Topic: MicroStrategy Buys $250M in Bitcoin, Calling the Crypto ‘Superior to Cash’ - page 15. (Read 18552 times)

In addition to these very correct statements, please remember there are auditors of public companies, who should assess the quality of the information on the balance sheets. So it wouldn't only be MicroStrategy making up numbers, but also KPMG would need to be involved.
This would be quite a plot twist.

As they are doing self-custody of their coins, instead of resorting to a custodian, we haven't a separate, direct assessment of their holding, but I anyway think that the information should be quite reliable.

I don't mean to evade your question - because I don't know about the actual proof - however, a public company lying in their making those levels of detailed disclosures, would be in pretty deep shit, including the various principle officers may well end up with criminal charges.. and pretty severe penalties... so even though I don't have any problems about being doubtful and/or a skeptic, but certain kinds of proclamations are supposed to be able to rely upon them.. so public statements in official quarterly release documents by companies are the kinds of documents we should be able to mostly rely upon... yeah of course, public companies lie sometimes.. but I doubt that lying is taking place with Saylor/MSTR in regards to these acquisition of BTC kinds of matters..

Even though there are a lot of MSTR/Saylor haters, bitcoin naysayers, shitcoin pumpeners and perhaps some others who would just love these kinds of false claims or fraud to be present in this particular case.. 

To me it seems to me that your own asking of those kinds of questions may well mean that you are part of one of those hater camps or you are reading talking points of some of those hater camps.. even your question is not very fleshed out to show that you have studied into the matter beyond merely asking the seemingly pretty lame question.  Sceptical Chymist?  Is that you?   

I mean is there any proof that they are actually buying? It will be good to see even some indirect evidence 

Microstrategy bought another clip:



No matter if the are in profit or in loss, they are DCA-ing their purchases at a constant pace.
Probably they want to front load next year when they will change their accounting rules.

Earlier Version of the tweet:



I will update you with full details later.

Purchase detail:

Based on my calculations, they are currently holding about 0.76% of the 21,000,000 bitcoin total supply, which doesn't look like a small holding to me.
158,400 BTC is 0.76% of 21,000,000 BTC . I used the formula:(158,400 / 21,000,000) x 100 = 0.76%.
 
And from the look of things, if they continue buying as time goes on, they might be able to accumulate up to 1% or above of the total supply, which I believe will be their target, as Micro Strategy has been known to be among the top firms that have so much faith in bitcoin like the rest of us, and they have predicted the price to be above $100k in the coming years.
 
And for private institutions, which have so much financial power with great hope and deal with the currency, we should not expect anything less from them. Selling also won't be in their favour, although they have sold a little in the past, which I believe was a result of escaping tax because they bought back what they sold almost immediately after a few days or a week.

The reason why MicroStrategy and Saylor are investing heavily in Bitcoin is that they believe it is better to invest in Bitcoin than to keep money in the bank since what you save in the bank will be what you get back when you want to withdraw it, and the money will lose it purchasing power due to inflation. The Bitcoin investment is working for them because, from JJG calculation when the Bitcoin price is at $34k, MicroStrategy and Saylor are already on $800m profit, I see them hodling their Bitcoin till another ATH.

I agree with you at JJG, because MicroStrategy and Saylor bought most of their Bitcoin when the Bitcoin price was at $29k. And I think MicroStrategy and Saylor will buy Bitcoin at any price when they have extra money to invest in Bitcoin.

I believe that I had already read about the conjectures about the single custodian and who it is, yet I am pretty sure that I had heard Saylor mention that companies have options regarding their custodians, which I had understood to imply that it would not be a very good practice to ONLY use one custodian.. but sure, you can tell from the way that I am talking about the topic that I have not either figured out specifics or investigated much in that direction.


Surely, we are likely of very similar thinking on the topic, and I am pretty sure that may bitcoin pundits have suggested that MSTR should have enough technical expertise and even abilities to consult with counsel in ways that they should be able to figure out ways to self-custody at least some of their own coins but yeah, even with a company that seems to have been as open as MSTR (and Saylor), I cannot recall Saylor getting into a lot of detailed discussions regarding what their deliberations might be in that direction, including the trade-offs that might come from some of the self-custody and/or multi-sig options that might be available and usable for a public company, such as MSTR.

Another thing is that Saylor talks so much about a variety of topics, I could not imagine that he has not at least somewhat danced around talking about the various tradeoffs in regards to various custodial options that are available to them.

One interesting aspect is that, as far as I know, they are giving their Bitcoin to a single custodian (I will let you discover in the thread which one I am talking about).
On the contrary, I know other companies have made the exact opposite choice. The rationale is that, yes, spreading the custody over multiple custodians actually increases the risk of being hacked but diminishes the expected value of the loss, and this allows the enterprise to survive in such an event. No matter how tiny the chance of a hack to a single custodian, it puts the firm's existence at risk because a single point of failure is a no-go.

A lot of people change their mind about bitcoin, and I doubt that there is any real need to dig deeply into Saylor's case because sure he was negative about bitcoin in 2013, and his story is that he did not realize the use case for bitcoin until some time around and after the March 2020 events with money printing and some of the crazy monetary policy actions going on around that time. .. so if you listen to what Saylor has been saying since around August 2020 and even many points after that (believe it or not he has been in BTC for three years now), and he has given a plausible enough story as to why he considered bitcoin to be a good investment and he has built his conviction since his first investments in late 2020.. and sure some folks are a bit skeptical of him, but he seems to be mostly legitimately pushing for the ideas of bitcoin, even though he is surely much more regulation friendly and maybe some individuals consider that bitcoin needs to stay more peer to peer, and even if we have these various competing ideas in bitcoin, bitcoin is not very easy to change, so various bitcoin supporters can have different and even opposing ideas in regards to purposes of bitcoin, how it should be used and how it should be regulated (if at all?).  


Public companies have disclosure requirements, and sure for security purposes they might not disclose all of their custodians, but I am pretty sure that they have to use qualified custodians, and I am pretty sure that the topic of the custody of MSTR's coins has come up from time to time over the last 3 years, and how many specifics that they gave may be contained in their quarterly reports and I am sure that they are giving as much as they need to give legally.. but sure the questions of their adequately securing their coins could become a question of concern, even though they did seem to survive the 2022 situation in which several custodians were shown to have been irresponsible with their coins.

Yes, and whoever holds the amount that they bought a large amount of Bitcoin is for sure a huge responsibility for him. And even I didn't see any news or any article news about the thing you are asking about.

Because the only thing we often read is how much they bought, which is the big value of bitcoin for their company. Well, anyway, let's not worry about that matter, as long as I'm the only one who thinks that Bitcoin is just like a coin to them when they buy it, while for others, it's very difficult to accumulate at least one bitcoin.

Do you really think if micro strategy would have made this statement about bitcoin? if he knew that bitcoin will still grow to the extent it did. I think Michael j saylor made a big mistake by saying bitcoin days are numbered because after he made that statement Bitcoin still didn't give up just like he expected, instead it grew above all odds. that is to say that Bitcoin is a coin never to underestimate and looked down on. Because after he made this statement he still continue to buy bitcoin again.

I think this image best describe the investment of Gold & silver vs Bitcoin, how massively bitcoin grew in microstrategy diagram.


[img
Microstrategy invested in many assets but in all Bitcoin gave it 1000x compeard to silver & gold and even the existing asset.



That's pretty cool deal. Can't still but wounder how a $205m worth of bitcoin was paid back to silver gate with a discount of %22 at $160  received cash back of 6,455btc



Definitely there attacks on Bitcoin was not effective, perhaps Bitcoin has changed their thinking faculty to note that bitcoin is not a shit project, rather an overwhelming, fantastic and fabulous project. I also applaud MSTR/saylor for not liquidating the Bitcoin asset during the dip fall. Perhaps it paspctive has show that he's not a dummy after all. Today he's a topic of discussion. Sometimes we need to be strong in other to achieve our goals. An makes the fucking hatter's know we aren't playing in bitcoin investment.

You are probably kind of correct in the assessment that there is a kind of consistency in the buying patterns of someone like Saylor, but your comparison to the gold/silver permabulls, bitcoin is still a new category of investment and a paradigm shifting discovery (invention), so there seems to be some kind of a lack of appreciation for the power of bitcoin when you compare bitcoin to gold/silver permabulls, when those older technologies have already been beaten the fuck in the market and even their physicality gives them some burdens that bitcoin does not have, and part of the reason that bitcoin is likely around 1,000x or greater value than gold is partly based on its lack of physicality which therefore translates into a more pure moneyness that goes above and beyond gold in a lot of ways, and surely I have been suggesting bitcoin to be around 1,000x better than gold for around 6-7 years, yet it seems that even Fidelity got into the mix of calling bitcoin 10,000x better than gold.. and I am not quite sure if I would go that far, and I have my reasons for choosing 1,000x better than gold based on the total addressable market currently being around $1 Quadrillion, and sure we might be able to double or triple that based on new innovations that bitcoin (and perhaps other inventions) is (are) likely going bring to the future in terms of the addressable market regarding places where monetary (rather than utility) value is currently being stored.


That seems to be kind of your way of admitting that you were wrong, and surely there were a lot of folks trying to beat down the BTC price and hoping that something like Saylor/MSTR was going to fail and/or that they had been making misrepresentations regarding both their liquidation points and/or also the extent to which they might have had overdone it with some of their leverage... but yeah, even though I admit Saylor is quite a bit of a risk-taker and a leverager (but he is also no dummy), there seemed to have to have had to have been some needs for him to be a deceptive twat (or even incompetent) like some of the other prior to 2022 bitcoin/crypto influencers that ended in scandal such as Terra/Luna (Do Kwan), 3AC, Celsius, Blockfi, Voyager, FTX, and seemingly Genesis/DCG (and maybe a few others), but Saylor/MSTR did not end up being in that criminal and/or quasi-criminal (or incompetent) category.. .Surprise surprise, and sure maybe it ended up being luck that Saylor/MSTR was pretty much making fair representations of what they were doing (even though it also did seem like a bit much - more than necessary to make the pro-bitcoin point) since there are so many not very good/honest people out there (who end up getting themselves into a pickle, either with purposefully bad acts or maybe just overly gambling and negligent acts).


Saylor does seem to be like a pretty sophisticated player in terms of both understanding bitcoin and also understanding various kinds of risk management strategies and how to have various mitigating measures available if the market moves against his various investments.   

Saylor might have been overly disclosing (even though he had obligations to disclose) when in 2022, he stated that some of his BTC (maybe like 10% or so) could have had been liquidated at $21k-ish if the company chose no other actions, and then later (around mid-to-late 2022) when the BTC price went down to the lower $20ks and then further down to $15,479, when he stated that MSTR had taken actions to further collateralize in which those same coins that were leveraged would become in jeopardy if the BTC price were to drop to $3,200 or so and if the company took no further actions, even while at the same time stating that there would still be actions available to the company to make sure that they do not get liquidated, even if the BTC price were to drop to $3,200.

One of the funny things that the MSTR/Saylor haters continue to fail to figure out is that Saylor (and/or his team) is no dummy, and he is also a pretty good negotiator, including that MSTR/Saylor largely bought back their leveraged coins (and/or resolved their loan with Silvergate) for prices that were way bette than what any normal person could have had resolved such a hundreds of millions of dollars situation. MSTR/Saylor came out of their position pretty damned well, including that bitcoin related banking industries were seeming to be attacked during that time too.. so surely matters could have had turned out worse, but even the bitcoin price faired pretty well  through so many attacks in 2022 and 2023 and several of the attacks are continuing, even though the BTC price is not going down as much as the attackers probably would like, which is most likely contributing to the attackers looking foolish, and maybe even that they are going to need to up their attack game, and still not sure if those attacks upon bitcoin are going to end up been effective.

judging from the analysis of how microstrategy bought his bitcoin starting from 08/08/2020 to the last date being 1/11/2023 there is no true evidence to show that microstrategy bought on deep. Judging from this image==>





Alll what he believes was to invest in bitcoin against Fiat inflation. And a good store of value. This was one of his quote.


Even if Bitcoin price drops I don't think if saylor and  MSTR will get into any trouble Soon. Checking from the table above there has been massive income generated in the shortest period of time morover the bullrun is yet to come and probably more profit will be made. It took me hours to study this microstrategy investment. Even if I don't get all about it. I think other colique can still guide me. Or still add to what I said.

If we're discussing MSTR/Michael Saylor buying the dips, I have a hard time believing that's his strategy (though I'll be the first to admit I haven't looked at the timing of his previous purchases).  He seems like a bitcoin permabull, just like the big-name goldbugs who are permabulls in the gold & silver market, who always have the mindset that it's always great time to buy [gold/silver/bitcoin], i.e., at any price.

Obviously when there's a dip and you have that mindset, you see a bargain, but I just don't think that's Saylor's strategy.  Anyway, I'm still watching the company's stock price even though I don't often post in this thread anymore.  I thought Saylor and MSTR might have been in trouble for a while when bitcoin was down, but it obviously didn't turn out that way and likely won't unless bitcoin seriously drops in price--and given that we're over the $35k mark, things are starting to look pretty rosy again.  We're all happy about that, I'm sure.

I do not believe MicroStrategy is buying the deep. They have on several occasions bought Bitcoin when its not at the rrecent dips.
I concur to them buying when they have available funds, more reason why I'm forced to believe they probably have a foresight beyond the regular.
Investing more than $4B on Bitcoin doesn't sound like 'testing the waters' for a seasoned investor like MocroStrategy. Not to even consider that they are currently standing at over $800M worth of profit.

As a general principle, there no reason not to believe that Saylor and/or MSTR's strategy is mostly going to be to hold their bitcoin forever Laura.. which likely is going to be several cycles rather than merely having any concerns about what the value and/or price of their BTC holdings might be at the next ATH.  Sure they might deviate in parts from such holding strategy, but I really doubt that trading (or major selling of their BTC stash) is going to become a major part of the ways that they deal with their bitcoin holdings.. though they are surely free to do pretty much whatever they like (as long as they report it - as a public company's obligations to report what they are doing and what they plan to do) to make adjustments to their BTC management and/or maintenance strategies.

Saylor knows what he has to do but I doubt that Saylor is just taking advantage of the downturn to make a purchase. If they are large investors who already understand bitcoin then their buying pattern should not only look at opportunities in decline because they can adjust their financial capabilities to increase their bitcoin holdings at any time when they consider the period is right. Moreover, if you mention that he continuously educates other people, his purchasing abilities should be much more varied in certain periods.

Although we know that buying during a decline is one of the right conditions and this is more likely to be used by individuals who do not have greater financial capabilities. The large holdings they have could exceed the expected profits for the $30k price period and it is conceivable that if they tried to hold bitcoin until it reaches the next ATH, the profits would exceed a percentage of the current amount by a large amount.

I doubt that it is accurate to suggest that MSTR is buying on the dip.   They are buying whenever, such as buying every quarter (or at least reporting it quarterly as they are obligated to do as a public company) but there might be some times that they are buying twice (or several times) in a quarter which largely seems to reflect that they are buying whenever they have extra money available.. and not really on dips as far as it seems..... but reporting at least once a quarter if they have any BTC buys, which they are obligated to make such reports.

I know that maybe I am nit-picking a bit, but in regards to your estimations regarding how much in profits they are, you should try to be a wee bit more accurate with numbers that are already out there (in this thread too).. because you seem to be vague and merely saying that their profits are "a lots" and even "in the millions," which seems to be a bit of an understatement and your numbers are not even close to precise, even if they are directionally correct.

You can look a mere few posts above and see the numbers that fillippone posted which are 158,400 bitcoin and an average cost of $29,753 and so an total invested amount of $4,712,956,757

So if we look at the current BTC price, we can just multiply $34,750 * 158,400 and we get right around $5,505,250,000 in current value.

Which appears to me to be right around $800 million in profits... getting close to a $billion in profits.. It seems that with their current quantity of bitcoin holdings and their cost basis, when bitcoin is above $36k, then they will be $1 billion in profits.. .

so maybe supra $36k is not coming right away, but seems to be pretty closely in reach, even if we might end up having a bit of a correction from here and needing to revisit these prices a bit further down the road.... but at the same time, even though quite a few folks are expecting a correction, it is not a given that BTC prices need to go down before they are able to go up... so each of us should be attempting to prepare our own portfolios accordingly.