After a long time, Microstrategy is back at what they know best: DCA.
Big news: they actually sold some Bitcoin for the first time!On December 28, 2022, MicroStrategy Incorporated (“MicroStrategy”) announced the following:
- During the period between November 1, 2022 and December 21, 2022, MicroStrategy, through its wholly-owned subsidiary MacroStrategy LLC (“MacroStrategy”), acquired approximately 2,395 bitcoins for approximately $42.8 million in cash, at an average price of approximately $17,871 per bitcoin, inclusive of fees and expenses.
- On December 22, 2022, MacroStrategy sold approximately 704 bitcoins for cash proceeds of approximately $11.8 million, at an average price of approximately $16,776 per bitcoin, net of fees and expenses. MicroStrategy plans to carry back the capital losses resulting from this transaction against previous capital gains, to the extent such carrybacks are available under the federal income tax laws currently in effect, which may generate a tax benefit.
- On December 24, 2022, MacroStrategy acquired approximately 810 bitcoins for approximately $13.6 million in cash, at an average price of approximately $16,845 per bitcoin, inclusive of fees and expenses.
Recap:
Of course, they are not selling in any kind of meaningful and/or material way - except to be able to harvest a tax loss (as they had explained) - which is also a relatively small amount of sale and/or small amount of tax loss harvesting.
Changed my mind about posting in this thread--not to gloat or anything of the sort, but because I was thinking about MSTR lately (and it's on my watchlist of stocks) and realized that everything I see Michael Saylor talking about on Youtube as of late has to do with bitcoin almost exclusively. In the MSTR news thread on my brokerage's site, I don't think I've seen any statements or press releases from the company regarding their core business. It's all about bitcoin.
Do any of you think that's strange?
No it is not strange.
I mean they didn't begin life as a bitcoin investment corporation, but it seems like that's exactly what they've morphed into.
And speaking of the stock, since I last posted here in September:
Right now the price is right around where it was before Saylor started his bitcoin binge,
It seems that all stocks are down. Seems like a BIG SO WHAT? to me.
and I'm very curious what's going to happen if BTC doesn't break out of the $16.5k trading range (which I hope it does soon, and to the upside).
Well our so far bottom for this correction is $15,479, so of course, it is possible to fairly easily break below $16.5k, especially since we have been in that range for nearly two weeks...
Again.. seems like a BIG SO WHAT?
You will be back.. unless you are merely trying to perform a lame-ass mic-drop. Is this meant to be a mic drop?
I don't do mic drops, and people almost always use that already-outdated phrase when they perform one.
Well.. look. You are back.
Who would've thunk?
Welcome back!!!!!!
MSTR's bitcoin purchases are straight-up gambling, there's no two ways about it.
I don't think so. You are being too absolutist.. again.. .want to be right, it seems.
My opinions given in this thread are similar in conviction to any of the others I've written on the forum. FTX's use of customer funds for their own trading was straight-up gambling.
If you are responding the same way to everything, then it may well be quite likely you are missing some nuance..
But, hey whatever.
If you are not buying bitcoin and/or sufficiently/adequately prepared for UP, then that's on you.
Is that too "absolutist"?
Point me to a post, and we will see if I agree or not and if not how I might not disagree. Anyone can say I told you after the fact.. That's easy peasy.
Is that me wanting to be right?
I don't know. I stand by my earlier comment (or my earlier probing), if that's why you are trying to verify. Do I (we?) need to revisit anything? You are quoting me from late September? Do we have the same facts or similar facts or how is it that you are wanting to engage at this point? What's our topic? You said that you would not be back, and you are back. So here we are.
What do you want to discuss? Saylor gambles too much from your point of view, and I don't think that he is gambling too much, but so what. Do you want to revisit that? He can do what he wants, no? Question is what are you doing? Are you failing/refusing to sufficiently/adequately stack sats because you fear that there are too many gamblers in the BTC space who still need to be purged before the BTC price can continue UP?
In the case of MSTR, I think you and some others don't happen to see what's going on and disagree with me.
You mean that you want to argue about whether Saylor is gambling too much? You and I have already presented our points on this topic, no?
That's fine, and we could argue forever about it but only time will tell who's right.
Why is there a need to be right? Everyone assigns probabilities to various events. Maybe you assign 75% and I assign 65% or there might be some other variation. Are you wanting to assign 90% or 100%, then maybe that's why I am tending to quibble so much with you. If you were closer in the ballpark as me then I would likely not even say anything, but for reasons that I have already asserted, many times, I find you to be too extreme in terms of what you are predicting and then for some reason you feel that you want to be right blah blah blah..
Why does it matter if you are right? What's the difference between reasonable assessments that might be extreme, except if one person is being unrealistic in his/her assessment and assigning way too high of probabilities because s/he thinks s/he is smarter than everyone else?
And I'm not sure what goalpost should be set for "right". Maybe a specific price for the stock? Maybe MSTR delcaring bankruptcy? Successful lawsuits? I'm open to suggestions.
You can set whatever goalposts that you believe to be relevant to the points/arguments that you are wanting to make. It's a bit of an extreme to be saying that he is gambling too much and then say.. look at FTX, they were gambling too much too. You seemed to have had suggested earlier in your post that Saylor and FTX may well be the same, but you do not have any evidence for that beyond a feeling, and also there is plenty of evidence to show both that Saylor and FTX are not even close to the same, but whatever, if you want to make those kinds of lame, fear-mongering and seemingly attention whoring kinds of comparisons, then that's up to you.
Frequently nuance can make a difference between figuring out if someone's strategy is merely aggressive rather than deranged, even though you would like to treat the two as if they were the same. Go figure?