MicroStrategy Buys Bitcoin for 10 Weeks in a Row. Their Bitcoin buying spree continues. They set a record this year as they bought the most bitcoins in 2024. Also today they have created a unique milestone and that is they have already accumulated 0.5 million bitcoins in their investment portfolio. Maybe nothing will stop them from buying bitcoins and they will continue to buy bitcoins.
Microstrategy has been one of the firms that has been increasing the Bitcoin adoption by showing others the way it ought to be. The firm focus on accumulating enough Bitcoin which has been increasing their profits as the price of Bitcoin keeps going bull. Microstrategy has been one of the biggest firms that are holding huge sum of Bitcoin and is still ready to buy at any slightest opportunity.
The company could worth 2X by the time the price of Bitcoin hit 200k. The company is in for long term Bitcoin holding which is one of the ways to make huge profits as an investor. The adoption of Bitcoin is increasing and more companies and firms are now seeing a reason to add Bitcoin to their portfolio.
The company
"MicroStrategy" is investing in Bitcoin in a long-term plan. They are posting various posts about Bitcoin on their Twitter page almost every day making it clear that they will invest more in Bitcoin in the future and maybe they are investing with a target that they will continue to invest until this target is met. If they keep investing like this, it won't be long before Bitcoin hits $200k. The way they are investing will attract the interest of other companies and they will see other companies regularly buying bitcoins with huge amount of money which is definitely good news for bitcoin investors.
I believe that Chad Saylor will only stop thinking about investing more into Bitcoin if the ratio between MSTR and Bitcoin will go from premium to discount. Michael Saylor, and MSTR holders, still have an opportunity to buy more Bitcoin from capital made by selling MSTR because MSTR is still trading at a premium against Bitcoin. But once it reaches an equilibrium, that opportunity is gone and there might probably a situation when it would be profitable to sell Bitcoin to buy MSTR if MSTR is at a discount against Bitcoin?
I'm merely posting that from a viewpoint of "trading" obviously, not from a viewpoint that "X is more valuable than Y".
Maybe we are saying similar things, yet I am still thinking that it be better to summarize that Saylor/MSTR will keep buying BTC on a weekly and sustainable basis for a certain period of time into the future no matter what (even as long as 1 year into the future no matter what) so long as Saylor/MSTR keeps receiving new money to buy BTC, so in that regard, if the price of MSTR or other kinds of company/personal credibility type measurements go down, then the free (extra/additional) money dries up.
Saylor/MSTR seems to have had also built up some level of cash reserves that seems to be quite a bit north of $1 billion to strategically continue to buy BTC on a regular basis no matter what for a certain period of time, such as 1 year or some other behind the scenes number of weeks that they do not have to disclose such exact particulars), so that part of the continued buys no matter what might be structured into both what they are saying and what they are doing... They buy no matter what but also the buys go up further if more money comes in and then sinks down to the minimum amount in the event that no new money is coming in.
So the extent to which additional buys happen just relates to whether anyone is giving him (or his company stubbles across) extra money to keep buying BTC... Money dries up, then no more buys, money comes in then additional buys, beyond whatever amounts that he structurally has already set up.
So for example, let me outline this in a kind of hypothetical way that I believe would be completely sustainable up to a year and surely he could do longer or shorter periods, yet let me say that if Saylor were to consider that he/his company has around $520 million in cash reserves that are already set aside and directly allocated for future bitcoin buys, then he can spend $10 million per week for the next 52 weeks with that $10 million per weeks as a minimum budgeted amount for buying bitcoin on a regular, consistent and persistent basis no matter what (and keeps his/MSTRs name in the news every single week with even bare minimum amounts that are not exactly unnewsworthy.. even though surely there might be some chuckles at BTC buys during weeks that end up ONLY being $10 million for the week, but that still is 100 BTC if the price is $100k each and 10 BTC if the price is $1 million each)...
So any new money that comes in would either be used to buy bitcoin right away for that week, or put into that bitcoin allocated reserve (the $520 million fund) or put into another back up cash fund.. .. So new money coming in might automatically get put $10 million in each of the three categories that I mentioned, and if the amount is above $30 million, then any excess beyond $30 million per week would be used to buy BTC right away during that week.
Sure, I am making up these particulars, but just outlining something like this as an example of a cashflow management way that has a couple categories of reserves that could be designed to be sustainable with assured buys for at least 52 weeks into the future no matter what with $10 million per week minimum and then any additional BTC buys would be based upon new money coming in and mostly erroring on the side of buying BTC as the money comes in once the amount coming in per week is above $30 million..
Even with my particular example, I am thinking that such a way would be completely reasonable and within bare minimum kinds of characteristics that would also allow for buying BTC with whatever new money comes in, yet I kind of get the impression that Saylor/MSTR is way less reasonable and conservative than me, so they may well be spending way beyond what I am suggesting to be sustainable.. yet at the same time, I am just one dumb person on the internet, and Saylor/MSTR has people who are brainstorming these kinds of variations of ideas on a regular basis, so they have pretty damned decently good ideas about ways that they can push in more adventurous ways, but still not be any more risky as a keep buying no matter what system than the for example method that I outlined.
