdaq 100 $QQQ this month — Bloomberg



Source link: https://x.com/BitcoinMagazine/status/1866587304934117728?t=UqP3M6vXrMavhoJsJMzE-Q&s=19

---

The entry of the Nasdaq 100 and MicroStrategy Bitcoin acceptance company and their future milestones are very strong, they will achieve success by accepting Bitcoin.
Currently, MicroStrategy company has deposited Bitcoin and has been able to deposit 423650 Bitcoins, and will deposit more in the future and they have enough thoughts to buy more Bitcoins in 2025.

I think one notable achievement microstrategy has made is by becoming one of the first publicly traded companies to adopt Bitcoin as a Treasury reserve asset, they invested a lot of money in Bitcoin, they even sold some of the companies shares and used the money to accumulate more Bitcoin and this adoption of Bitcoin has really attracted a lot of attention to them there by brought more business partners to them.
Microstrategy is a successful company today because of the adoption of Bitcoin.

MicroStrategy Company has already managed to purchase BTC423,650 Bitcoins as they continue to buy Bitcoin regularly. They bought BTC21,550 bitcoins worth $2.1 billion this week. As MicroStrategy regularly purchased Bitcoins their invested Bitcoins grew. Regular purchases have left them trailing several large bitcoin holders. They have already overtaken many large bitcoin holders, maybe they will overtake many more large bitcoin holders in the future by purchasing more bitcoins. MicroStrategy isn't far from overtaking BlackRock and Binance.