Bitcoin will prevail, but not everyone will win along with it.
Author: Deep Tide TechFlow
In the history of Wall Street, there has never been a shortage of legendary stories, but the transformation path of MicroStrategy is destined to become a unique new legend.
An unremarkable enterprise software company made a stunning decision in August 2020, investing all of its $250 million in idle cash into Bitcoin. This decision not only changed the fate of the company but also pioneered an unprecedented business model.
In just four years, MicroStrategy transformed from a software company with annual revenues of only $500 million into the largest publicly traded holder of Bitcoin in the world, holding nearly 390,000 Bitcoins, accounting for 1.8% of the global supply. Even more astonishing is that its stock price soared from $12 to a maximum of $500, with a market capitalization exceeding $100 billion, and its daily trading volume at one point surpassed Nvidia.
This is not just a simple investment story but an art of carefully designed capital operations. Through low-interest borrowing and stock issuance, MicroStrategy weaves an astonishing web of 'spiral stock manipulation.'
How did it achieve this? Is it commercial innovation or hidden crises?
Guest: Todd (@0x_Todd), partner at Nothing Research and co-founder of Ebunker.
The following content is a整理 of our dialogue, and the audio version of the podcast is also launched simultaneously. Please subscribe to 'Let's Flow' on 小宇宙.
Scan the QR code in the image below to listen.
Background information
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 an investment of $250 million to purchase approximately 21,400 BTC, becoming the first publicly traded company to implement a Bitcoin funding strategy.
What sets MicroStrategy apart is not only that it was the first to take the plunge by incorporating Bitcoin into its balance sheet but also that it continues to buy and dares to borrow to purchase. MicroStrategy borrows money at about 1% interest through issuing stocks and bonds to buy Bitcoin.
In the past four years, MicroStrategy has announced about 41 Bitcoin purchases.
As of now, on November 26, MSTR has held over 386,700 Bitcoins, accounting for about 1.8% of Bitcoin's total global supply, making it the largest publicly traded Bitcoin holder in the world.
MSTR has spent a total of $21.983 billion purchasing Bitcoin, with an average cost of about $56,849, and as of now, they have a paper profit of over $14 billion.
On November 21, MSTR's stock price briefly surpassed $500, with a market capitalization exceeding $100 billion. On that day, trading volume even surpassed that of the American stock market leader Nvidia. The stock price has increased more than 40 times since the approximately $12 price in August 2020, when it began accumulating Bitcoin, and has risen five times since the beginning of the year, outpacing Bitcoin's fourfold increase.
Currently, MicroStrategy still maintains its main business, but it has reported losses for the third consecutive quarter, performing poorly. However, this has not prevented it from becoming a super bull stock in U.S. stocks this year, successfully transforming into a shadow stock of Bitcoin or a leveraged Bitcoin in U.S. stocks.
MicroStrategy has pushed up Bitcoin prices by issuing stocks and bonds to purchase Bitcoin, and the rising Bitcoin prices in turn further boost MSTR's stock price.
MicroStrategy's stock price manipulation magic.
Deep Tide TechFlow: How can a previously unremarkable company continue to attract such substantial funds in the capital markets? What is its spiral stock manipulation technique?
Todd:
I want to start from the beginning to introduce why MicroStrategy has been able to reach this level today.
In many people's impressions, MicroStrategy doesn't seem like a very strong company. In 2020, MicroStrategy itself was a software development company, helping other companies develop software, such as the well-known software it developed for McDonald's. By 2020, it had nearly $250 million left on its books.
From a relatively secular perspective, a company that has been operating for many years with a paper profit of $250 million is quite impressive. However, at that time, these funds were just sitting idle on the books.
Our protagonist today, Michael Saylor, feels it is time to make a bold decision. He is the chairman of the board and personally pushed MicroStrategy to invest almost all of its cash profit of $250 million into Bitcoin. This is actually a very bold move, and it is difficult for an ordinary person to make such a decision.
After investing this money, he felt that the exposure was still not large enough, so he began to consider leveraging, which is also the beginning of the entire MicroStrategy magic.
He thought about borrowing some money off the market to continue increasing his Bitcoin positions, so he adopted a very mature method in capital markets, called convertible preferred bonds.
What he promised the creditors was: you lend me money now, and at maturity, creditors have two options: either withdraw the principal with interest at a certain time or choose to take equity.
He established a conversion ratio that allows all borrowed money to be converted into equity, which reassures creditors. If there is money on the books, the principal and interest can be repaid; if there is no money, creditors can take stocks to the secondary market and sell them, allowing them to recoup some funds, which is a good guarantee for creditors.
This is how convertible preferred bonds work. As a creditor, you can choose to take back the principal at maturity or convert the debt into stock, or you can choose partial conversion. You should know that the bonds MicroStrategy initially issued all had 0% interest, and investors valued another opportunity.
Because everyone knows Saylor is betting all his funds on Bitcoin. If Bitcoin rises, the company’s stock price will naturally rise as well. The creditors are interested precisely because the bond-to-stock conversion ratio is fixed; if Bitcoin rises in the future, MicroStrategy's stock will also rise, at which point they can choose to convert everything into stock and complete an arbitrage. Even if the stock price soars, they can still complete the conversion at a very low price.
This creates a very appealing investment logic: at worst, get the principal back or lose a little, but if MicroStrategy skyrockets, investing $1 million could yield $1.5 million or even $2 million in stocks.
This is precisely why MicroStrategy easily raised its first round of funding, and then issued multiple rounds of ultra-low interest loans, with interest rates ranging from 0% to 0.8%. Even during the Federal Reserve's interest rate hike cycle, when treasury yields reached 3.4%-5%, investors are still willing to lend them money at ultra-low rates.
Later, as Bitcoin and the company's stock prices continued to rise, in this situation, although MicroStrategy would find it very easy to borrow money now, to be honest, borrowing ultimately carries risks, as debts must be repaid. So now MicroStrategy has begun to adopt a second approach, directly issuing stocks for financing.
As a publicly traded company, Saylor utilizes his position as chairman of the board to choose to issue new shares and sell them in the market in compliance with regulations. In recent days, MicroStrategy's trading volume has even surpassed the bull market star stock Nvidia, raising nearly $4.6 billion through this method, and subsequently continuing to increase its Bitcoin holdings. This is also one of the important reasons driving Bitcoin to break through $95,000.
This is MicroStrategy's second strategy: after the company's stock price rises, they raise funds through issuing new shares. The funds raised in this way are not debt, with no repayment pressure.
MicroStrategy is not the next LUNA.
Todd:
Many people will ask a question: with so much debt, will MicroStrategy face repayment pressure in the future?
Regarding MicroStrategy's debt issues, they have actually managed it very wisely. For example, their earliest zero-interest debt doesn't mature until 2027, which gives them ample time to operate, and currently, the yield on their books is close to 50%, with absolutely no immediate repayment pressure.
Even if they have to repay in the future, they have multiple options: they can sell some Bitcoin or issue new debt, as many people are willing to lend them money now. According to current trends, their repayment pressure is not significant.
Some people compare MicroStrategy to Luna, but I think this analogy is not appropriate. Upon careful consideration, MicroStrategy is simply leveraging at the right position to complete a long position; making money from a long position is a normal market behavior and not a Ponzi scheme.
They just seized the opportunity and used a good leverage to achieve a great return.
MicroStrategy previously proposed a concept that I highly agree with, understanding this matter as 'sharing volatility.' What is volatility sharing? Those bond investors tend to be conservative; they only like low-volatility investments. So, the low-volatility portion is given to them, with MicroStrategy providing the guarantee. The cost for MicroStrategy is to offer investors low-volatility returns while obtaining high-volatility returns from Bitcoin.
This is why Saylor likens MicroStrategy to a 'transformer': just like an electrical system, the same energy can be converted into low pressure and high pressure. Low pressure serves those prudent investors, while high pressure is enjoyed by himself.
This is actually a common practice in financial markets, which is to tier assets: selling the low-risk portion to others while enjoying the high-risk, high-return portion oneself. This model has often been seen in past fund markets and securities markets.
In summary, MicroStrategy is absolutely not like Luna in being a Ponzi scheme. They are more about taking bold positions at the right time and betting in the right direction. Of course, they have indeed become part of the market, but they are not the decisive force in the market. This is an interesting case where MicroStrategy, Bitcoin, and creditors all benefit.
Deep Tide TechFlow: MicroStrategy's approach reminds me of domestic real estate companies in the past, where those real estate developers also used to issue low-interest convertible bonds to hoard land, achieving land reserve expansion. Then, during the real estate upcycle, land prices would rise, driving stock prices up, and they would continue to hoard land by issuing bonds or stocks, thus creating a cycle.
These two are indeed very similar, but the difference is that Bitcoin is a globally recognized asset, and its liquidity is better across cycles. My question is whether MicroStrategy's strategy of leveraging through off-market financing to buy Bitcoin and push 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 talk about the essential differences between real estate and Bitcoin: Bitcoin has very good liquidity, while real estate is constrained by many factors. Building houses requires complex capital chain management, but trading Bitcoin is much simpler; it just involves borrowing money to buy coins.
An asset with global liquidity, tradable in various currencies, is simply not in the same league as real estate in a city.
Speaking of whether MicroStrategy's strategy can last forever, there is no permanent magic in the world. But many investors actually do not care so much about what happens in 5 or 10 years; they care more about the present. From a practical perspective, at least before MicroStrategy has 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, from the original 13 states, constantly expanding through wars and land purchases, buying land from France, Mexico, and Russia, laying the foundation for the nation through acquiring land space. MicroStrategy believes that the era of land space has ended, and we have entered the era of cyberspace. In this internet currency-dominated cyberspace, controlling cyberspace equals 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, as this represents control over cyberspace, just as land represented control over physical space in the past. Now, especially with Trump and his team supporting Bitcoin, this prediction is becoming increasingly clear. In the past, countries needed to stockpile land to rise; now, to rise in cyberspace, they need to stockpile Bitcoin.
From this perspective, although Bitcoin's price is significantly higher than it was a few years ago, if in the future, as mentioned in the U.S. Bitcoin Reserve Act, the U.S. holds 1 million Bitcoins, accounting for 5% as a strategic reserve for cyberspace, the current price may still be at a relatively low level.
Of course, this is not investment advice. But if you believe Bitcoin is currently at a relatively low position, MicroStrategy's strategy is essentially a long strategy, with the key being the entry position. If you predict that Bitcoin is still at a relatively low level, then continuing to go long and leverage is not unreasonable. Of course, this is based on some premises, such as Trump successfully taking office, and his team supporting Bitcoin can successfully take important positions and advance previous commitments.
So overall, while MicroStrategy’s current strategy is bold, it is not entirely absurd or crazy, in my view.
The metaphysics of Citron's defeat.
Deep Tide TechFlow: I see that some institutions, including Citron Capital, have started to short MicroStrategy, leading to a decline in its stock price. But I looked at their statements, and this shouldn't just be a simple shorting; it's a hedging strategy.
They believe that MicroStrategy's stock value has already deviated from the fundamentals of Bitcoin, having about three times the premium compared to its held Bitcoins. Although Citron still holds a positive outlook on Bitcoin, they think this premium is too outrageous, so they are betting that this premium will revert. Do you think Citron will win this bet? Or do you think the current premium of MicroStrategy is reasonable?
Todd:
Regarding the Citron issue, I want to approach it from a somewhat interesting angle.
From a somewhat metaphysical perspective, Citron has a long history and has indeed had many spectacular shorting opportunities, but they have also made several significant missteps, and these missteps seem particularly unfortunate in certain specific fields.
Let me give you a few examples. The one that stands out the most might be Citron shorting GameStop (GME), which suffered significant losses. An earlier example was in 2018, when Citron kept shorting Tesla, believing that Tesla's production capacity was insufficient and its valuation was too high. But we all saw how Tesla performed later, and in the end, Citron had to admit defeat and exit.
Interestingly, Tesla and Bitcoin are highly correlated, and everyone's clear about Musk's attitude towards cryptocurrencies. GME also has some intricate connections with cryptocurrencies, and the spirit of the GME community is somewhat similar to that of cryptocurrencies, especially meme coins. Therefore, Citron's two major failures are somewhat related to Bitcoin.
From this metaphysical perspective, Citron seems to be consistently inaccurate with these types of assets; several major failures have occurred with these related themes. This time, it is MicroStrategy's turn, which is similarly strongly tied to Bitcoin. From this angle, they may not be very successful this time. If a situation like GME were to replay, 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 does indeed make sense. The market is indeed very FOMO right now, with the greed index reaching levels of 94-95 a few days ago. Therefore, MicroStrategy may indeed be overheated in the short term; their shorting of this premium may also be coupled with holding long positions in Bitcoin as a hedge, which is also a very reasonable operation. However, as mentioned earlier, based on historical experience, Citron has not been very successful in Bitcoin-related themes; this is just an interesting observation.
Potential flaws in MicroStrategy.
Deep Tide TechFlow: Currently, MicroStrategy's strategy is indeed hard to find flaws in, but if one had to find the biggest flaw, what do you think it would be?
Todd:
This question is very sharp. I think the biggest flaw is that if MicroStrategy continues to push such a strategy, the biggest concern is that it may not synchronize with the rhythm of Bitcoin.
Let me give you an example to illustrate this issue.
Let me explain with a specific example:
There are many 'ancient whales' in the Bitcoin market, and the movements of these early holders can have a tremendous impact on the market. For example, recently, an early investor from the ICO period of Ethereum (when ETH was only $6) started selling about 100,000 ETH continuously from November 7. It is important to note that the total buying power brought by the approval of the Ethereum ETF is also in the millions (not to mention Grayscale's existing holdings). The selling of this one whale 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 determine that $100,000 is the top and place dense orders in the $95,000-$98,000 range, it would be difficult for MicroStrategy alone to break through this price level. Because MicroStrategy does not have absolute control over Bitcoin like the Luna Foundation does over Luna; it is just one of many market participants. Although borrowing tens of billions of dollars to buy Bitcoin can indeed push up the price, if the ancient whales do not agree with this strategy and choose to keep selling, the situation will be quite different.
This may break MicroStrategy's 'spiral upward' model: borrowing money to buy Bitcoin → driving stock prices up → borrowing more money to buy more Bitcoin → stock prices continue to rise. Once this cycle is broken, MicroStrategy will face pressure. Although currently, due to costs being over $50,000, the pressure is not significant, if this operation continues, the pressure will gradually increase.
However, we now have many monitoring tools to track the movements of these ancient whales' addresses to observe whether early Bitcoin is suddenly transferred to exchanges. This information can help anticipate subsequent trends. If these ancient whales cooperate, MicroStrategy's strategy should still be able to continue.
Deep Tide TechFlow: In this cycle, MicroStrategy somewhat replicated Grayscale's script from the previous cycle. When the market was bad, everyone looked forward to Grayscale as a savior to buy Bitcoin. Similarly, when the market is weak now, 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 Bitcoin; while MicroStrategy seems to be able to make money without selling Bitcoin, they can directly monetize through issuing stocks.
But will there be a point in time when MicroStrategy will sell its Bitcoin holdings? If such a situation really occurs, it would be a significant blow to market confidence. Do you think MicroStrategy will sell Bitcoin? Under what circumstances would they sell?
When will MicroStrategy sell Bitcoin?
Todd:
That's right. If MicroStrategy starts selling Bitcoin, it would be a massive blow to market confidence.
I just mentioned Grayscale, and I want to talk about the three major contributors to this Bitcoin bull market.
Previously, when Bitcoin fell to $16,000, everyone knew the reasons: on one hand, FTX had run off, 3AC went bankrupt, and on top of that, the U.S. kept raising interest rates, pushing Bitcoin down to the $16,000 level.
From $16,000 to over $30,000, the biggest contributor during this period was actually Grayscale. On one hand, the SEC did not allow it to redeem, and many people could not hold on and sold at a discount. On the other hand, it also kept suing the SEC, and eventually managed to get the much-disliked Gensler (the SEC chairman) to reluctantly agree to let the ETF issue, because they lost the lawsuit.
From over $30,000 to over $60,000, we need to thank ETFs, as companies like BlackRock and Fidelity have extensive sales networks spread all over the world. With their promotion, many people began to buy Bitcoin through ETFs, bringing institutional market funds into play.
From over $60,000 to over $90,000, the most important contributor is actually MicroStrategy. When Bitcoin reached over $60,000, it needed a driving force for its rise, and that driving force was MicroStrategy.
I call this the four-stage rocket theory: just like a rocket, the first stage drops off, and the second stage continues the relay. This is the three major contributors to Bitcoin's rise from $16,000 to $96,000: Grayscale, ETFs, and MicroStrategy.
The first three stages have been completed, and the fourth stage is what we expect to happen when Trump comes to power and truly promotes it, such as the FIT21 plan, to establish a Bitcoin strategic reserve for the United States. Not only the U.S., but we can see that Poland, Suriname, and the Middle East are all working on their own Bitcoin strategic reserve bills, which will be the fourth-stage rocket.
From this perspective, MicroStrategy is currently in the middle position of the four-stage rocket, and relatively speaking, its risks are still quite controllable.
Deep Tide TechFlow: So in your view, there is still a long way to go before they sell Bitcoin.
Todd:
By continuously following Michael Saylor's interviews, I believe his faith in Bitcoin is about 90%. He has a mature theoretical system, and since 2021, many of his predictions have gradually come true, including national strategic reserves and adoption by publicly traded companies. In the future, we may even see technology giants like Microsoft establishing Bitcoin reserves.
In the short term, MicroStrategy has no motivation to sell Bitcoin. At least before 2027, they can handle their debts by issuing stocks or borrowing. More likely is that, since the creditors initially subscribed at a lower stock price, they might prefer to hold stocks rather than demand repayment.
Why is Saylor 90% loyal rather than 100%? The key lies in a detail: when Bitcoin was around $16,000, MicroStrategy sold about 700-800 Bitcoins for tax planning reasons. Although they bought them back shortly after, this behavior of making waves to avoid taxes revealed that he still harbors a 10% speculative mentality.
As a true HODLER, one should not engage in any swing trading. Once someone has experience in swing trading, it indicates that they still possess speculative traits. Therefore, do not expect MicroStrategy to hold Bitcoin for 25 or 50 years; once someone has ever done swing trading, they will certainly try again in the future; this is human nature. So Saylor is 90% faith and 10% speculation, meaning that someday in the future, he will still sell Bitcoin, but we should not expect to see that in the next few years.
Deep Tide TechFlow: More and more publicly traded companies are looking to replicate MicroStrategy's strategy. For example, the Japanese listed real estate company Metaplant and the Hong Kong listed company Boya Interactive are all incorporating Bitcoin into their balance sheets. Do you think MicroStrategy's approach will be increasingly replicated by more publicly traded companies? And do these replicating companies still hold investment value?
Todd:
Let me clarify that this is not financial advice. I have done some reasoning about this matter myself. Because MicroStrategy's bold gamble has achieved tremendous success, many companies, including Marathon, want to emulate MicroStrategy's strategy, and I think that's okay.
Why? Because according to the four-stage rocket theory, the first three stages have been completed. Although MicroStrategy has gained maximum returns since it started accumulating from the first stage, if people really foresee that countries will begin to compete for control over cyberspace in the future, or further, when AI rules the world, AI may prefer cryptocurrencies controlled by computing power rather than fiat currency.
Regardless of which distant legend ultimately comes true, those who entered as part of the third-stage rocket can still achieve considerable returns.
Although it is difficult for other companies to reach this scale, I believe this strategy is not problematic. Essentially, it is a strategy of leveraging off-market to buy Bitcoin and go long. As long as off-market creditors are willing to lend money, they get low-volatility returns while these companies bear high volatility, this model is feasible.
However, these companies imitating them enter at different times, and if they enter late, timing becomes even more crucial, as it directly determines the level of returns from their strategies. I suggest these publicly traded companies need to think carefully and complete the layout of Bitcoin reserves at the right time.
Deep Tide TechFlow: Finally, let's talk about Michael Saylor. I recently watched some podcasts interviewing him, where he mentioned that he spent 1,000 hours learning the theories related to Bitcoin and successfully brainwashed himself into becoming a maximalist or a fervent religious believer in Bitcoin. How do you evaluate this person?
Todd:
Michael Saylor is a top graduate from MIT, having been very successful at a young age. He has successfully sold several companies in previous ventures, and the fact that MicroStrategy can generate a paper profit of $250 million is quite remarkable.
One interesting point in 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 and 2013. His ability to predict the rise of mobile internet in 2012 shows that his judgment was 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 combines liberal arts and sciences to study how scientific breakthroughs occur, which helps him judge future technological trends.
He often cites the views of scientists such as Newton and Einstein in interviews. From his professional background and the book he later wrote on the wave of mobile internet, it is evident 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. A person like him, as an important figure in the Bitcoin community, greatly helps in spreading Bitcoin.
His most famous video has 10 million views on YouTube, explaining in three to four hours why he chose Bitcoin. His core argument is that the current economic system is constantly printing money, with an inflation rate that appears to be 2% but is actually at least over 7%, because economists keep adjusting the inflation basket ratios. This is the fundamental principle behind his investment in Bitcoin.
This theory is hard to refute because, no matter where you are in the world, governments and central banks are indeed constantly printing money; this anxiety is universally felt. In countries like Argentina, currency depreciation 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 the total amount of Bitcoin is fixed. This makes Bitcoin a very robust asset against inflation. Michael Saylor holding this belief will help him go further on the path of Bitcoin investment.
There won't be an Ethereum version of MicroStrategy.
Deep Tide TechFlow: This year, Ethereum has shown some weakness, and people often mock Ethereum by comparing it to the strength of Bitcoin and Solana. Do you think there will be an Ethereum version of Michael Saylor or MicroStrategy in the future?
Todd:
This is purely a prediction, and I think it's quite difficult. The reason is that MicroStrategy and Saylor have specific backgrounds, while Ethereum lacks these conditions.
The narrative of Bitcoin has been eternal since its inception, from the moment Satoshi Nakamoto wrote the news of the Chancellor preparing to bail out banks into the genesis block, establishing its position against fiat currency inflation and as a true store of value.
In Saylor's words, fiat currency is just currency, while Bitcoin is capital, which is a completely different concept.
In contrast, Ethereum is positioned to constantly utilize cutting-edge technology to provide blockchain services. From our experience operating the Ethereum mining pool, Ethereum is constantly evolving: moving from PoW to PoS to solve energy issues, to the recent Beacon Chain strategy proposed at Devcon in Bangkok, planning to ZK-ify the entire chain. This shows that Ethereum is on a completely different development path from Bitcoin.
For large funds, they prefer predictable, stable investment targets rather than continuously changing projects.
Saylor has mentioned that Satoshi Nakamoto's anonymity is very appealing, which aligns with the typical N-type personality traits in MBTI. Vitalik's continuous activity in Ethereum, although he presents many good viewpoints, may make some investors hesitate. As said in (Let the Bullets Fly), 'You are not very important to me.' Large investors need certainty and do not want projects to suddenly change direction.
Therefore, an Ethereum version of MicroStrategy may be difficult to appear, but the possibility of a smaller-scale version cannot be ruled out. Especially considering that Ethereum currently has a lower market value, it does not require the massive capital investment that Bitcoin does. There has always been an investment logic in the market that 'Bitcoin is too expensive, and we need to find cheaper assets,' and Ethereum may become the first choice for these types of investors.
Deep Tide TechFlow: I completely agree with the discussion about Bitcoin's narrative. The charm of Bitcoin lies in its simplicity; it does not require technical delivery and cannot be falsified. It is like a perfect closed loop, with each crisis reinforcing rather than weakening its value proposition. In the crypto world, we see too many grand visions and complex technological solutions, but the one that stands the test of time is the simplest Bitcoin, which does not need marketing, a roadmap, or technological commitments. In a world full of uncertainty, the most precious thing is certainty, and this is Bitcoin's greatest charm.
Finally, thanks to Todd.
Todd:
Finally, I quote a line from Saylor: Bitcoin will prevail, but not everyone will win along with it.
