Holding 380,000 bitcoins, penetrating MicroStrategy's "pump magic"

Author: Deep Tide TechFlow

In the history of Wall Street, legendary stories are never in short supply, but the transformation journey of MicroStrategy is destined to become a unique new legend.

A previously obscure enterprise software company made a stunning decision in August 2020 to invest all of its idle $250 million in 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 revenue of only $500 million into the world's largest publicly traded holder of Bitcoin, owning nearly 390,000 Bitcoins, which accounts for 1.8% of the global supply. Even more astonishingly, its stock price skyrocketed from $12 to a peak of $500, with a market capitalization exceeding $100 billion, and its daily trading volume once surpassed that of Nvidia.

This is not just a simple investment story, but an art of meticulously designed capital operations. Through low-interest borrowing and stock issuance, MicroStrategy wove an astonishing "spiral lifting" web.

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

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 it would spend $250 million to purchase approximately 21,400 BTC, becoming the first publicly traded company to implement a Bitcoin treasury strategy.

What sets MicroStrategy apart is not only that it was the first to take the plunge by adding Bitcoin to its balance sheet but also its continuous buying and willingness to borrow money to purchase Bitcoin. MicroStrategy borrowed money at an interest rate of about 1% through issuing stocks and bonds to buy Bitcoin.

Over the past four years, MicroStrategy has announced approximately 41 Bitcoin purchases.

As of now, on November 26, MSTR holds over 386,700 Bitcoins, accounting for about 1.8% of the total global Bitcoin supply, making it the largest publicly traded Bitcoin holder in the world.

MSTR has spent a total of $21.983 billion to purchase Bitcoin, with an average cost of about $56,849, and as of now, it has an unrealized gain of over $14 billion.

On November 21, MSTR's stock price briefly surpassed $500, with a market capitalization exceeding $100 billion. On that day, its trading volume even surpassed that of the leading U.S. stock Nvidia. Since it began accumulating Bitcoin in August 2020 at a price of about $12, its stock price has increased more than 40 times, rising fivefold since the beginning of the year, which is four times the increase of Bitcoin.

Currently, while MicroStrategy still maintains its main business, it has reported losses for three consecutive quarters and has performed poorly. However, this has not prevented it from becoming a super bull stock in the U.S. market this year; it has successfully transformed into a shadow stock of Bitcoin or a leveraged Bitcoin in the U.S. market.

MicroStrategy has driven up Bitcoin prices through issuing stocks and bonds to finance Bitcoin purchases, and the rise in Bitcoin prices, in turn, further boosts MSTR's stock price.

The Magic of MicroStrategy's Price Manipulation

Deep Tide TechFlow: How could a previously unremarkable company continuously attract so much capital in the market? What is its spiral lifting technique?

Todd:

I want to start from the beginning to explain how MicroStrategy has reached this level step by step.

In many people's impressions, MicroStrategy does not seem to be a very impressive company. In 2020, MicroStrategy was a software development company that helped other companies develop software, famously including some software for McDonald's. By 2020, it had about $250 million left on its balance sheet.

From a more mundane perspective, a company that has been around for so many years with an unrealized gain of $250 million is quite good. However, at that time, this money was just sitting idle on the balance sheet.

Our protagonist today, Michael Saylor, felt it was time to make a bold decision. As the chairman of the board, he personally pushed for MicroStrategy to invest almost all of its $250 million cash into Bitcoin. This was indeed a very bold move, and it is difficult for most people to make such a decision.

After making this investment, 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 borrowing some money off-market to continue increasing his Bitcoin position, 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 creditors have two options: either take back the principal with interest at a certain time, or choose to take equity.

He set a conversion ratio that allowed the borrowed money to be converted into equity, which made the creditors feel much more secure. If there is money on the balance sheet, they can repay the principal and interest; if not, the creditors can still take the stock and sell it in the secondary market, which provides some assurance for them.

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 MicroStrategy initially issued all had 0% interest; investors were attracted to another opportunity.

Because everyone knows Saylor is betting all the funds on Bitcoin. If Bitcoin rises, the company's stock price will naturally rise as well. What creditors are looking at is that the bond-to-stock conversion ratio is fixed; if Bitcoin rises in the future, MicroStrategy's stock will also rise, and they can choose to convert everything into stock and complete an arbitrage. Even if the stock price soars, they can still convert at a very low price.

This creates a very attractive investment logic: the worst-case scenario is to get back the principal or incur a small loss, but if MicroStrategy skyrockets, a $1 million investment could turn into $1.5 million or even $2 million in stock.

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% and 0.8%. Even during the Federal Reserve's rate hike cycle, when Treasury yields reached 3.4%-5%, investors were still willing to lend them money at ultra-low rates.

Later, as Bitcoin and the company's stock prices continued to rise, although it would be very easy for MicroStrategy to borrow money now, to be honest, borrowing ultimately carries risks, as debts need to be repaid. So now MicroStrategy has begun to adopt a second approach: directly issuing stocks to raise funds.

As a publicly traded company, Saylor, using his position as chairman of the board, chose to issue additional shares and sell them in the market in compliance with regulations. In recent days, MicroStrategy's trading volume even surpassed that of the bull market star stock Nvidia, raising nearly $4.6 billion through this method, and then continued to increase its Bitcoin position. This is also one of the important reasons for Bitcoin breaking through $95,000.

This is MicroStrategy's second strategy: after the company's stock price rises, to raise funds through issuing additional shares. The funds obtained through this method are not debt at all, with 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 issue, they have actually been very smart. For example, their earliest 0% interest debt does not mature until 2027, and now it is 2024, leaving ample time for operations. Moreover, the current yield on their balance sheet is close to 50%, so there is no immediate repayment pressure at all.

Even if repayment is required 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. Based on current trends, their repayment pressure is not significant.

Some have compared MicroStrategy to Luna, but I think this analogy is inappropriate. Upon closer examination, MicroStrategy is merely leveraging its position to go long, which is a normal market behavior for making money, not a Ponzi scheme.

They have simply seized the opportunity and used a good leverage to achieve excellent returns.

MicroStrategy previously proposed a concept that I strongly agree with: they understand this as "sharing volatility." What is sharing volatility? Those bond investors are usually quite conservative; they prefer low-volatility investments. Well, let’s give them the low-volatility part while MicroStrategy guarantees the bottom line. The cost to MicroStrategy is to provide investors with a low-volatility return while they themselves enjoy the high-volatility return 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 and high pressure. Low pressure is given to those stable investors, while high pressure is enjoyed by themselves.

This is actually a very common practice in financial markets, which is to grade assets: sell the low-risk part to others and enjoy the high-risk, high-return part yourself. This model can often be seen in past fund markets and securities markets.

So overall, MicroStrategy is definitely not a Ponzi scheme like Luna; they are more about having the courage to choose to go long at the right position and betting on the right direction. Of course, they have indeed become part of the market now, but they are not the decisive force in 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 in the past, where those developers also hoarded land through issuing low-interest convertible bonds to expand land reserves, and then during the real estate upcycle, rising land prices drove up stock prices, followed by issuing bonds or stocks to obtain cash flow and continue hoarding land, thus creating a cycle.

These two are indeed very similar, but the difference is that Bitcoin is an asset with global consensus and better cross-cycle liquidity. I want to ask, can MicroStrategy's strategy of leveraging off-market financing, buying Bitcoin, and pushing up stock prices 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 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’s just borrowing money to buy coins.

An asset with global liquidity that can be traded in various currencies is on a completely different level compared to a property in a city.

As for whether MicroStrategy's strategy can last forever, there is no eternal magic in the world. However, many investors do not care much about what happens 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 the United States, which started with 13 states and expanded continuously through wars and land purchases, acquiring land from France, Mexico, and Russia, establishing the foundation of the nation through land space. MicroStrategy believes that the era of land space has ended, and we have entered the era of cyberspace. In this cyberspace dominated by internet currency, controlling cyberspace is equivalent to controlling the new world, and Bitcoin is the most important currency in this space.

They predicted early on that in the future, countries would establish Bitcoin strategic reserves because it represents control over cyberspace, just as land represented control over physical space in the past. Now, especially in the context of Trump and his team supporting Bitcoin, this prediction is becoming clearer. 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 current price is much higher than in previous years, if in the future, as mentioned in the U.S. Bitcoin Reserve Act, the U.S. holds 1 million coins, accounting for 5% as a strategic reserve for cyberspace, then the current price may still be relatively low.

Of course, this is not investment advice. But if one believes that Bitcoin is currently undervalued, MicroStrategy's strategy is essentially a long strategy, with the key being the entry position. If one predicts that Bitcoin is still at a relatively low level, then continuing to go long and leverage is not incomprehensible. Of course, this is based on some premises, such as Trump successfully taking office, and his team supporting Bitcoin being able to take important positions and push forward previous commitments, etc.

So overall, while MicroStrategy's current strategy is bold, it is not entirely absurd or crazy; this is my view.

The Mystique of Citron Capital's Defeat

Deep Tide TechFlow: I see that some institutions, including Citron Capital, have begun to short MicroStrategy, causing its stock price to decline. But I looked at their statements, and this does not seem to be a simple shorting, but rather a hedging strategy.

They believe that MicroStrategy's stock value has detached from the fundamentals of Bitcoin, with about three times the premium compared to its holdings of Bitcoin. Although Citron still has 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 be right this time? Or do you think the current premium of MicroStrategy is reasonable?

Todd:

Regarding Citron, I want to approach this from a rather interesting angle.

From a somewhat mystical perspective, Citron is a long-established company that has indeed had many spectacular shorting successes, but they have also had several significant failures, and these failures seem to be particularly related to certain specific fields.

Let me give you a few examples. The most memorable might be Citron's shorting of GameStop (GME), which resulted in significant losses. An even earlier example was in 2018 when Citron continuously shorted Tesla, believing that Tesla's production capacity was inadequate 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; everyone knows Musk's attitude toward cryptocurrencies. GME also has some intricate connections to cryptocurrencies, and 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 this mystical perspective, it seems that Citron's judgment on such assets is often inaccurate, and several major failures have occurred in these related themes. This time it’s MicroStrategy's turn, which is also strongly tied to Bitcoin. From this angle, they may not have a smooth ride this time either. If a situation similar to GME repeats, MicroStrategy could experience unpredictable surges. Of course, this is just an entertaining interpretation and does not constitute investment advice.

From a fundamental perspective, Citron's argument does make sense. The market is indeed very FOMO right now; the greed index reached 94-95 just a few days ago. So MicroStrategy could indeed be overheated in the short term; their shorting of this premium might also involve holding long positions in Bitcoin to hedge, which is a reasonable operation. However, as mentioned earlier, based on historical experience, Citron has often not been successful in Bitcoin-related themes, which is just an interesting observation.

Potential Flaws in MicroStrategy

Deep Tide TechFlow: Currently, it is indeed difficult to find flaws in MicroStrategy's approach, but if one had to find the biggest flaw, what do you think it is?

Todd:

This is a sharp question. I believe the biggest flaw is that if MicroStrategy continues to implement such a strategy, the most concerning thing is that it may not synchronize with the rhythm of Bitcoin.

Let me illustrate this with a specific example.

There are many "ancient whales" in the Bitcoin market, and the movements of these early holders can have a huge impact on the market. For example, recently with Ethereum, an early investor from the ICO period (when ETH was only $6) has been continuously selling about 100,000 ETH since November 7. It’s worth noting that the total buying power brought by the approval of the Ethereum ETF is only in the hundreds of thousands (and that includes Grayscale's existing holdings). The sell-off by this one whale has offset a significant portion of the growth momentum brought by the ETF.

For MicroStrategy, these Bitcoin ancient whales are the biggest potential adversaries.

Suppose these whales determine that $100,000 is the top and place concentrated orders in the $95,000-$98,000 range; it would be very difficult for MicroStrategy alone to break through this price level. Because MicroStrategy does not have absolute control like the Luna Foundation did over Luna; it is just one of many market participants. Although borrowing billions of dollars to buy coins can indeed push up Bitcoin prices, if the ancient whales do not agree with this strategy and choose to continue selling, the situation would be very different.

This could break MicroStrategy's "spiral upward" 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, 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 see if any early Bitcoins suddenly transfer to exchanges. This information can help predict future trends. If these ancient whales cooperate, MicroStrategy's strategy should be able to continue.

Deep Tide TechFlow: This round of MicroStrategy seems to replicate the script of Grayscale from the last cycle, when the market was bad, everyone expected Grayscale to be the savior to buy coins. Now similarly, when the market is down, everyone is waiting for MicroStrategy's announcement, hoping it will buy Bitcoin to lift prices.

However, there is a clear difference between MicroStrategy and Grayscale: Grayscale's clients also want to cash out and have to sell coins; whereas MicroStrategy seems to be able to make money without selling Bitcoin, as it can directly monetize through issuing stocks.

But will there come a time when MicroStrategy sells its holdings of Bitcoin? If that really happens, it would be a huge blow to market confidence. Do you think MicroStrategy will sell coins? Under what circumstances would they sell?

When Will MicroStrategy Sell Coins?

Todd:

Indeed, if MicroStrategy starts selling coins, it would be a massive blow to market confidence.

Just now, we happened to mention Grayscale, and I want to talk about the three major contributors to this round of Bitcoin bull market.

Previously, when Bitcoin fell to $16,000, everyone knows the reasons: on one hand, FTX collapsed, 3AC went bankrupt, and on the other hand, the U.S. kept raising interest rates, driving Bitcoin down to $16,000.

From $16,000 to over $30,000, the biggest contributor at that time was actually Grayscale, because on one hand, the SEC did not allow them to redeem, and many people simply could not hold on and sold at a discount. On the other hand, they were constantly fighting legal battles with the SEC, and eventually, the much-disliked 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, we must thank the ETF, as companies like BlackRock and Fidelity have extensive sales networks spread across every corner of the world. With their push, many people began to buy Bitcoin through ETFs, bringing institutional market funds in.

From over $60,000 to over $90,000, the most important contributor was actually MicroStrategy. When Bitcoin reached over $60,000, it needed a driving force, and that driving force was provided by MicroStrategy.

I call this the four-stage rocket theory: just like a rocket, the first stage drops off, and then the second stage continues the relay. This is the three major contributors to Bitcoin's rise from $16,000 to $96,000: Grayscale, the ETF, and MicroStrategy.

The first three stages have been completed, and there is still a fourth stage to come, which is what we expect when Trump comes to power and truly pushes forward, for example, the FIT21 plan, to establish Bitcoin as a strategic reserve for the U.S. Not only the U.S., but we can also see that Poland, Suriname, and Middle Eastern countries 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 of the four-stage rocket, and relatively speaking, its risk is still quite controllable.

Deep Tide TechFlow: So in your view, there is still a long way to go before they sell coins.

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 tech giants like Microsoft establishing Bitcoin reserves.

In the short term, MicroStrategy has no motivation to sell coins. At least before 2027, they can cope with their debts through issuing stocks or borrowing. More likely, since the initial stock price at which creditors subscribed was relatively low, they may prefer to hold stocks rather than demand repayment.

Why do I say Saylor is 90% rather than 100% loyal? 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 trades to avoid taxes reveals that he still has a 10% speculative mindset.

A true HODLER should not engage in any trading. Once someone has had trading experiences, it indicates that they still have speculative attributes at heart. Therefore, do not expect MicroStrategy to hold coins for 25 or 50 years; as long as they have traded before, they will certainly try again in the future, as this is human nature. So, Saylor is 90% faith and 10% speculation, which means that one day in the future, he will sell Bitcoin; it’s just that we should not expect to see that in the next few years.

Deep Tide TechFlow: More and more publicly traded companies are trying to replicate MicroStrategy's strategy. For example, the Japanese listed real estate company Metaplant and the Hong Kong-listed company Boya Interactive are incorporating Bitcoin into their balance sheets. Do you think MicroStrategy's approach will be replicated by more and more publicly traded 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 done some projections on this matter. Because MicroStrategy's gamble has achieved great success this time, 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 already been completed. Although MicroStrategy has been building its position since the first stage and has gained the maximum benefit, if later entrants truly foresee that countries will start competing for control of cyberspace, or further down the line, when AI rules the world, AI may prefer cryptocurrencies controlled by computing power rather than fiat currencies.

Regardless of which distant legend ultimately comes true, those entering as the third stage can still achieve considerable returns.

Although it is very difficult for other companies to reach this scale, I believe this strategy is not problematic; it is essentially a strategy of going long Bitcoin 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, these companies that are emulating MicroStrategy have entered at different times, and if they enter later, timing becomes even more important, as it directly determines the return level of the strategy. It is advisable for these publicly traded companies to think carefully and complete their Bitcoin reserve layout at the right position.

Deep Tide TechFlow: Finally, let’s talk about Michael Saylor. I recently watched some podcasts where he was interviewed, and he mentioned that he spent 1,000 hours studying Bitcoin-related knowledge and theories, successfully brainwashing himself into a maximalist of Bitcoin, or a fervent religious believer. How do you evaluate this person?

Todd:

Michael Saylor is a top graduate from MIT, and he was very successful at a young age, having successfully sold his previous startups. The fact that MicroStrategy could achieve an unrealized gain of $250 million is quite remarkable.

An interesting point about his life is that he wrote a book in 2012 about the wave of mobile internet, predicting the rise of mobile internet when smartphones were just starting to become popular in 2012 and 2013, which shows his accurate judgment.

He studied two degrees at MIT: aerospace engineering and the history of science. This combination of majors is quite unique and seems almost tailor-made for him. The history of science combines the arts and sciences, studying how science develops breakthrough advancements, which is very helpful for him in judging future technological trends.

He often cites the views of scientists like Newton and Einstein in his interviews. From both his academic background and the book he wrote on the mobile internet wave, it is evident that he has a clear personal judgment on future technological trends, and these judgments have been validated. His speech is logically clear, and his viewpoints are articulated well. Having someone like him as an important figure in the Bitcoin community is very beneficial for the spread of Bitcoin.

One of his most famous videos has 10 million views on YouTube, where he explains for three to four hours why he chooses Bitcoin. His core argument is that the current economic system is constantly printing money; while inflation appears to be 2%, it is actually at least over 7%, because economists have been adjusting the composition of the inflation basket, which is his fundamental belief for investing in Bitcoin.

This theory is hard to overturn because, no matter where you are in the world, governments and central banks are indeed continuously printing money, and this anxiety is widespread. In countries like Argentina, currency depreciation can reach dozens of times. Bitcoin, on the other hand, has a clear limit of 21 million coins, 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. Holding such beliefs will help Michael Saylor go further on his Bitcoin investment journey.

There Will Not Be an Ethereum Version of MicroStrategy

Deep Tide TechFlow: This year, Ethereum has shown some weakness, and people often mock Ethereum with 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 pure speculation, and I think it is quite difficult. The reason is that the emergence of MicroStrategy and Saylor has its specific background, while Ethereum does not possess these conditions.

The narrative of Bitcoin has been eternal since its inception; from the moment Satoshi Nakamoto wrote the news of the Treasury Secretary preparing to bail out banks into the genesis block, it established its positioning as a counter to fiat currency inflation and a true store of value.

In Saylor's words, fiat currency is just money, while Bitcoin is capital; these are completely different concepts.

In contrast, Ethereum's positioning is to continuously provide blockchain services using the most advanced technology. From our experience operating Ethereum mining pools, Ethereum is constantly evolving: transitioning 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 and stable investment targets rather than continuously changing projects.

Saylor has mentioned that Satoshi's anonymity is very appealing, which aligns with the typical N-type personality traits in MBTI. In contrast, Vitalik's continuous activity in Ethereum, while proposing many good ideas, may cause some investors to hesitate. Just like in "Let the Bullets Fly," where it says "you are not that important to me," large funds need certainty in their investments and do not want projects to suddenly change direction.

Therefore, it may be difficult to see an Ethereum version of MicroStrategy emerge, but it does not rule out the possibility of smaller-scale versions. Especially considering that Ethereum currently has a lower market capitalization, 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; we need to find cheaper targets," and Ethereum may become the first choice for such 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 technical solutions, but ultimately, what stands the test of time is the simplest Bitcoin, which does not need marketing, roadmaps, or technical commitments. In an uncertain world, the most precious thing is certainty, and that is Bitcoin's greatest charm.

Finally, thank you, Todd.

Todd:

In conclusion, I quote Saylor: Bitcoin will win, but not everyone will win along with it.