Pages:
Author

Topic: MicroStrategy Buys $250M in Bitcoin, Calling the Crypto ‘Superior to Cash’ - page 36. (Read 17191 times)

legendary
Activity: 3892
Merit: 11105
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
Is this Jeffries, LLC?  If so, they look like an investment banking company, and I guess I'm missing the connection with the "ATM facility" tag.  Can anyone clarify that for me?  Are they involved with BTCATMs or does that refer to something different?

Either way, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that MSTR bought more bitcoin since it looks like they're going to be doing the DCA thing in perpetuity (or until they think they have enough). 

Despite every purchase of BTC by MSTR, the price does not soar when Amazon issues vacancies and false assumptions in the community about the implementation of BTC on Amazon
Wait, what?  I'm not sure what you mean about the Amazon part of your post.  I don't think Amazon was responsible for those rumors that they'd soon be accepting bitcoin--they'd have no reason to do that IMO.  And as far as bitcoin not soaring: it's at around $49k, so I think it's starting to take off.  If and when it breaks through the $50k barrier, it'll be a straight shot to a new ATH.

I cannot resist to make some kind of comment regarding what sometimes can seem like short term perspectives in regards to where the BTC price is at or where it might be going... and for sure, I am not referring to you, The Pharmacist, because you seem to appreciate that we are in an upward momentum for the moment.

What I am suggesting is that so frequently there will be emphasis in terms of some recent price movements of the past days or even a week or so that get all worked up that the latest local high has not been busted through - as if BTC price goes up in a straight line, which is kind of ridiculous way of thinking.

Largely we have about a 70% price bounce back from our sub $30k prices of just a month ago, and for sure there could be some pauses, and even a correction from our current price point.. and surely at each stage in the past month-ish, when BTC prices were getting into the upper $30ks, and then into the lower $40ks and getting above $46k and bouncing above $50k - getting above each of those BTC price thresholds brought higher levels of certainty that the $28,600 bottom was in, and not about BTC prices continuing to go UPpity...

Sure, in the medium to long term, and including our current BTC price momentum, we seem poised for continuing UPpity, but of course nothing is guaranteed and not even that there could be a BTC price correction at this time - and so far, we have only had a 6% correction (down $47,750 so far), which seems to be a BIG so what.. kind of ant price movements, in the whole scheme of things.   

When he buy Bitcoin total market is impact I don't know why market is down now.after some day he buy some bitcoin market go down.

Maybe this post is demonstrating part of my point?

The BTC price is NOT down.. Zoom the fuck out..

The BTC price is up, and what do you expect?  Straight up forever?  no corrections?  6%?  What is 6% in the scheme of things?   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes   seemingly nada...

To be honest I do not like that someone holding so much BTC that they can create panic in the BTC market so easily. This is not good for crypto in the long term. I am just thinking about how much the market will be affected by a "profit booking" tweet from Michele saylor. Some individuals will hold so much power we could see misuse of it very often in the future.


You shouldn't have let him buy that much then. You should have bought it yourself until it's sold out so no one else can buy.

But hey, it's a free market. Anyone can buy bitcoins.

However, it is very unlikely that they will do any "profit booking" anytime soon. All their coins are locked up for at least 5 years.

MSTR's coins (and Saylor's personal stash as well) are not exactly "locked up", but I otherwise agree with the overall sentiment of your post Dabs and your various other points including that MSTR nor Saylor are likely to be either selling or attempting to be manipulating the BTC price, even if they are capable of doing whatever the fuck they want - in terms of free market aspects of bitcoin (but of course, there would likely be concerns from some regulatory bodies (such as SEC - and even share holder concerns) if Saylor were to try any kind of significant or meaningful levels of selling stocks to buy lower kinds of things).
legendary
Activity: 3416
Merit: 1912
The Concierge of Crypto
To be honest I do not like that someone holding so much BTC that they can create panic in the BTC market so easily. This is not good for crypto in the long term. I am just thinking about how much the market will be affected by a "profit booking" tweet from Michele saylor. Some individuals will hold so much power we could see misuse of it very often in the future.


You shouldn't have let him buy that much then. You should have bought it yourself until it's sold out so no one else can buy.

But hey, it's a free market. Anyone can buy bitcoins.

However, it is very unlikely that they will do any "profit booking" anytime soon. All their coins are locked up for at least 5 years.
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6981
Top Crypto Casino
Is this Jeffries, LLC?  If so, they look like an investment banking company, and I guess I'm missing the connection with the "ATM facility" tag.  Can anyone clarify that for me?  Are they involved with BTCATMs or does that refer to something different?

Either way, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that MSTR bought more bitcoin since it looks like they're going to be doing the DCA thing in perpetuity (or until they think they have enough). 

Despite every purchase of BTC by MSTR, the price does not soar when Amazon issues vacancies and false assumptions in the community about the implementation of BTC on Amazon
Wait, what?  I'm not sure what you mean about the Amazon part of your post.  I don't think Amazon was responsible for those rumors that they'd soon be accepting bitcoin--they'd have no reason to do that IMO.  And as far as bitcoin not soaring: it's at around $49k, so I think it's starting to take off.  If and when it breaks through the $50k barrier, it'll be a straight shot to a new ATH.
hero member
Activity: 1414
Merit: 574
MicroStrategy acquired an additional 3,907 BTC at a price of $45,294 per BTC for about $177 million, thus the total volume held by the company as of August 24 reached 108,992 BTC.

<...>

Damn, you guys are becoming increasingly efficient, I cannot twelve IRL for a few minutes that you immediately take on my post!

Great.

In the meanwhile, I updated the spreadsheet!



Luckily, all the metrics in the press release are aligned with the data in the spreadsheet!


The important thing is the financing of the purchase: they purchased the Bitcoin with the ATM facility, or the possibility to issue new shares "on the fly" to buy more bitcoins: they raised capital during the third capital issuing new shares at an average price of 753 USD, raising 177.5 USD, and using 177 of those (ah... the juicy fees!) to buy the bitcoins on Coinbase:

This is the first time they are using this facility.


I'm seeing some pretty exciting news right now.  Since the Fud spread by China hit the market the one that still survives is the MSTR.  Despite every purchase of BTC by MSTR, the price does not soar when Amazon issues vacancies and false assumptions in the community about the implementation of BTC on Amazon
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 16328
Fully fledged Merit Cycler - Golden Feather 22-23
MicroStrategy acquired an additional 3,907 BTC at a price of $45,294 per BTC for about $177 million, thus the total volume held by the company as of August 24 reached 108,992 BTC.

<...>

Damn, you guys are becoming increasingly efficient, I cannot twelve IRL for a few minutes that you immediately take on my post!

Great.

In the meanwhile, I updated the spreadsheet!



Luckily, all the metrics in the press release are aligned with the data in the spreadsheet!


The important thing is the financing of the purchase: they purchased the Bitcoin with the ATM facility, or the possibility to issue new shares "on the fly" to buy more bitcoins: they raised capital during the third capital issuing new shares at an average price of 753 USD, raising 177.5 USD, and using 177 of those (ah... the juicy fees!) to buy the bitcoins on Coinbase:

Quote
As previously disclosed, on June 14, 2021, the Company entered into an Open Market Sale AgreementSM with Jefferies LLC, as agent (“Jefferies”),
pursuant to which the Company may issue and sell shares of its class A common stock, par value $0.001 per share (“Shares”), having an aggregate
offering price of up to $1.0 billion from time to time through Jefferies (collectively, the “ATM Facility”). On August 24, 2021, the Company also
announced that during the third quarter of the Company’s fiscal year to date (the period between July 1, 2021 and August 23, 2021), the Company had
issued and sold an aggregate of 238,053 Shares under the ATM Facility, at an average gross price per Share of approximately $753.21, for aggregate net
proceeds to the Company (less sales commissions and expenses) of approximately $177.5 million.

This is the first time they are using this facility.

legendary
Activity: 2590
Merit: 1501
MicroStrategy acquired an additional 3,907 BTC at a price of $45,294 per BTC for about $177 million, thus the total volume held by the company as of August 24 reached 108,992 BTC. https://www.microstrategy.com/en/investor-relations/financial-documents/microstrategy-acquires-3907-additional-bitcoins-with-proceeds-from-atm-facility-sales



legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6981
Top Crypto Casino
Let's face it, for (all of) them it's just "digital gold", whether some of us like it or not. They invest to make money. Don't we do the same, whether we expect or not to spend in some years like we do with cash now?
Of course it is--institutions sure as hell aren't buying bitcoin with the intention of spending it; that would be insane.  For the average bitcoin holder it makes sense if that person is low on cash but has bitcoin and needs to buy something (and if the merchant accepts bitcoin), but these big companies view bitcoin for what it is for most people, and for what it is legally: an asset. 

If most of us are being honest, bitcoin's primary purpose is as an investment, not as a currency.  I'm sure there are some members here who love to spend it, but I'd say the majority of us look at bitcoin as "digital gold".  If we didn't, there wouldn't be nearly as much interest in price speculation, and there would be a lot more discussion of where bitcoin can be spent.

And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that view, either. 

Also, I agree that Michael Saylor has so far been succeeding with his DCA approach, and props to him for his big brass balls.  I'm not sure I'd have a set of those if I was running a big company and speculating in bitcoin at the same time.
hero member
Activity: 1414
Merit: 574

For institutional investors the "coin" functionality of Bitcoin doesn't matter much, or at all. Let's face it, for (all of) them it's just "digital gold", whether some of us like it or not. They invest to make money. Don't we do the same, whether we expect or not to spend in some years like we do with cash now? It helps the price, it helps the ecosystem with advertising and liquidity, it's a win-win situation.
I agree if it is said that institutional investors like MSTR will consider BTC as their digital gold, so buying BTC several times is like the CEO's step in saving and investing in it.  We know each other that no single asset is able to provide a gain of up to one hundred percent in just a few months due to its volatile nature.  The success of MSTR's investment in BTC shows that BTC is a newcomer with its very sexy decentralization issue in the midst of a global economy that is currently very sluggish due to many government policies dealing with this pandemic.
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 6382
Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!
They generally buy at any time, at any price, despite the multimillion-dollar quarterly losses.

This is how one does proper DCA. He's just doing it by the book.


Actually, I like the way Saylor has been thinking lately. His concept is that bitcoin is already property, and not some form of money. And that this digital property will be able to freely coexist with fiat, as is now happening with the same gold or real estate. And those who now give up Bitcoin will lose a lot, as Bitcoin will continue to expand.

For institutional investors the "coin" functionality of Bitcoin doesn't matter much, or at all. Let's face it, for (all of) them it's just "digital gold", whether some of us like it or not. They invest to make money. Don't we do the same, whether we expect or not to spend in some years like we do with cash now? It helps the price, it helps the ecosystem with advertising and liquidity, it's a win-win situation.
member
Activity: 714
Merit: 16
"An attractive investment asset" I love this analogy use for bitcoin, it actually makes a lot of sense, I hope many big corporations will cease the call of attractiveness in this investment and yield.
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 6382
Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!
A post about the first anniversary of its Bitcoin adoption appeared on Twitter yesterday:

Michael Saylor has also tweeted about this.

My rookie year playing for the #Bitcoin Cyber Hornets is officially over. I want to thank Folded handsmy teammates for all the support and coaching they have provided to help me along the way.

It was a crazy year, but the roller coaster just goes on. They were one of the more vocal institutional investors and Michael Saylor was one of those who tried (and still trying) to open the eyes of the other possible institutional investors go on this path. Although not too many said it publicly that they went on this path, I'd still say that he's a trend setter.
legendary
Activity: 3892
Merit: 11105
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"

Oh maybe I cannot recall your backstory... have you been investing in bitcoin before you came to the forum, or did you just start to get involved in bitcoin in 2020?  Maybe you are Michael Saylor.. ?  Oh shit... Hi Michael.. did not mean to say mean things about you...

You cannot recall because I haven't told you. I started making small BTC purchases around July 2017.

I had already been investing in funds and stocks for a few years. At that time I took it as a high risk high potential rewards investment. Like investing in a start-up company. Back in February 2018 if I remember correctly, after the dip, I stopped buying. I didn't know much about the fundamentals or anything. It was a kind of gamble.

From then on I forgot about Bitcoin, while we were in bear market I didn't pay attention, but kept holding.

Last year, with the last halving I started to think that we would surely break $20K again and go higher. I registered on the forum and started learning more about Bitcoin

that's pretty interesting, and of course, there are variations of your story where some persons actually hear about BTC and take some small actions, do they have some familiarity with bitcoin, but then there needs to be some passage of time or maybe even their own more receptiveness to bitcoin to cause them to come back and to look at bitcoin more thoroughly and try to understand it better.

Surely, you do not have to provide any numbers, but I am gathering that your quantity of investment into BTC in 2017 and 2018 was a pretty small number relatively speaking.. but in the end, it is probably all o.k as long as you still hold onto whatever you bought at that time, even if it is not a big amount.

Anyway, I started buying Bitcoin regularly again, but still allocated money to other investments, mainly an S&P 500 fund and some shares.

But I have recently decided to go all in with Bitcoin. All the money I can save in a month I put into buying Bitcoin. I don't invest in anything else anymore.

Back before 2014, I was still contributing to a 401k, so there is a decent amount of incentive to invest into something like a 401k when you have matching funds and tax deferral status.. but sure, maybe up until the amount of the matching funds would be enough to put into that kind of an investment.. I never did actually have that kind of dilemma in front of me, and you did not say anything about a 401k or matching funds, even though that sometimes can be a reasonable consideration that people make to get those kinds of benefits.... hoping that it is going to pay off in the end.

One advantage of investing into bitcoin and NOT using retirement funds is that you can cash out at any time, but surely with bitcoin, if you just continue to buy, there is no tax consequences until you cash out.. so there could be some advantage of just not cashing out until you are damned ready.. which also could be quite a bit earlier than your retirement funds would even be coming available to you in the event that you have any of that.

Nor have I gone crazy and sold my other assets or borrow against my equity as Saylor recommends to invest in Bitcoin.

Putting all your eggs in one basket can be a bit too much for many people, so even if Saylor ends up being correct, it is a quite bold way to go forward.

Remember Saylor did not go balls to the wall right from the start, he first invested something like 70% or more of his company's cash reserves - and sure that is a kind of balls to the walls, already, and then he went into a variety of debt instruments to increase his level of balls to the wall, and many of us do not either have that level of credit, that ability to build that level of credit nor that level of cashflow to be able to service the payments of utilizing the credit (which is another way of saying servicing the debt).

There are not too many of us who are really considering what Saylor did to be a bad move, overall, and really with a 4-6.5 year timeline to service the debt, seems that he does have a pretty damned decent time cushion with full bitcoin cycles usually playing out in 4 years, and there is nothing really to indicate that we are extremely off of that 4 year cycle, yet.

I think with this step of investing all available liquidity in Bitcoin for the next few years and the appreciation, in the next few years BTC is going to be a very important part of my net worth.

Hopefully, you have all your cashflows covered, so we can look at what Saylor did, and sometimes we have to appreciate that he very well has his cashflows covered, and whether we are individuals or attempting to manage our personal cashflows and perhaps the cashflows of a business, we are frequently going to be better off if we can attempt to project our cashflows into the future so we do not get ourselves into any kind of pickle, so let's say hypothetically you have a cashflow of $5k per month, but by the time that you pay all your various bills and whatever, you ONLY have $1,200 left per month for investing.  In the past, you used to put $600 per month into bitcoin and $600 per month into stocks and other investments, and then you had a period of only putting that $1,200 into other investments, and now after going through some transition back into BTC and then increasing your percentage into BTC, now you are back to putting all of that $1,200 into bitcoin.  

So, sure after a while the amount that you invest into bitcoin could end up matching or exceeding those other investments, and then if we look at the performance of each of the investments, that also will end up causing potential changes in the values of each of the asset classes... and for sure bitcoin could start to become disproportionately larger in size than the other assets.

I remember you saying recently in a post that years ago, I think in the beginning, Bitcoin was 10% of your liquid assets. I guess now it is much more

After about my first year investing into bitcoin (which would have been by the end of 2014), I had figured out that my target was to get my bitcoin allocation to 10% of my quasi-liquid investment assets, so I added everything up and something that I owned were pretty highly liquid, but some things, I discounted if they were not very liquid, so I had a business that I only counted about 1/3 or perhaps a bit more of its value as potentially liquid, and then some of the funds that I owned were more liquid than others, and I could not even consider my 401k as completely liquid without either a 10% withdrawal penalty or going through some expenses to put into a self-directed fund, but even then there are age/disability requirements before the funds become available.  Anyhow, my goal became to cause my BTC investment amount to be equal to 10% of the value of all of what I considered to be the value of my quasi-liquid investment portfolio, and pretty much, ever since I figured that out to be my goal, I would almost inevitably tell people that from a beginners point of view and not knowing shit about bitcoin, they should have a starting point of a 1% to 10% allocation into bitcoin, and of course, if they were more confident higher and less confident lower, and of course, if they learned more about the asset, then they could also go above or below my own ongoingly consistent recommendation that everyone should have a 1% to 10% investment into bitcoin. .. hardly anyone listens.... .but does not stop me from continuing to say it if anyone asks.. should I buy bitcoin?.. yes.. 1% to 10 % allocation.. and study it and figure out details from there and adjust afterwards, if needed.

Should I buy Cardano..?  no fuck that shit
should i buy Doge coin? no fuck that shit
should I buy Ethereum?  no fuck that shit.
should I buy blah blah blah fill in the blank shit coin de juer, defi baloney, nft blah blah nonsense?... no fuck that shit..

Remember I talked with you about bitcoin a few years ago (or last year or last month blah blah blah),and  I am wondering if your investment thesis about bitcoin has changed based on recent BTC price performance or the markets or the shitcoins or the macro landscape or whatever might be happening..   I hardly even need to look at any BTC chart... or news or anything and I say, that my recommendation is the same and has been the same no matter what the BTC price...  buy bitcoin 1% to 10 % of your portfolio allocation and study it and figure out if you need to adjust... again.. .hardly anyone listens, even if they might ask specifically about buying bitcoin and my immediate and unequivocal answer is yes.  Why are they asking?  Just trying to see if I am o.k... maybe the price dropped 56% in the past month or two or it is down 85% from its top?  or maybe they forgot that even if it is down, it is also up, so maybe when I say that bitcoin is currently up 3.8x from its early September price of $10k and that is pretty damned good.. there eyes just kind of glaze over.. yeah yeah.. and perhaps they are thinking about something and maybe it will come up, but surely I am biased because I am focusing on the UP rather than the down, and I say bitcoin is still going up.. you just need at least a 4-year investment horizon... more glazed eyes and no confirmation of intended action..

Sorry I am repeating myself, and it just emphasizes the point that Saylor is and has been way above and beyond the 1% to 10% allocation and likely because of his use of leverage, we could say that he is 150% invested or something higher than his investment portfolio.. but that might not make any sense either because he does have other investments, assets, etc, but surely if Saylor has studied bitcoin beyond superficialities, then he can weight the upside and downside risks and all of his personal circumstances including his cashflow and his other investments, his timeline, his risk tolerance, his view of bitcoin as compared with other investments, his time, skills and abilities to learn, strategize, plan reallocate from time to time or use investment instruments.

So for me, I reached my 10% at the end of 2014 (and the BTC price was something like $350), and I thought that I was good, but the bitcoin price went down some more (down to lower $200s with a few spikes below) stayed down through out most of 2015 and really had a lot of sub $250 prices through that whole year and probably even tending towards the lower ends of the $200s for the whole year, so by the end of 2015, my BTC allocation did end up going up to about 13.5% in terms of the amount that I invested into BTC, but then the BTC price appreciation brought my BTC close to parity with all my other investments (so 50%) in mid-2017 and the allocation might have gotten close to 90% in the late 2017 price peak.. but I had already decided by late 2016 that I was not going to be selling a lot of my BTC, so I had a system to sell some as the BTC price went up, but not very much at all, and I largely decided to let my BTC investment ride, so during the downward BTC price spikes in December 2018 and in March 2020, my allocation did end up in the ball park of around 45% to 50% again, but then it got back into the 90%, and maybe now it is a bit below 90%.. maybe 85% or so.. something like that and I just kept with the let your winners ride theory.. because I have my other investments too that had gone up something like 60% or maybe even more during the 2014 to present period, but the bitcoin investment went up like 44x or maybe we can just use $1k as our average cost per BTC, and say that it went up 38x, but it was up as high as 65x.. and recently down to nearly 29x in profits.. still better than 60% or so, even if giving bitcoin a higher cost per BTC because sometimes mistakes are made along the way that increase your costs per BTC.. sometimes? sometimes?

From that first time when I bought Bitcoin, 2017, I remember that McAfee was the one who was in the media the most,grabbing headlines by claiming that he was going to eat his dick and all that. Today we have Saylor, which I think gives a much better image than McAfee and has contributed more positively to the popularization of Bitcoin.

Saylor is a way better role model.. smarter for sure.. and gosh McAfee was one thing and then another and then another and into shitcoins and could not really rely on him to be even quasi-consistent.  Saylor has a lot more solid ideas and even seems to be putting money where his mouth is in terms of things that he researches into and even his actual actions to attempt to educate people.. will we have to slay our hero.. I hope not.. .but we do have to be careful in putting too much credence into a person who could end up turning, or get forced into taking a position that might be good for him or his company, but might not be what a decent number of others believe is good for bitcoin, and there is room for all of that variance in bitcoin, because anyone can invest into bitcoin or even advocate for it, whether they are likable or agreeable or not or even if they have good or bad intentions.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 2017
 I am not even saying anything about your level of intelligence ONLY because I still remain concerned about the self-fulfilling prophecy idea...

Forget about it. It's just an idea that was on my mind. I'll also forget about it.


Oh maybe I cannot recall your backstory... have you been investing in bitcoin before you came to the forum, or did you just start to get involved in bitcoin in 2020?  Maybe you are Michael Saylor.. ?  Oh shit... Hi Michael.. did not mean to say mean things about you...

You cannot recall because I haven't told you. I started making small BTC purchases around July 2017.

I had already been investing in funds and stocks for a few years. At that time I took it as a high risk high potential rewards investment. Like investing in a start-up company. Back in February 2018 if I remember correctly, after the dip, I stopped buying. I didn't know much about the fundamentals or anything. It was a kind of gamble.

From then on I forgot about Bitcoin, while we were in bear market I didn't pay attention, but kept holding.

Last year, with the last halving I started to think that we would surely break $20K again and go higher. I registered on the forum and started learning more about Bitcoin

Anyway, I started buying Bitcoin regularly again, but still allocated money to other investments, mainly an S&P 500 fund and some shares.

But I have recently decided to go all in with Bitcoin. All the money I can save in a month I put into buying Bitcoin. I don't invest in anything else anymore.

Nor have I gone crazy and sold my other assets or borrow against my equity as Saylor recommends to invest in Bitcoin.

I think with this step of investing all available liquidity in Bitcoin for the next few years and the appreciation, in the next few years BTC is going to be a very important part of my net worth.

I remember you saying recently in a post that years ago, I think in the beginning, Bitcoin was 10% of your liquid assets. I guess now it is much more

From that first time when I bought Bitcoin, 2017, I remember that McAfee was the one who was in the media the most,grabbing headlines by claiming that he was going to eat his dick and all that. Today we have Saylor, which I think gives a much better image than McAfee and has contributed more positively to the popularization of Bitcoin.
legendary
Activity: 3892
Merit: 11105
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
I am not sure if you really believe this self-fulfilling prophecy concept.

Lol. I said I've been thinking about it lately. I don't believe it like some people believe in God if that's what you mean.

That's good.

 Wink

I doubt that bitcoin gives any shits about whether Saylor likes it or not or whether Saylor promotes it or not...

If we are talking about the very long term, of course not. Bitcoin if I remember correctly started being traded for price below $0.01 (correct me if I'm wrong). If we agree that in the future it will be worth $1M or more, Saylor has little influence on that long process.

If we talk about the last year and the near future, I think it has played an important role, especially in the popularization to companies and to a lesser extent to retail investors. Nowadays you search for "Bitcoin" on Youtube and you immediately get Saylor's videos.

In terms of companies, in February they held their annual user conference which included the Bitcoin for Corporations. According to Mr. Saylor, the Bitcoin program attracted 8,197 attendees from 6,917 different enterprises. He has the videos posted on the website for anyone who wants to see them.

For sure you are not going to find me arguing with facts about Saylor(MSTR) coming to fame, a lot of public attention, and even a lot of personal work in bitcoin to really garner and gain attention (and the ears) of a lot of institutional thinkers, rich peeps and even normies who had previously NOT been paying attention to bitcoin.  Sure, I can concede all of these factual happenings and still stand by all of the points that I have already made.. I am not really in conflict with you except for how I mentioned the "self-fulfilling prophecy" talkenings and any worshiping (or narrowing of causation) implications that might inspire you and/or others to go down such a framing of what's happening in bitcoinlandia path.

I don't disagree with other ideas in your post, except the implication that you are trying to make that Saylor has any actual material or meaningful role in bitcoin's success....

Again, if we consider the long term in Bitcoin, I think he has little influence. And that Bitcoin is going to succeed more because of its intrinsic properties than anything else.

For sure, it is like getting in front of a mass of moving people and saying look at me, look at me, I am the leader, and so then the mass of moving people triples in size in a matter of 6 months.. o.k... sure there was a contribution because more people came into the mass.. but we cannot really measure exactly what would have happened if saylor had not jumped into the limelight (don't get me wrong.. I am surely not ungrateful and I agree with a lot of what he does, except maybe some of his ESG nonsense in recent times.. but whatever.. peeps gonna do whatever they are going to do).

But I didn't want to focus on him so much as on to what would happen if big businessmen happen to have the same conception of Bitcoin as Saylor and act like him, buying a lot of Bitcoin to never sell it, which means a reduction in offer in large quantities. MSTR has approximately 100K Bitcoin. You could get to the point where 1M BTC or more are never offered to be bought.

Of course, those kinds of things are already happening, and sure sometimes the sourcing of coins might have to come from numerous entities/persons... and of course, we know what happens with the more of those kinds of things going on, that kind of dynamic puts upwards pressures on the BTC price.

If someone wants 1 million coins, s/he could get those million coins, but it might cause the BTC price to go to $1million as well (and maybe it takes them several months - or maybe even a year to get the coins).. but whatever.. we already should appreciate that these kinds of dynamics are quite likely to happen.. and they are already happening to some degree.. but no one of such size has been as public as Saylor..... even though there are a hell of a lot of companies BIGGER than Saylor and able to buy more coins than Saylor (but they might not be ready and willing which is part of the gamble that Saylor is playing and likely somewhat correct about in terms of the nimbleness of his own company and the way that it is structured with him controlling the whole damned thing) and many of us already have appreciated that his public company position causes him to have to disclose and perhaps even overdisclose...

By the way, this is the first time I've replied to you at length in a post, and I enjoyed it.

I can come off as a meanie sometimes in terms of sometimes calling someone a dummy (when I really believe that the ideas are dumb), but hardly ever do I mean anything personal.  I am not even saying anything about your level of intelligence ONLY because I still remain concerned about the self-fulfilling prophecy idea... and sure I might change my mind, but so far not.... I prefer to stick to my guns on this one...  even if some of the devil is in the details...


Today marks one year since I registered on Bitcointalk and I feel old enough Smiley

You old foggie.   Tongue

Oh maybe I cannot recall your backstory... have you been investing in bitcoin before you came to the forum, or did you just start to get involved in bitcoin in 2020?  Maybe you are Michael Saylor.. ?  Oh shit... Hi Michael.. did not mean to say mean things about you...
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 16328
Fully fledged Merit Cycler - Golden Feather 22-23
The loss is because GAAP accounting rules require companies to report unrealized gains and losses on a quarterly basis, so companies will often report a this "phantom" income or loss even though it doesn't affect the actual cash flows of the company.  That's what happened here, as MSTR was forced to report a loss on the bitcoins they bought for over $50K each when they dropped to the low 30s.  It doesn't actually affect the cashflows of the company, and if the price goes back up, they'll report a "phantom" gain for the same reason.

Ok,
I tried to update the spreadsheet on the relevant section to match the GAAP computation, but it is a near miss:

According to spreadsheet:

First, I computed the GAAP impairment using the EOQ price:



Then I computed all the relevant figures:



In the spreadsheet, you have all the formulas, that explain the computation I performed.

Then I checked them against the relevant part in MicroStrategy statement:

Quote
Digital Assets: As of June 30, 2021, the carrying value of MicroStrategy’s digital assets (comprised of approximately 105,085 bitcoins) was $2.051 billion, which reflects cumulative impairment losses of $689.6 million since acquisition and an average carrying amount per bitcoin of approximately $19,518. As of June 30, 2021, the non-GAAP digital asset cost basis and non-GAAP calculation of the market value of MicroStrategy’s bitcoin were $2.741 billion and $3.653 billion, respectively, which reflects an average cost per bitcoin of approximately $26,080 and a market price per bitcoin of $34,763.47.


All Non- Gaap Statements are correct.
I am slightly off the Impairments, which affects the GAAP Value of the Digital assets and of course the carrying amount per BTC.
Of course, if I manually edit the impairment value in MSTR text, all the computations are correct.


Is there an accountant out there?

EDIT: Thanks Ratimov for the link above:
  • Huge fan of Emily Chang here.
  • Micheal Saylor states the average cost of debt is 1.5%. Through the spreadsheet, I immediately computed the actual number is 1.6%.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 2017
I am not sure if you really believe this self-fulfilling prophecy concept.

Lol. I said I've been thinking about it lately. I don't believe it like some people believe in God if that's what you mean.

I doubt that bitcoin gives any shits about whether Saylor likes it or not or whether Saylor promotes it or not...

If we are talking about the very long term, of course not. Bitcoin if I remember correctly started being traded for price below $0.01 (correct me if I'm wrong). If we agree that in the future it will be worth $1M or more, Saylor has little influence on that long process.

If we talk about the last year and the near future, I think it has played an important role, especially in the popularization to companies and to a lesser extent to retail investors. Nowadays you search for "Bitcoin" on Youtube and you immediately get Saylor's videos.

In terms of companies, in February they held their annual user conference which included the Bitcoin for Corporations. According to Mr. Saylor, the Bitcoin program attracted 8,197 attendees from 6,917 different enterprises. He has the videos posted on the website for anyone who wants to see them.

I don't disagree with other ideas in your post, except the implication that you are trying to make that Saylor has any actual material or meaningful role in bitcoin's success....

Again, if we consider the long term in Bitcoin, I think he has little influence. And that Bitcoin is going to succeed more because of its intrinsic properties than anything else. But I didn't want to focus on him so much as on to what would happen if big businessmen happen to have the same conception of Bitcoin as Saylor and act like him, buying a lot of Bitcoin to never sell it, which means a reduction in offer in large quantities. MSTR has approximately 100K Bitcoin. You could get to the point where 1M BTC or more are never offered to be bought.

By the way, this is the first time I've replied to you at length in a post, and I enjoyed it.

Today marks one year since I registered on Bitcointalk and I feel old enough Smiley
legendary
Activity: 3892
Merit: 11105
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
Lately I've been thinking how much of a self-fulfilling prophecy Saylor's conception of Bitcoin may be.

I am not sure if you really believe this self-fulfilling prophecy concept.

I doubt that bitcoin gives any shits about whether Saylor likes it or not or whether Saylor promotes it or not...

Sure, on the margins, it might make a difference that Saylor is buying into bitcoin and pumping bitcoin like a wildman, but in the end, bitcoin is going up whether Saylor gets onboard or not....

For him it's basically the best financial asset in the world, and that's why he's not going to sell it. Never. He's going to keep buying as much as he can. I think the pic that Fillippone posted in the WO thread characterizes it perfectly.


LOL

As of June 21, 2021, MicroStrategy holds an aggregate of approximately 105,085 bitcoins,

He plans to keep buying. Non-stop

What happens to those Bitcoin he buys? They reduce the offer. It's as if they are lost. They don't flow. The more Bitcoin he buys, the more he reduces the offer and the more pressure he puts on the price to go up.

If big businessmen start sharing their vision, the predictions of several million per Bitcoin in the future are going to be easy fulfilled but largely due to this self-fulfilling prophecy. The whales believe Bitcoin is too valuable, buy it and never sell it, and create even more scarcity than Bitcoin already has because of its limited (deflationary) nature and the reduction of supply with halvings. Aside from the Bitcoins lost already and those that may get lost in the future.

I don't disagree with other ideas in your post, except the implication that you are trying to make that Saylor has any actual material or meaningful role in bitcoin's success.... sure maybe his actions cause the dips to be less severe and the pumps to be greater, but in the end, there are all kinds of factors to take into account, so it seems a bit too much to be suggesting that bitcoin becomes successful by Saylor, Microstrategies or any other bullish player.. and sure, he wants to be the bullish of the bulls, but so what?  There are a lot of factors that come into play, and Saylor identified them and also identified that we are still in early days and he became willing to bet, leverage and overleverage, and likely it will pay off well for him on a personal level.. no guarantees, but surely seems to be a good bet for someone in his position to have taken and way the hell more aggressive than a lot of others would have done (and probably way more aggressive than necessary, but still sends various interesting bullish bitcoin messages, so I am not going to wrestle with his ready, willingness, ableness, and actual action in the various over the top seeming strategies that he has chosen to take for himself and his company.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 2017
Lately I've been thinking how much of a self-fulfilling prophecy Saylor's conception of Bitcoin may be. For him it's basically the best financial asset in the world, and that's why he's not going to sell it. Never. He's going to keep buying as much as he can. I think the pic that Fillippone posted in the WO thread characterizes it perfectly.


LOL

As of June 21, 2021, MicroStrategy holds an aggregate of approximately 105,085 bitcoins,

He plans to keep buying. Non-stop

What happens to those Bitcoin he buys? They reduce the offer. It's as if they are lost. They don't flow. The more Bitcoin he buys, the more he reduces the offer and the more pressure he puts on the price to go up.

If big businessmen start sharing their vision, the predictions of several million per Bitcoin in the future are going to be easy fulfilled but largely due to this self-fulfilling prophecy. The whales believe Bitcoin is too valuable, buy it and never sell it, and create even more scarcity than Bitcoin already has because of its limited (deflationary) nature and the reduction of supply with halvings. Aside from the Bitcoins lost already and those that may get lost in the future.
legendary
Activity: 3892
Merit: 11105
Self-Custody is a right. Say no to"Non-custodial"
I don't think that cryptocurrencies are fully superior to cash for now. They have not only advantages against it but also disadvantages. Cryptocurrencies still have a long way to go to make it. But one thing is certain that they are absolutely a great alternative to fiat.

Thank you for your opinions, but bear in mind that while FIAT currencies are structurally engineered to lose value over time (trough the regressive hidden tax called inflation), BTC (let’s talk about the only one cryptocurrency having a value) is structurally engineered to be deflationary, or to increase his value over time.
While you can deal with a depreciating currency trough investments, of course this is an inferior choice.

We know already that Microstrategy (and Saylor) is only focusing on Bitcoin, so the title of the thread is likely a bit deceptive in terms of the topic (even if Saylor) might have said those exact words.

As far as I know, Saylor has not deviated from focusing only on Bitcoin, even though once in a while he will mention or acknowledge other cryptos (aka shitcoins).

Another matter is to focus on long term versus short term, even if we might get back to the 4 year bitcoin cycle and consider 4 years as a kind of minimum consideration in terms of entry point for the long term, performance of bitcoin or even the various shitcoins can be all over the place in the short term, so sure there could be better performance of shitcoins on the short term, and even shitcoins seem to fairly consistency out perform the dollar (and likely other fiats too).

I don't want to devolve too much into shitcoin talk either, because it is difficult to give too many shits about them.. unless just making short term bets, and really since this thread is meant to focus in upon Microstrategy/Saylor's strategies and involvement, the punchline does seem to be that he is still not distracted into such shitcoin topics - even if sometimes he may discuss the topic based on the frequent discussions of others - people are still very easily distracted in being able to focus on bitcoin.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 16328
Fully fledged Merit Cycler - Golden Feather 22-23
I don't think that cryptocurrencies are fully superior to cash for now. They have not only advantages against it but also disadvantages. Cryptocurrencies still have a long way to go to make it. But one thing is certain that they are absolutely a great alternative to fiat.

Thank you for your opinions, but bear in mind that while FIAT currencies are structurally engineered to lose value over time (trough the regressive hidden tax called inflation), BTC (let’s talk about the only one cryptocurrency having a value) is structurally engineered to be deflationary, or to increase his value over time.
While you can deal with a depreciating currency through investments, of course, this is an inferior choice.

Pages:
Jump to: