Topic: MicroStrategy Buys $250M in Bitcoin, Calling the Crypto ‘Superior to Cash’ - page 44. (Read 14269 times)

Surely would be a decent test of their resolve if such a thing were to happen, because there does seem to be a bit of arrogance in a kind of presumed idea that Saylor might believe that that much money might be able to pump BTC.. but I am not even sure if he is actually trying to pump BTC's price, even if that is what people try to attribute to his motives.


If it is a quickie correction, then that might already be accounted for, and it does not seem likely to have a long dip.. but hey, nothing is guaranteed in bitcoinlandia.. and Saylor's timing might really be such that he will not suffer such a test of his resolve... even if you, exstasie, are wishing such bad fortune's upon him.    

Honestly, I hope Microstrategy completes these leveraged buys and then BTC immediately crashes 40%.

That's the kind of test this guy needs. Everything is hunky-dory while the market is trending up. Let's see what happens to that exuberance, and how MSTR's shareholders feel, when Bitcoin brutally shakes the trees as it historically always has and people begin to question his price predictions.

You gotta admit, acquafredda, that you do have a wee bit of a tendency to phrase matters in terms of extremes.

Sure Saylor is being bold as fuck.. and maybe even getting a lot of attention for recent pumpenings in the bitcoin price, but it is quite likely that bitcoin gives little to no shits about these pumpenings and it may well have been inclined to pump anyhow..

Sure, it does not hurt that we seem to be getting a bit of institutional fomo from some of the BIG players that Saylor seems to be poking and prodding and acting a bit outrageous, and even getting some backlash from longer term BTC bulls.

Actually Saylor seems to be serving as a kind of angel whale that many of us were wishing for through much of 2015, 2016 and even into 2017.. and we seem to be getting such a figure this time, when such figure(s) were either absent or silent in the 2015-2017 bullrun.  Lucky for us HODLers... and if you either sold too early, waiting on the fence or failed and refused to put in enough BTC because you are overly bearish about the ramifications of these kinds of bold measures, then too bad for you... you snooze you lose... hahahahahaha


Maybe maybe not.  Don't let these kinds of fears cause you to either sell to early, sit on the fence or fail/refuse to buy enuff BTC to pee pare ur lil selfie for UPpity.


Saylor has provided a very articulated case for why he is buying now, and if you are attempting to compare $20k now to $20k in 2017, you may well be failing and or refusing to account for the passage of three years and other aspects of bitcoin including its most compelling current price prediction models.


You seem to be thinking quite small tbterryboy... and not really putting yourself in the kind of cash rich position that Saylor and his company finds itself in... So even though Saylor seems to be being bold, he is merely considering ways to attempt to preserve cash value while being a bit public about it and probably he has to be a bit public about it, unless he were to be able to convert his public company to a private company.

I cannot even keep track of their intentions.
They started with a 400 millions issue, then 550, but apparently they ended up with 650 millions:

MicroStrategy Completes $650 Million Offering of 0.750% Convertible Senior Notes Due 2025


This means a potential to up to 36,000 BTC!


Context:


https://twitter.com/fillippone1/status/1337447410654728194?s=20

I can't believe they keep buying more and more from these prices as well. I just think that bitcoin is not at a price where I would be willing to buy thousands of it right now, they did a great job by buying very early on before this bull run started and that makes sense, I would understand it if they bought more of it early on as well, but looking at the situation right now, it is very high and I doubt it would worth this much that easily.

In any case I would have to say they are brave for buying this many this early, I just think best course of action for them would be not buy more, not sell , and just keep holding the ones they have, that way they could get a lot better profits in the future, if they keep buying from higher price they could increase their averages to a less wanted price.

There is no need to be a dictator when you own almost all the CLASS B shares that gives you 10X the voting power.




When you own the 67% of the voting rights in the firm, you can basically do whatever you want.

Maybe Michael Saylor sees this as a challenge. He might be thinking that because he was the one to start all this then he needs to be leading the one and only company which is going crazy about bitcoin.
Honestly, I do not know if he is a sort of dictator who is surrounded by yes men but the amount of power that requires doing what he is doing must be very high.
One day he will be either recognized as somebody who made MSTR super wealthy or a fool. I do not think there can be a middle ground.

Companies like this really move btc higher in the mid-term

I already said what I was going to say.. it was my response, and I believe that I backed it up or explained myself sufficiently.  You do not need to agree (and of course, it appears that you do not).


Not necessarily.  The future is based on a series of probabilities, and also individuals have cashflow concerns as well.  Sure some people might be able to lump sum invest, but others are better able to manage their investments by figuring out their individual circumstances and then dollar cost averaging and attempting to reach their investment target with the passage of time - and hopefully as their wealth (or net worth) increases.



Maybe, maybe not.  People have all kinds of ways of communicating their own strategies and their beliefs.


Your further explanation sounds more crazy than your earlier post.  i was all with you on the overall theory until you got into specifics.  Perhaps I find that you are trying to lump too many people into some kind of similar category.


There is some truth in what you are saying, but still seems like you are trying to take one angle too far when price is affected by a multitude of factors, including some of the ones that you are pointing out.  I don't feel that I need to say anything more than what I have already said on this particular topic...  at least not at this point.

I don't know that I'm "beating up on them" unless identifying their motivation to believe what they believe is beating up on them.  If you disagree, say why.  I note that you only seemed to disagree but didn't say what in my assessment made it wrong in your opinion.  I'll hear it out.  I'm just trying to square what the maximalists say vs. what their actions would show if they were true believers.  Because if you were convinced that bitcoin was going to make you rich, like guaranteed rich, and it was only a matter of time, you would want to be buying as much as you can at as low of a price as you can.  That would require NOT spreading the gospel to keep the price as low as possible for as long as possible.  But that's not what they're doing, so then I try to figure out why they're evangelizing if it's against their own economic interests if they're such true believers, and the conclusion I've reached is the one I already stated.  It's not about being right, it's about convincing others they're right because that's the only thing that sustains or increases the price.  I see the same behavior and motivations with short sellers.  Being "right" about their bet isn't the point, what causes price movements is other people agreeing they're right.  That does not mean to say that I think bitcoin holders are in a desperate situation, as you characterized my point, so let me dispel that notion.  I'm only making a comment on motivation and likening it what I see in other (non-bitcoin) markets, because no matter the medium (bitcoin, stocks, etc.), economic motivation dictates actions.

I think some are using their services because they don't know how to deal with crypto and they feel secure that someone is holding their assets. But for most crypto users here, of course, we want to hold our own bitcoins. We feel safe if it is in our wallets. Those companies are banking from their investors' insufficient knowledge in handling crypto portfolio. Or we can think also that some are lazy looking into crypto, and they just want an established company to do their business.

The company is entirely controlled by Saylor.  Board can't even check him, he can appoint anyone to the board on account of his control of voting shares, so he's naturally only appointed yes-men.  If you're buying in, you're buying into Saylor's leadership specifically.

Investing in MicroStrategy in order to invest in Bitcoin seems dumb.  If you want to invest in bitcoin, just invest in bitcoin.  The more middlemen you put between you and bitcoin the more things can go wrong.

Seems to me that we don't really disagree in any kind of meaningful sense even if we might have differing ways of characterizing Saylor's actions or the potential repercussions of such actions on the company or the bitcoin market more broadly. 

So seems no need to take my characterizations personally... for example, if I assert that you are emphasizing negativisms too much.. that's my opinion.. and of course, you likely believe that you are attempting to be realistic (or more realistic) in the way you post or what you emphasize about the situation that you see. 

Does not seem to be a BIG deal to me that members are going to post from differing perspectives and emphasize differing angles in regards to even seeing similar facts but speculating differently about the ramifications of such facts.


Hahahahaha

I agree with a lot of what you were saying jaysabi, and I was about to send you a merit for outlining the situation like that, until you started beating up upon so called "bitcoin maximalists."

In other words, the punchline of your post seems to attempt to describe a situation as if bitcoin maximalists (to the extent that there is such a thing) are in a kind of desperate position, currently,... which seems to be far from the actual current bitcoin price dynamics posture or the underlying forces that seem to be ongoingly contributing to UPpity pressures upon corns.

In other words, Bitcoin is in a great position, currently, even if it were to drop to retest $12k (40% correction from the most recent top of $19,918) or some other kind of extreme level of "unexpected bearishness" and likely the actual position of bitcoin currently is better than expected from the perspective of many so called "bitcoin maximalists."  Sure, in any camp there are going to be pie in the sky people who are shocked by any kind of BTC correction or they largely expect the BTC price to ONLY go up.. blah blah blah.. but the reality of the matter is that 30%, 40% or even 50% corrections can happen in bitcoin even during a bullrun.. but still does not mean that they are going to happen just because they can.

So yeah market/price direction of bitcoin or any other asset can be pushed in part by propaganda, but there are quite a few other factors at play too that propaganda might not be able to overcome, and we have seen it many times in bitcoin's history in which it seemed that the doomers and gloomers were out there outlining the so many reasons that bitcoin was going to move down before up or even move down without coming up or some other variations of the theory, and those folks ended up chasing after the train and bitcoin prices did not end up going down as they had propagated.. and those supposed lower prices that were inevitable (or highly likely) were never seen again in bitcoin.

You see the same type of actions and motivations with short sellers who take massive short positions against a stock and then very publicly list all the things wrong with the company.  The reason they do this is not because they themselves believe it's true (though I'm sure that is the case), but more importantly they need everyone else to agree with them in order to profit.  It's not enough to be right, you need other people to agree you're right.  Same with MicroStrategy and everyone else taking positions in Bitcoin.  Because there is no intrinsic value, they only profit if everyone agrees with them and pushes the price up.  That's why the bitcoin maximalists are so loud.  It's not about being right, it's about you believing they're right, and those two things aren't the same.

JayJuanGee, here we go again. I am not spreading neither doom nor gloom: I have shared what I felt it was in line with my thinking. The market is always right, any market. Anyway you are right on one thing, because I believe MS is betting other people's money.

You are projecting doom and gloom, acquafredda.. and sure, likely many traditional financial folks are considering his various moves to be employing too much gambling and too much doubling down, almost like the Martingale method which has odds that are against it.

So sure it will be interesting to see how these strategies might play out over the coming one to two years.  He is not making short term plays in regards to what the market might think in the short term, so I doubt that your emphasis on short term perception is likely how Saylor (and perhaps his team) is thinking about these matters - and hopefully his legal counsel is solid enough to ensure that he does not experience too many costs in that direction.. Of course, there are always going to be some legal costs when dealing with decently large public companies, and even interesting kinds of costs with such bold (and seemingly exploratory) moves such as the ones that Saylor is trying out.   He is surely getting a lot of attention with these moves, and I doubt that attention whore explains what he is seeking, either (at least not completely).   

Michael Saylor is getting crazy, I guess. Wild move.
Investors clearly were not enthusiastic about the announcement. Nor was Citi analyst Tyler Radke, who downgraded the company's stock from neutral to sell. Radke believes MicroStrategy's share price gains have become "overextended," and that this new debt offering and bitcoin-buying strategy make the company an incrementally riskier investment.
Why MicroStrategy Stock Is Tumbling Today

In the end this is not Michael Saylor's money, but someone else's.

Microstrategy is going to officially turn into a Bitcoin Hedge Fund in disguise:

MicroStrategy Announces Pricing of Offering of Convertible Senior Notes



If they use this sales proceeds to buy Bitcoin, they are going to add roughly 30,000 BTC to their assets. This will take them to a total of 70,000 BTC, or 0.39% of total Bitcoin supply.

They really seem to go all-in to Bitcoin, but even they as a company are limited in the amount of money they own, and with which they can buy Bitcoin or is there some catch (lending or borrowing money) with which they would still continue to buy even more BTC? Michael Saylor has obviously gone crazy for BTC, and from several videos I’ve watched it is evident that the man is fascinated with the same to the point that he intends to put all the eggs in the same basket.

---

Saylor is the majority shareholder and can actually make any decision on his own - others are just politely informed, but they can’t stop decisions like this. If memory serves me well, I think I have read that shareholders agreed with the decision in the original investment decision, so I believe that is the case now as well.

They are leaning more towards the later at this point.
I was actually very speculative about their intentions from the beginning; it would have been difficult to hold bitcoins for at least hundred years and remain only a holder even though they already had a good investor base. Also Saylor has dedicated his social handles to discuss Bitcoin and its fundamentals, very little else is talked about in relation to MSTR, so it makes sense to switch into hedge fund or add it as a branch of the company, while creating competition for Grayscale.
It's however still pretty early to judge with certainty the direction the company is going, looking in from outside.

I would assume stakeholders and board members have a say in some of these decisions and would probably be aware of the long term plans of the company.