Author: Deep Tide TechFlow
In Wall Street's history, there has never been a shortage of legendary stories, but MicroStrategy's transformation journey is destined to become a unique new legend.
An unremarkable enterprise software company made a stunning decision in August 2020 to invest all of its 250 million dollars in idle cash into Bitcoin. This decision not only changed the fate of the company but also created an unprecedented business model.
In just four years, MicroStrategy has transformed from a software company with annual revenues of only 500 million dollars into the world's largest publicly traded Bitcoin holder, owning nearly 390,000 Bitcoins, accounting for 1.8% of the global supply. Even more astonishing is that its stock price soared from 12 dollars to a peak of 500 dollars, with a market capitalization exceeding 100 billion dollars, and the daily trading volume once surpassed Nvidia.
This is not just a simple investment story, but a meticulously designed art of capital operations. Through low-interest borrowing and stock issuance, MicroStrategy has woven a breathtaking 'spiral pull-up' net.
How did it achieve this, is it commercial innovation or a hidden crisis?
Guest: Todd (@0x_Todd), partner at Nothing Research, co-founder of Ebunker
The following content is a text整理稿 following our conversation, and the podcast audio version is also launched simultaneously; welcome to subscribe to 'Let's Flow' on Xiaoyuzhou.
Deep Universe Link or scan the QR code in the image below to listen.
Background Introduction
MicroStrategy was founded in 1989 and went public on NASDAQ in 1998, originally focusing on enterprise analytics software.
In August 2020, under the leadership of Chairman Michael Saylor, MSTR announced a purchase of approximately 21,400 BTC for 250 million dollars, becoming the first publicly traded company to implement a Bitcoin funding strategy.
What sets MicroStrategy apart is not just that it was the first to take the plunge by incorporating Bitcoin into its balance sheet, but also that it continuously buys and dares to borrow money for purchases. MicroStrategy borrows money at around 1% interest by issuing stocks and bonds to purchase Bitcoin.
In the past four years, MicroStrategy has issued approximately 41 Bitcoin purchase announcements.
As of now, that is, November 26, MSTR holds over 386,700 Bitcoins, accounting for about 1.8% of the global total supply of Bitcoin, becoming the largest publicly traded Bitcoin holder in the world.
MSTR has spent a total of 21.983 billion dollars purchasing Bitcoin, with an average cost of about 56,849 dollars, and as of now, the book profit exceeds 14 billion dollars.
On November 21, MSTR's stock price once broke through 500 dollars, and its market capitalization exceeded 100 billion dollars. That day's trading volume even surpassed that of the leading U.S. stock Nvidia. Compared to the stock price of about 12 dollars when it started hoarding Bitcoin in August 2020, it has increased more than 40 times, rising five times since the beginning of the year, outpacing Bitcoin's four-fold increase.
Currently, MicroStrategy still maintains its main business, but the financial report has shown losses for three consecutive quarters, performing poorly. However, this has not prevented it from becoming this year's super bull stock in the U.S. stock market, successfully transforming into a shadow stock of Bitcoin or a leverage Bitcoin in the U.S. stock market.
MicroStrategy has driven Bitcoin's price up by financing Bitcoin purchases through stock and bond issuance, and the rise in Bitcoin price further boosts MSTR's stock price.
MicroStrategy's pump magic
Deep Tide TechFlow: Why has an otherwise unremarkable company been able to continuously attract so much capital in the market? What is its spiral pull-up technique?
Todd:
I want to start from the beginning to explain to everyone how MicroStrategy has reached today's level step by step.
In many people's impressions, MicroStrategy does not seem to be a very impressive company. In 2020, MicroStrategy itself was a software development company, helping other companies develop software, one well-known example being software development for McDonald's. By 2020, it had about 250 million dollars left on its books.
From a more mundane perspective, a company that has been in operation for so many years, with a paper profit of 250 million dollars, is quite impressive. However, at that time, this capital was sitting idle on the books without being utilized.
Today's protagonist, Michael Saylor, felt it was time to make a bold decision. He is the chairman of the board and personally pushed MicroStrategy to invest almost all of its 250 million dollars in cash reserves into Bitcoin. This is actually a very bold move, and it is difficult for an average person to make such a decision.
After investing this money, he felt that this exposure was not large enough, so he began to consider leveraging, which is also the beginning of the entire MicroStrategy magic.
He thought about going off-market to borrow some money to continue increasing Bitcoin holdings, so he adopted a very mature method in the capital market called convertible preferred bonds.
He promised the creditors: if you lend me money now, at maturity, the creditor has two choices: either take back the principal with interest at a certain time, or choose to take equity.
He has set a conversion ratio that allows the borrowed funds to be converted into equity, which reassures the creditors significantly. If they have money on the books, they will repay the principal and interest; if they don’t, creditors can still take the stock to the secondary market to sell, which provides some return, making it a good guarantee for creditors.
This is the play of convertible preferred bonds; as a creditor, you can choose to take back the principal at maturity or convert the debt into stock, or choose partial conversion. You should know that the bonds issued by MicroStrategy at first were all at 0% interest; investors were focused on another opportunity.
Because everyone knows Saylor is betting all his funds on Bitcoin. If Bitcoin goes up, the company's stock price will naturally rise. Creditors are interested in the fixed stock conversion ratio; if Bitcoin rises in the future, MicroStrategy's stock will also rise, and they can choose to convert everything into stock, completing an arbitrage. Even if the stock price soars, they can still convert at a very low price.
This creates a very attractive investment logic: at worst, they can get back the principal or suffer a small loss, but if MicroStrategy skyrockets, they might invest 1 million and end up with 1.5 million or even 2 million in stocks.
For this reason, MicroStrategy easily raised its first round of funding and subsequently issued multiple rounds of ultra-low-interest loans, with interest rates between 0%-0.8%. Even during the Federal Reserve's interest rate hike cycle, when treasury yields reached 3.4%-5%, investors were still willing to lend them money at super low interest rates.
Later, as Bitcoin and the company's stock price continued to rise, even though MicroStrategy can easily borrow money now, to be honest, borrowing always carries risks, after all, debts need to be repaid. So now MicroStrategy has started to adopt a second approach, directly issuing stocks for financing.
As a publicly listed company, Saylor utilized his position as chairman to choose to issue additional shares and sell them on the market in compliance. In recent days, MicroStrategy's trading volume even surpassed that of the bull market star stock Nvidia, raising nearly 4.6 billion dollars through this method, and then continued to increase its Bitcoin holdings. This is also one of the important reasons for Bitcoin breaking through 95,000 dollars.
This is MicroStrategy's second strategy: once the company's stock price rises, it will raise funds through issuing additional shares. The funds obtained through this method are not debt, so there is no repayment pressure.
MicroStrategy is not the next LUNA
Todd:
Many people will ask a question: with MicroStrategy borrowing so much money, will there be repayment pressure in the future?
Regarding MicroStrategy's debt issues, they are actually doing quite well. For instance, their earliest 0% interest debt is due only in 2027; currently, it is 2024, giving them ample time to operate, and their current book yield is close to 50%, with no immediate repayment pressure.
Even if they have to repay in the future, they have multiple options: they can sell part of their Bitcoin, or issue new debt because many people are willing to lend them money now. According to current trends, their repayment pressure is not significant.
Some compare MicroStrategy to Luna, but I think this analogy is not appropriate. Upon careful consideration, MicroStrategy is merely leveraging at the right moment to go long, and making money from going long is a normal market behavior, not a Ponzi scheme.
They just seized the opportunity, used good leverage, and achieved great returns.
MicroStrategy previously proposed a concept that I very much agree with; they understand this as 'sharing volatility'. What is sharing volatility? Those bond investors are usually more conservative; they only like low-volatility investments. Well, let’s give them the low-volatility part while MicroStrategy guarantees the rest. MicroStrategy pays the cost of providing investors with a low-volatility return while reaping high-volatility returns from Bitcoin.
This is why Saylor likens MicroStrategy to a 'transformer': just like in an electrical system, the same energy can be converted into low pressure and high pressure. Low pressure is given to conservative investors, while high pressure is enjoyed by themselves.
This is actually a common practice in financial markets, which is to tier assets: selling the low-risk part to others while enjoying the high-risk, high-return part. This model can often be seen in past fund and securities markets.
So overall, MicroStrategy is definitely not a Ponzi scheme like Luna; they are more leveraging their courage to choose to go long at the right position and have bet correctly on the direction. Of course, they have indeed become part of the market, but they are not the decisive force of the market. This is an interesting case where MicroStrategy, Bitcoin, and creditors can all benefit.
Deep Tide TechFlow: MicroStrategy's approach reminds me of domestic real estate companies from the past, where those real estate developers also issued low-interest convertible bonds to hoard land, achieving land reserve expansion, and then during the real estate upcycle, rising land prices drove stock prices up. They would then issue bonds or stocks to obtain cash flow and continue hoarding land, thus cycling through.
These two are indeed quite similar, but the difference lies in the fact that Bitcoin is an asset with global consensus and has better cross-cycle liquidity. I want to ask whether MicroStrategy's approach of leveraging off-market financing, buying Bitcoin, and pushing up stock prices can continue indefinitely.
Todd:
That's a good question. Indeed, many real estate developers, including Evergrande, have similar operations. But I want to point out the essential difference between real estate and Bitcoin: Bitcoin has excellent liquidity, while real estate is constrained by many factors. Building houses requires complex capital chain management, while Bitcoin transactions are much simpler, just borrowing money to buy coins.
An asset with global liquidity, available for trading in various currencies, is on a completely different level of liquidity compared to real estate in a city.
When it comes to whether this strategy of MicroStrategy can continue indefinitely, there is no perpetual magic in this world. However, many investors do not care about the situation in 5 or 10 years; they are more concerned about the present. From a practical standpoint, at least before MicroStrategy needs to repay its first debt, we do not see them selling Bitcoin.
Here, I want to share an important concept of MicroStrategy. Look at the history of America's development: starting from the initial 13 states, expanding through wars and land purchases, buying land from France, Mexico, and Russia, laying the foundation of the nation through acquiring land space. MicroStrategy believes that the era of land space has ended; we have entered the era of cyberspace. In this internet currency-dominated cyberspace, controlling cyberspace equates to controlling the new world, and Bitcoin is the most important currency in this space.
They predicted early on that countries would establish Bitcoin strategic reserves in the future because it represents control over cyberspace, just as land represented control over physical space in the past. Now, particularly in light of the support of Trump and his team for Bitcoin, this prediction is becoming increasingly clear. In the past, countries needed to hoard land to rise; now, to rise in cyberspace, they need to hoard Bitcoin.
From this perspective, although Bitcoin's price is significantly higher than it was a few years ago, if the future truly unfolds as the U.S. Bitcoin Reserve Act suggests, with the U.S. holding 1 million coins, accounting for 5% as a strategic reserve in cyberspace, then the current price may still be considered relatively low.
Of course, this is not investment advice. However, if one believes Bitcoin is currently at a low position, MicroStrategy's strategy is essentially a long strategy, and the key lies in the entry position. If one predicts that Bitcoin is still in a relatively low position, then continuing to go long and leverage is not unreasonable. Of course, this is predicated on certain conditions, such as Trump successfully taking office and his Bitcoin-supporting team being able to successfully assume important positions and promote previous commitments, etc.
So overall, MicroStrategy's current strategy, although bold, is not entirely absurd or crazy, this is my view.
The metaphysics of Citron Capital's defeat
Deep Tide TechFlow: I see that some institutions, including Citron Capital, have begun to short MicroStrategy, leading to a decline in its stock price. However, I looked at their statements, and this should not be a simple shorting strategy, but rather a hedging strategy.
They believe that MicroStrategy's stock value has diverged from Bitcoin's fundamentals, with about three times the premium compared to its held Bitcoin. Although Citron remains optimistic about Bitcoin, they think this premium is too outrageous, so they are betting that this premium will return. Do you think Citron will get it right this time? Or do you think the current premium of MicroStrategy is reasonable?
Todd:
Regarding Citron, I want to discuss this from a relatively interesting perspective.
From a somewhat metaphysical perspective, Citron, a long-established company, has indeed had many spectacular shorting events, but they have also had several significant failures, and these failures seem to be particularly incompatible with certain specific fields.
Let me give you a few examples. The one that might leave the deepest impression is Citron shorting GameStop (GME), which resulted in a significant loss. An earlier example was in 2018 when Citron continuously shorted Tesla, believing that Tesla's production capacity was inadequate and overvalued. But we have all seen how Tesla performed later, forcing Citron to admit defeat and exit.
Interestingly, Tesla has a high correlation with Bitcoin; everyone's aware of Musk's attitude towards cryptocurrencies. GME also has various connections with cryptocurrencies; the spirit of the GME community is somewhat similar to that of cryptocurrencies, especially Meme coins. So Citron's two major failures are somewhat related to Bitcoin.
From a metaphysical perspective, Citron seems to always misjudge these types of assets; several major failures have occurred around these related themes. This time it is MicroStrategy's turn, which is also a tightly bound target with Bitcoin, from this perspective; they may not have a smooth road this time. If a situation similar to GME replays, MicroStrategy could experience unpredictable surges. Of course, this is just an interpretation from an entertainment perspective and does not constitute investment advice.
From a fundamental perspective, Citron's statement indeed has merit. The market is currently very FOMO; the greed index was at 94-95 just a few days ago. Therefore, MicroStrategy may indeed be overheated in the short term; their shorting of this premium may also hold a long Bitcoin position to hedge, which is also a reasonable operation. However, as mentioned earlier, based on historical experience, Citron has often not been successful with Bitcoin-related themes; this is just an interesting observation.
Potential flaws in MicroStrategy
Deep Tide TechFlow: As it stands, MicroStrategy's strategy is indeed hard to find flaws in, but if one had to find the biggest flaw, what would you think it is?
Todd:
This question is very sharp; I believe the biggest flaw is that if MicroStrategy continues to implement such a strategy, the most concerning thing is that it may not keep pace with Bitcoin's rhythm.
Let me give you an example to illustrate this issue.
Let me explain with a concrete example:
There are many 'ancient whales' in the Bitcoin market; the movements of these early holders can have a huge impact on the market. For example, an early investor in Ethereum from the ICO period (when ETH was only 6 dollars) has been continuously selling about 100,000 ETH since November 7. It’s important to note that the total buying pressure brought by the approval of the Ethereum ETF is only in the millions (considering Grayscale's existing holdings). The sale by this one whale has offset a significant portion of the growth momentum brought by the ETF.
For MicroStrategy, these ancient Bitcoin whales are the biggest potential opponents.
Assuming these whales believe 100,000 dollars is the top, tightly placing orders in the 95,000 to 98,000 dollar range, it would be difficult for MicroStrategy alone to break through this price point. Because MicroStrategy does not have absolute control like the Luna Foundation over Luna, it is just one of many market participants. While borrowing billions to buy coins can indeed push up Bitcoin's price, the situation would be very different if the ancient whales do not agree with this strategy and choose to sell continuously.
This could break MicroStrategy's 'spiral rise' model: borrowing money to buy coins → driving up stock prices → borrowing more money to buy more coins → stock prices continue to rise. Once this cycle is broken, MicroStrategy will face pressure. Although currently, due to costs being over 50,000 dollars, the pressure is still manageable, if they continue to operate this way, the pressure will gradually increase.
However, now we have many monitoring tools to track the movements of these ancient whales' addresses to observe whether there is a sudden influx of early Bitcoins into exchanges. This information can help predict future trends. If these ancient whales cooperate, MicroStrategy's strategy should still be sustainable.
Deep Tide TechFlow: MicroStrategy in this cycle seems to have copied Grayscale's script from the previous cycle. When the market was bad, everyone was looking forward to Grayscale as a savior to buy coins. Now, similarly, when the market is down, everyone is waiting for MicroStrategy's announcement, hoping it will purchase Bitcoin to lift prices.
However, there is a clear distinction between MicroStrategy and Grayscale; Grayscale's clients want to cash out and have to sell coins, while MicroStrategy seems to be able to make money without selling Bitcoin, directly monetizing through stock issuance.
But will there be a point in time when MicroStrategy will sell its held Bitcoin? If this truly occurs, it would be a significant blow to market confidence. Do you think MicroStrategy will sell coins? Under what circumstances would they sell coins?
When will MicroStrategy sell its coins?
Todd:
That's right; if MicroStrategy starts selling coins, it would be a huge blow to market confidence.
Just now I happened to mention Grayscale; I want to talk about the three major contributors to this round of Bitcoin bull market.
Previously, when Bitcoin dropped to 16,000 dollars, everyone knew the reason: on one hand, FTX collapsed, 3AC declared bankruptcy, and then the continuous interest rate hikes in the U.S. pushed Bitcoin down to the 16,000 dollar mark.
From 16,000 to over 30,000 dollars, the biggest contributor at this time is actually Grayscale, because on one hand, the SEC doesn't allow him to redeem, and many people couldn't hold on and sold at a discount. On the other hand, he kept suing the SEC, and in the end, the not-so-liked Gensler (the SEC Chairman) reluctantly agreed to allow the ETF to be issued because they lost the lawsuit.
From over 30,000 to over 60,000 dollars, this segment owes special thanks to ETFs, as companies like BlackRock and Fidelity have extensive sales networks spread across every corner of the globe. With their push, many people began to buy Bitcoin through ETFs, bringing institutional market funds in.
From over 60,000 to over 90,000 dollars, the most important contributor is actually MicroStrategy. When Bitcoin reached over 60,000 dollars, it required a driving force, and that driving force was MicroStrategy.
I call this the four-level rocket theory; just like a rocket, the first stage drops off, and then the second stage continues the relay, which is how Bitcoin rose from 16,000 to 96,000, thanks to three major contributors: Grayscale, ETFs, and MicroStrategy.
The first three levels have been completed, and there is still the fourth level, which we expect to be pushed forward when Trump comes back, for example, the FIT21 plan, to truly implement Bitcoin as a strategic reserve for the United States. Not only the U.S., but we can see countries like Poland, Suriname, and in the Middle East, all these countries are formulating their own Bitcoin strategic reserve laws, which will be the fourth-level rocket.
From this perspective, MicroStrategy is currently in the middle position of the four-level rocket, and relatively speaking, its risk is still manageable.
Deep Tide TechFlow: So, in your view, there is still a long way to go until he sells his coins.
Todd:
By continuously following Michael Saylor's interviews, I believe his faith in Bitcoin is around 90%. He has a mature theoretical system; since 2021, many of his predictions have gradually come true, including national strategic reserves and the adoption by publicly traded companies. In the future, we may even see tech giants like Microsoft establishing Bitcoin reserves.
In the short term, MicroStrategy has no motivation to sell coins. At least until 2027, they can handle their debts through issuing stock or borrowing. More likely, since the initial stock subscription price was low, creditors may prefer to hold the stock rather than demand repayment.
Why say Saylor is 90% rather than 100% loyal? The key lies in a detail: when Bitcoin was around 16,000 dollars, MicroStrategy sold 700-800 Bitcoins for tax planning reasons. Although they bought them back shortly after, this behavior of conducting swing trading to avoid taxes exposed that he still has 10% of speculative psychology.
As a true HODLER, one shouldn't do any swing trading. Once someone has experience with swing trading, it indicates that there is still a speculative nature within them. Therefore, don't expect MicroStrategy to hold Bitcoin for 25 or 50 years; as long as they have ever done swing trading, they will certainly try it again in the future, as this is human nature. So Saylor is 90% faith and 10% speculation; thus, someday in the future, he will sell Bitcoin, but we probably won't see that in the next few years.
Deep Tide TechFlow: Now more and more listed companies are thinking of replicating MicroStrategy's strategy. For example, the Japanese listed real estate company Metaplant, and Hong Kong-listed company Boyaa Interactive, are all incorporating Bitcoin into their balance sheets. Do you think MicroStrategy's approach will be replicated by more and more listed companies in the future? And do these companies that replicate it still have investment value?
Todd:
First, let me clarify that this is not financial advice. I have also made some calculations regarding this matter. Since MicroStrategy's gamble has been hugely successful this time, many companies, including Marathon, want to emulate MicroStrategy's strategy, and I think that is acceptable.
Why? Because according to the four-level rocket theory, the first three levels have already been completed. Although MicroStrategy has been accumulating since the first-level rocket and has achieved maximum gains, if later people truly foresee that countries will start to compete for control over cyberspace, or further, when AI rules the world, AI may prefer cryptocurrencies controlled by computing power instead of fiat currencies.
No matter which distant legend eventually comes true, those who entered as the third-level rocket can still expect reasonable returns.
Although it is difficult for other companies to reach this scale, I think this strategy is not fundamentally problematic; it is essentially a strategy of buying Bitcoin long through off-market leverage. As long as off-market creditors are willing to lend money, because they receive low-volatility returns, while these companies bear high volatility, this model is currently viable.
However, now these companies entering the imitation process have done so at varying times, and if they enter later, timing becomes even more critical as it directly determines the strategy's return level. It is recommended that these listed companies carefully consider and position themselves appropriately for Bitcoin reserves.
Deep Tide TechFlow: Finally, let's talk about Michael Saylor; I recently watched some podcasts interviewing him. He mentioned that he spent 1,000 hours learning the theoretical knowledge related to Bitcoin and successfully brainwashed himself into becoming a Bitcoin maximalist, or a fervent religious believer. How do you evaluate this person?
Todd:
Michael Saylor is a top graduate from MIT and was successful at a young age, previously selling several startups successfully, and ultimately achieving a paper profit of 250 million dollars for MicroStrategy is quite remarkable.
An interesting point about studying his life is that he wrote a book about the wave of mobile internet in 2012, when smartphones were just starting to become popular in 2012-2013. His ability to predict the rise of mobile internet back in 2012 shows that his judgment is very accurate.
He studied two degrees at MIT: Aerospace Engineering and the History of Science. This combination of majors is quite special, almost tailor-made for him. The History of Science merges the arts and sciences to study how science makes breakthrough developments, which helps him in judging future technological trends.
He often cites the views of scientists like Newton and Einstein in interviews. Both from his professional background and from his later book 'The Wave of Mobile Internet', it proves that he has a clear personal judgment on future technological trends, and these judgments have been validated. His speeches are logically clear, and his viewpoints are clearly articulated. As an important figure in the Bitcoin community, such a person is very helpful for the spread of Bitcoin.
His most famous video has 10 million views on YouTube, where he explains for three or four hours why he chose Bitcoin. His core argument is that the current economic system is continuously printing money; while inflation appears to be 2%, it is actually at least over 7%, as economists have been adjusting the composition of the inflation basket. This is his fundamental belief in investing in Bitcoin.
This theory is hard to overturn because, no matter where in the world, governments and central banks are indeed continuously printing money; this anxiety is universally present. In countries like Argentina, currency devaluation can reach dozens of times. Bitcoin has a clear limit of 21 million, which will never change.
Two unchanging facts: governments will continue to print money, and Bitcoin's total supply is fixed. This makes Bitcoin a very robust asset against inflation. Michael Saylor holding such beliefs will help him go further on the road of Bitcoin investment.
There will not be an Ethereum version of MicroStrategy
Deep Tide TechFlow: This year, Ethereum has shown some weakness, and people often use Bitcoin and Solana's strength to mock Ethereum. Do you think there will be an Ethereum version of Michael Saylor or MicroStrategy in the future?
Todd:
This is purely a prediction; I think it is quite difficult. The reason is that the emergence of MicroStrategy and Saylor has its specific background, which Ethereum does not possess.
The narrative of Bitcoin has been eternal since its inception, established at the moment Satoshi Nakamoto wrote the news of the Treasury Secretary preparing to rescue banks into the genesis block, positioning itself against fiat inflation and becoming a true store of value.
In Saylor’s words, fiat currency is merely money, while Bitcoin is capital; these are entirely different concepts.
In contrast, Ethereum's positioning is to continuously leverage the latest technology to provide blockchain services. From our experience operating an Ethereum mining pool, Ethereum is constantly evolving: from PoW to PoS to solve energy issues, to the recent Beacon Chain strategy proposed at Devcon in Bangkok, aiming to ZK-ify the entire chain. This demonstrates that Ethereum is on a completely different development path than Bitcoin.
For large funds, they prefer predictable, stable investment targets rather than constantly changing projects.
Saylor has mentioned that Satoshi Nakamoto's anonymity is very attractive; this aligns with the typical N personality traits in MBTI. Vitalik's continuous activity in Ethereum, while proposing many good points, may cause some investors to hesitate. As stated in 'Let the Bullets Fly': 'You are not that important to me', large fund investments require certainty, and they do not want a project to suddenly change direction.
Therefore, an Ethereum version of MicroStrategy may be hard to come by, but the possibility of a smaller version cannot be ruled out. Especially considering Ethereum's current low market value, it does not require the massive capital investment that Bitcoin does. The market has always had the investment logic of 'Bitcoin is too expensive, looking for cheaper targets', and Ethereum may become the first choice for these investors.
Deep Tide TechFlow: I completely agree with the discourse on Bitcoin narratives. The charm of Bitcoin lies in its simplicity; it requires no technical delivery and cannot be falsified. It is like a perfect closed loop, with every crisis reinforcing rather than weakening its value proposition. In the crypto world, we see too many grand visions and complex technical solutions, but what ultimately withstands the test of time is the simplest Bitcoin; it does not need marketing, roadmaps, or technical commitments. In an uncertain world, the most precious thing is certainty, which is Bitcoin's greatest charm.
Finally, thanks to Todd.
Todd:
Finally, I quote a saying from Saylor: Bitcoin will win, but not everyone will win along with it.
