Pages:
Author

Topic: MicroStrategy Buys $250M in Bitcoin, Calling the Crypto ‘Superior to Cash’ - page 34. (Read 20891 times)

legendary
Activity: 2380
Merit: 17063
Fully fledged Merit Cycler - Golden Feather 22-23
The quarter has ended, and it's time to recap on the effect of this Bitcoin Dip on Microstrategy balance sheet.
This is my projection:



They are going to report on Aug 2, after the bell.

legendary
Activity: 3934
Merit: 11405
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
It seems to me that stating the fact that selling 75% of your BTC results in ONLY having 25% of what BTC that you used to have is a reminder of the importance of building a BTC position.. I understand that it is not really saying anything, it is like if someone does or says something that you may agree with or you don't agree with, and you merely assert, "that was an interesting choice."  You have not really said anything, but you acknowledged that you know that something had happened.

Michael Saylor is a salesman, or I should say a snake oil salesman. When Musk bought, he sold it as good news, and now that Musk is selling, he wants to sell it as good news too, or at least as neutral or not so bad.


You can consider the matter in any way that you like, and if you believe that Saylor is trying to sell bitcoin upon people rather than educate people about bitcoin, then that is your choice to see the matter like that... and maybe with the passage of time, you will be proven to be correct.  Alternatively, you could be proven to be wrong.. in the sense that bitcoin is not snake oil, even if you personally believe bitcoin to be lacking in substance.

No one can cause you to do your research and to come to any conclusion other than the conclusion that you have chosen to see for yourself.

For me this is bad news, because this cycle was known as the institutional adoption cycle, and if Tesla has sold to obtain liquidity, I wonder if there are other companies that are not nearly as famous that have also sold but without appearing in the news, as in this case.

If you really consider the matter, the adoption of bitcoin and the various network effects of bitcoin have been building for the past 13.5 years.  Sure, there are way more institutions coming into bitcoin in recent times, and quite likely there were way smaller institutions in bitcoin for many years back.  If you want to create a defeatest attitude and frame bitcoin as if it were failing in adoption, then again you may well be proven to be correct, but then again, you may well be proven to be incorrect.

I doubt anyone is going to convince you to account for facts before you reach your conclusions that bitcoin is not growing as fast as you believe that it should grow.

Even if you were to try to figure out the extent to which bitcoin's network effects are growing or not, you could spend a whole hell of a long time studying each of the network effects, and still you may well end up coming to your own conclusion, in which you believe that bitcoin is not growing as fast as you believe that it should be growing.  No one is going to stop you from being a no coiner or a low coiner based on your various likely to be false assumptions.

One of the earlier frameworks for network effects came from Trace Mayer, and surely there has been a lot of discussions around various aspects of how bitcoin becomes more powerful and even unstoppable by ongoing building of network effects.
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1565
The first decentralized crypto betting platform
It seems to me that stating the fact that selling 75% of your BTC results in ONLY having 25% of what BTC that you used to have is a reminder of the importance of building a BTC position.. I understand that it is not really saying anything, it is like if someone does or says something that you may agree with or you don't agree with, and you merely assert, "that was an interesting choice."  You have not really said anything, but you acknowledged that you know that something had happened.  

Michael Saylor is a salesman, or I should say a snake oil salesman. When Musk bought, he sold it as good news, and now that Musk is selling, he wants to sell it as good news too, or at least as neutral or not so bad.

For me this is bad news, because this cycle was known as the institutional adoption cycle, and if Tesla has sold to obtain liquidity, I wonder if there are other companies that are not nearly as famous that have also sold but without appearing in the news, as in this case.
legendary
Activity: 3934
Merit: 11405
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"

What important information am I missing in that tweet?  Is it just a blatantly autistic response to Musk's sale, or is there more to it?  This is one thing that bugs me about e-mails, posts, tweets, and basically all forms of written communication: it's very hard to determine the tone of what you're reading.  I don't know if he's being sarcastic or whatever else; it just looks like a weird tweet to me.

But boy, I'm happy for Michael Saylor that bitcoin didn't (or hasn't yet) continue to drop.  He must have been sweating just a little bit when it fell below $20k, no matter how stoic he appears in interviews.  MSTR's stock hasn't overreacted to bitcoin's price, either.

It seems to me that stating the fact that selling 75% of your BTC results in ONLY having 25% of what BTC that you used to have is a reminder of the importance of building a BTC position.. I understand that it is not really saying anything, it is like if someone does or says something that you may agree with or you don't agree with, and you merely assert, "that was an interesting choice."  You have not really said anything, but you acknowledged that you know that something had happened.  

You can agree with Saylor's largely making of neutral statements or not.. it still serves as a reminder that people noticed that Musk sold 75% of his stash.. and people will likely notice again down the road whether such selling of 75% ended up working out well or not... Time will tell.. Time will tell.. and sure, Musk/TESLA might take some actions in the meantime in terms of buying some or all of the sold BTC back,,, Perhaps? perhaps?.
legendary
Activity: 2618
Merit: 1505

What important information am I missing in that tweet?  Is it just a blatantly autistic response to Musk's sale, or is there more to it?  This is one thing that bugs me about e-mails, posts, tweets, and basically all forms of written communication: it's very hard to determine the tone of what you're reading.  I don't know if he's being sarcastic or whatever else; it just looks like a weird tweet to me.

But boy, I'm happy for Michael Saylor that bitcoin didn't (or hasn't yet) continue to drop.  He must have been sweating just a little bit when it fell below $20k, no matter how stoic he appears in interviews.  MSTR's stock hasn't overreacted to bitcoin's price, either.

Yes, the people under this Michael Saylor tweet began to develop the topic around the ratio of the% indicated by him, well, the context of the tweet is, as it seems to me, regret about what happened, because it is likely that the moment will come when the remaining 25% will cost much more than the 75% that Musk sold. Smiley
legendary
Activity: 3556
Merit: 7011
Top Crypto Casino

What important information am I missing in that tweet?  Is it just a blatantly autistic response to Musk's sale, or is there more to it?  This is one thing that bugs me about e-mails, posts, tweets, and basically all forms of written communication: it's very hard to determine the tone of what you're reading.  I don't know if he's being sarcastic or whatever else; it just looks like a weird tweet to me.

But boy, I'm happy for Michael Saylor that bitcoin didn't (or hasn't yet) continue to drop.  He must have been sweating just a little bit when it fell below $20k, no matter how stoic he appears in interviews.  MSTR's stock hasn't overreacted to bitcoin's price, either.
legendary
Activity: 2618
Merit: 1505
In the second quarter, Tesla got rid of most of its bitcoin reserves by selling 75% of the available ones, now the crypto assets on Tesla's balance sheet amount to $218 million, at one time Michael Saylor thanked Musk for buying bitcoin for $1.5 billion.



However, according to Musk, this is a forced measure to overcome difficulties due to covid problems in China, and not a sentence to bitcoin.
Source link: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jul/20/tesla-second-quarter-earnings-elon-musk

The state of the global economy should eventually force the largest companies to change their attitude to bitcoin, for example, BlackRock, which lost $1.7 trillion at the end of the 2nd quarter of this year, is no longer so opposed to investing in bitcoin.

Source link: https://watcher.guru/news/bitcoin-averse-blackrock-loses-1-7-trillion-in-6-months
                  https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-07-20/how-blackrock-lost-1-7-trillion-in-six-months#xj4y7vzkg
Archived bloomberg Link: https://archive.ph/SxS7a

Upd: Michael Saylor's comment on Tesla's bitcoin sale:

https://twitter.com/saylor/status/1549856625321807873
legendary
Activity: 2380
Merit: 17063
Fully fledged Merit Cycler - Golden Feather 22-23
Micheal Saylor is pushing the “bitcoin strategy” narrative:





As a bonus, an earlier version of the same tweet, now deleted:



legendary
Activity: 2380
Merit: 17063
Fully fledged Merit Cycler - Golden Feather 22-23


or unless he is almost out of cash for now therefore making smaller purchases

I think this is the right reason.

Microstrategy as a company is basically a zombie company. Have you ever heard of a Microstrategy product before it became known for their bitcoin investment? Me neither.

The vast majority of his buys have been made against issue of new debt or equity. I guess the small buys of 10sh millions are financed from cash flows from company converted into bitcoin.
I guess this is pretty evident from the spreadsheet where I kept track of the source of every buy via a colour coding.
legendary
Activity: 3934
Merit: 11405
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
Don't you see that Saylor is already panicking by being so whimpy with his additional purchases of ONLY $10 million?  He flinched, no?  He's showing weakness?  and lack of confidence, no?

He is partly afraid of making bigger purchase but he doesnt want to stop purchasing it otherwise alot of people would question his confidence in all of his bitcoin holdings. Pretty sure that we will get alot more small size purchase like this in the upcoming weeks unless btc somehow climb up to 30k or something then he might be confident afterward to make bigger purchase

or unless he is almost out of cash for now therefore making smaller purchases

Of course, my statement that you cited was meant a bit tongue in cheek - which means that it was a bit of an exaggeration, and even though Saylor likely is a bit disappointed with BTC's price drops of the last month or more, I doubt that his confidence would have really been shaken in any kind of substantial and/or meaningful way... so maybe that is one of the difficulties in my making those kinds of statements . .because the baloney propaganda continues to be "concerned" about the level of Saylor's ongoing conviction in regards to his already made bitcoin purchases - averaging higher prices.
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 521
DGbet.fun - Crypto Sportsbook
the decline that is happening now this doesn't deter saylor from investing again and even a 3 day ago they announced another purchase of 480 bitcoins or equivalent with $10 milions.
In general, the idea of buying and not selling is in itself reassuring to the markets, but these people invest in the long-term, so these currencies will be sold within 10 to 20 years, and therefore unless they are forced, there is no reason to sell them.

Of no doubt microstrategy has it best strategy inplace for the bitcoin market and price, they can't just persists on making buys without considering some quogent areas, long term bitcoin investment is one of the most secured ways for the future in cryptocurrency considering it previous history right from inception, from the year 2009 till date and it past events record could attest to the certainty for a rising in price.

Bitcoin does not need to get to ATH for Saylor to be profitable from BTC and/or to even had made a good investment decision by putting money into bitcoin.

Aside from bitcoin being use as digital currency for exchange there are other applicable aspect where bitcoin has more advantage it serves it's investors such as, store of value, decentralized digital assets, profitable investment, medium of exchange and the likes.
legendary
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1414
Don't you see that Saylor is already panicking by being so whimpy with his additional purchases of ONLY $10 million?  He flinched, no?  He's showing weakness?  and lack of confidence, no?

He is partly afraid of making bigger purchase but he doesnt want to stop purchasing it otherwise alot of people would question his confidence in all of his bitcoin holdings. Pretty sure that we will get alot more small size purchase like this in the upcoming weeks unless btc somehow climb up to 30k or something then he might be confident afterward to make bigger purchase

or unless he is almost out of cash for now therefore making smaller purchases
legendary
Activity: 3934
Merit: 11405
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
So we can't speculate to compare the amount of Microstrategy investment with the current price, their commitment to hold bitcoin as much as they can for the long term, maybe 10 or 20 years from now they are getting high profits based on the historical cycle of the Bitcoin market movement from year to year and very Bitcoin potential could reach ATH in the long term.
To be precise, we're not speculating what Saylor did. but his problem is in managing his finances in maintaining the mstr market cycle with the investment he makes in btc. If we follow Saylor steps, we are not at all surprised because he is an expert in IT and even his knowledge is a role model for big investors. Now this situation might be interesting to discuss when extreme market conditions recently occurred where btc could drop quite deep to reach $17k due to massive sell-off by big investors and can Saylor survive in such situation if extreme market conditions happen again, Especially if he uses the Leverage strategy.

You seem to be talking positive about Saylor but also questioning his survivability in terms of the next "extreme market conditions" if they come.  What do you consider "extreme market conditions?"  $18k?  $16k?  $13k?  $10k?  $8k?  $3k?  If you pick a number for how far down would be "extreme market conditions," then how long would the BTC price have to stay down there in order for it to rise to the level of "extreme market conditions?"

Furthermore, how likely do you believe various levels of "extreme market conditions" to be?  Is it possible that the bottom is in? Is it possible that we still might get some additional failures of various other "highly leveraged" companies in the bitcoin space by merely staying down in our current prices for a certain extended period of time?  3-9 months?

I know that none of us understand all of the various facts or even the various hypotheticals that could end up playing out from what might be going on behind the scenes, whether we know some of the facts or not.  At the same, time there are some forum members who seem to create impressions and implications that they know more than they actually know.. so in that regard, sometimes it might be helpful to figure out what kinds of "extreme market conditions" do you believe are going to start to cause someone like Saylor to start to have to show weakening signs?  Some of us might speculate that he has already shown a wee bit of weakening signs by the lower amounts of his most recent BTC purchase - adding ONLY a mere little $10 million of additional BTC at around $20k.

Don't you see that Saylor is already panicking by being so whimpy with his additional purchases of ONLY $10 million?  He flinched, no?  He's showing weakness?  and lack of confidence, no?
hero member
Activity: 2464
Merit: 550
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
So we can't speculate to compare the amount of Microstrategy investment with the current price, their commitment to hold bitcoin as much as they can for the long term, maybe 10 or 20 years from now they are getting high profits based on the historical cycle of the Bitcoin market movement from year to year and very Bitcoin potential could reach ATH in the long term.
To be precise, we're not speculating what Saylor did. but his problem is in managing his finances in maintaining the mstr market cycle with the investment he makes in btc. If we follow Saylor steps, we are not at all surprised because he is an expert in IT and even his knowledge is a role model for big investors. Now this situation might be interesting to discuss when extreme market conditions recently occurred where btc could drop quite deep to reach $17k due to massive sell-off by big investors and can Saylor survive in such situation if extreme market conditions happen again, Especially if he uses the Leverage strategy.
hero member
Activity: 2436
Merit: 607
Am I the only one who reads it differently, if an ardent believer in Bitcoin’s value in the future made a purchase for 10 million then we can’t expect many cash payments in the next 6 months.
No, I also read it differently so that found the contradictory intent of @DU18 explanation, we can simply conclude that Saylor is not at all in a state of emergency as some assumptions from the previous page post, in fact Saylor has added another $10 million by buying bitcoin on the price is lower and supposedly $10 million can be added to the reserve assets to sustain the liquidation of the previous bitcoin purchases.

Quote
In general, the idea of buying and not selling is in itself reassuring to the markets, but these people invest in the long-term, so these currencies will be sold within 10 to 20 years, and therefore unless they are forced, there is no reason to sell them.
So we can't speculate to compare the amount of Microstrategy investment with the current price, their commitment to hold bitcoin as much as they can for the long term, maybe 10 or 20 years from now they are getting high profits based on the historical cycle of the Bitcoin market movement from year to year and very Bitcoin potential could reach ATH in the long term.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 4002
the decline that is happening now this doesn't deter saylor from investing again and even a 3 day ago they announced another purchase of 480 bitcoins or equivalent with $10 milions.


Am I the only one who reads it differently, if an ardent believer in Bitcoin’s value in the future made a purchase for 10 million then we can’t expect many cash payments in the next 6 months.

In general, the idea of buying and not selling is in itself reassuring to the markets, but these people invest in the long-term, so these currencies will be sold within 10 to 20 years, and therefore unless they are forced, there is no reason to sell them.
legendary
Activity: 3934
Merit: 11405
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
So behind all this, does Saylor really think that the DCA strategy will help offset the company's balance sheet a bit, because now microstrategy companies rely heavily on Bitcoin price movements because their finances are invested in bitcoin.
It's still hard to know how Saylor thinks about his investments right now, because what he's done for Bitcoin and microstrategy companies isn't a bad thing. Because he sees the price of Bitcoin which is now very far from ATH so he has the confidence and courage to put the company's money into Bitcoin with the hope of greater profits even though it also has risks. And I think he definitely understands that

Bitcoin does not need to get to ATH for Saylor to be profitable from BTC and/or to even had made a good investment decision by putting money into bitcoin.

Of course, there are direct price considerations in which there may well be goals/preferences that bitcoin holds its value better than the dollar.. and that seems to have really great likelihood - almost like a no brainer.. so if the dollar ends up devaluing 10% per year, then he should at least want Bitcoin to appreciate by that much (as well to include whatever costs that he had incurred to service various bitcoin-related debts that he incurred by accumulating and holding BTC)..  

Another thing is that if his average cost per BTC is $30k.. then that may well be the measuring starting point in terms of figuring out where he would prefer BTC to be in order to be profitable (or even break-even profitable)..   Perhaps $60k by August 2027?  which would be 7 years from the time that he started buying BTC.   I think that there are pretty decent odds that BTC prices will be $60k or greater by August 2027, and of course, you have the right to believe that the odds are not that great and/or you believe that it is not a good bet..  There are a lot of people (including but not limited to no coiners) who either believe that or they feel really uncertain about bitcoin, and a large majority of them have hardly any clue about what bitcoin is and/or how bitcoin is differentiable from other assets and currencies.  

So, it seems that knowing bitcoin's value proposition and also being able to act upon such value proposition is a good thing for Saylor/MSTR and any of the other BTC HODLers and accumulators out there in the world... still a small part of the population.. Oh and by the way, in recent times some of the real real real true BTC believers got reckt as fuck in recent times and that is not because of their belief, but instead their choice to bet like degenerate gamblers - and sure Saylor/MSTR has been truly aggressive in his BTC accumulation strategies, but his level of aggressiveness is not even close to the level of gambling that many of the folks currently getting reckt (and actually some of those getting reckt currently are likely innocent bystanders who just did not realize the amount of risk that they were taking with some of the products that they bough because they were trying to receive yield on their bitcoin.. which truly should not be necessary with an investment like bitcoin. at least not with large portions of your BTC stash)...

The nature of any asymmetric bet to the upside is that the potential is likely to go way beyond the minimum break even price points (such as going beyond $60k in August 2027).  Of course, using leverage changes some of the calculations, too.. in terms of weighing downside versus upside risks and calculating the various expected values based on expected BTC price performance.

MicroStrategy's investments in bitcoin for the long term are confirmed by the senior director of cash operations and investor relations Shirish Jajodia. When asked about what steps the company is planning to take in the current situation (the company's assets in bitcoins fell by $3.4 billion from $5.9 billion to $2.45 billion), he replied that MicroStrategy does not plan to sell bitcoins and that this the position is supported by investors.

https://fortune.com/2022/07/02/microstrategys-bitcoin-holdings-take-a-record-3-4-billion-hit-the-company-says-its-playing-the-long-game/
Well, he bought it at spot so at least he can still convince his investors to keep it for around a year or two more. But he is slowly running out of time if Bitcoin price back to below $10k which put him at loss for all of his DCA (21,454 BTC @$11k and 16,796 BTC @$10k). Can we even call all of his investments in Bitcoin as DCA?

Saylor has already unambiguously proclaimed that his investment timeline for bitcoin is longterm, and several of his bitcoin related debts are structured 4-7 years from the time that they started, so some of those could start coming due in 3-5 years... but still there is no sign that he is even thinking about the matter in 1-2 year time horizons as you Tomohisa seem to consider some kind of relevant calculation that he is not even framing the matter in that kind of way.. which seems to be that you are trying to place some kind of different framework upon the supposed dilemmas that exist for Saylor/MSTR.

And, why is what Saylor/MSTR doing NOT some variation of DCA?  Go ahead explain.  Do you think that since he is using leverage, then that is not DCA?  Do you think that DCA has to come in some kind of specific increment or a some kind of expected amount?

I agree that there may well be something going on beyond DCA, such as buying on dips and lump sum investing, but there is also ongoing regularity to the process (and there is no selling or fucking around with selling), so I have troubles understanding how what Saylor/MSTR has been doing in the past 2 years is very much different from DCA and cannot be referred to DCA in a kind of short-hand descriptive overview of what is mostly happening?
full member
Activity: 360
Merit: 100
MicroStrategy's investments in bitcoin for the long term are confirmed by the senior director of cash operations and investor relations Shirish Jajodia. When asked about what steps the company is planning to take in the current situation (the company's assets in bitcoins fell by $3.4 billion from $5.9 billion to $2.45 billion), he replied that MicroStrategy does not plan to sell bitcoins and that this the position is supported by investors.

https://fortune.com/2022/07/02/microstrategys-bitcoin-holdings-take-a-record-3-4-billion-hit-the-company-says-its-playing-the-long-game/
Well, he bought it at spot so at least he can still convince his investors to keep it for around a year or two more. But he is slowly running out of time if Bitcoin price back to below $10k which put him at loss for all of his DCA (21,454 BTC @$11k and 16,796 BTC @$10k). Can we even call all of his investments in Bitcoin as DCA?
legendary
Activity: 2618
Merit: 1505
MicroStrategy's investments in bitcoin for the long term are confirmed by the senior director of cash operations and investor relations Shirish Jajodia. When asked about what steps the company is planning to take in the current situation (the company's assets in bitcoins fell by $3.4 billion from $5.9 billion to $2.45 billion), he replied that MicroStrategy does not plan to sell bitcoins and that this the position is supported by investors.

https://fortune.com/2022/07/02/microstrategys-bitcoin-holdings-take-a-record-3-4-billion-hit-the-company-says-its-playing-the-long-game/
legendary
Activity: 2716
Merit: 1102
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
So behind all this, does Saylor really think that the DCA strategy will help offset the company's balance sheet a bit, because now microstrategy companies rely heavily on Bitcoin price movements because their finances are invested in bitcoin.
It's still hard to know how Saylor thinks about his investments right now, because what he's done for Bitcoin and microstrategy companies isn't a bad thing. Because he sees the price of Bitcoin which is now very far from ATH so he has the confidence and courage to put the company's money into Bitcoin with the hope of greater profits even though it also has risks. And I think he definitely understands that
Pages:
Jump to: