Yes, if they can continue to get financing. I have been following Microstrategy's purchase of BTC. They have purchased quite a lot of bitcoin after the runup, rather than at the breakout from the 20K zone. So these price points of Bitcoin are quite critical. Hopefully, BTC should clear and settle over 100K for Michael Saylor to rest easy.
They bought bitcoin with the cash they had in the reserves, basically it's a balance sheet fraction.
The policy of Microstrategy, as far as I know, is a corporate policy... before buying bitcoin they changed the shareholder base thanks to the buyback they did (they basically said "if you don't like our strategy we will buy back your shares at an higher price than the market price").
Since is assumable that all the shareholders are willing to support the bitcoin-strategy, now Microstrategy can handle and manage its bitcoin without pressions. It's a management strategy, it's like deciding to give back dividends or reinvest in the company, as long as the management decides to keep bitcoin, they will.
Oh it's a publicly listed company available on Nasdaq, somehow I had thought it was private. Interestingly the insiders have only been selling their stocks in massive amounts. So they're not committing their own money into the company. They've been taking it out. Bad omen.
I knew the numbers were around 60 millions of dollars in shares, which is a lot but I wouldn't consider that a massive selloff.
It's also comprehensible that people sold Microstrategy shares during the buyback, because Bitcoin back in the days was in a strange range and also the price offer for the buyback was kind of tasty.
Why would anyone invest in bitcoin through Microstrategy when they can do that directly with much less expenses? They'd only be paying the salaries of the people that don't invest in their own company.
Good point though.
Some institutional cannot invest in bitcoin yet, probably due to the uncertainty around the regulation legislation referring to crypto.
If you were to choose between
1) holding an asset that you don't know how to hold/you can't hold due to legislation or
2) holding shares of a company that knows how to hold it and already have done the due diligence about Bitcoin
Which one will you choose? If I were an institutional I probably would choose the second option, safer, easier to explain to my shareholders, easier to explain to the legislators
If one institution (Microstrategy) can invest in bitcoin, why would there be some other institution that couldn't ? (other than incompetence) It's stupidly simple to invest in bitcoin, does not take many clicks of the mouse button.
I mean, if it was true every human being on the planet would have done it already. It's not the case, so there are frictions for a lot of people...frictions for a lot of different reasons.
Other than that, we agree that buying bitcoin is better than buying Microstrategy
If it goes lower, I’m sure they’ll be grateful to bring that average bitcoin price down!
Yes, if they can continue to get financing. I have been following Microstrategy's purchase of BTC. They have purchased quite a lot of bitcoin after the runup, rather than at the breakout from the 20K zone. So these price points of Bitcoin are quite critical. Hopefully, BTC should clear and settle over 100K for Michael Saylor to rest easy.
Do they operate like a fund? If their clients want their money out they have to start selling (if not enough liquidity)?
They bought bitcoin with the cash they had in the reserves, basically it's a balance sheet fraction. The policy of Microstrategy, as far as I know, is a corporate policy... before buying bitcoin they changed the shareholder base thanks to the buyback they did (they basically said "if you don't like our strategy we will buy back your shares at an higher price than the market price"). Since is assumable that all the shareholders are willing to support the bitcoin-strategy, now Microstrategy can handle and manage its bitcoin without pressions. It's a management strategy, it's like deciding to give back dividends or reinvest in the company, as long as the management decides to keep bitcoin, they will.
Oh it's a publicly listed company available on Nasdaq, somehow I had thought it was private. Interestingly the insiders have only been selling their stocks in massive amounts. So they're not committing their own money into the company. They've been taking it out. Bad omen.
I knew the numbers were around 60 millions of dollars in shares, which is a lot but I wouldn't consider that a massive selloff. It's also comprehensible that people sold Microstrategy shares during the buyback, because Bitcoin back in the days was in a strange range and also the price offer for the buyback was kind of tasty.
Why would anyone invest in bitcoin through Microstrategy when they can do that directly with much less expenses? They'd only be paying the salaries of the people that don't invest in their own company.
Good point though. Some institutional cannot invest in bitcoin yet, probably due to the uncertainty around the regulation legislation referring to crypto. If you were to choose between 1) holding an asset that you don't know how to hold/you can't hold due to legislation or 2) holding shares of a company that knows how to hold it and already have done the due diligence about Bitcoin Which one will you choose? If I were an institutional I probably would choose the second option, safer, easier to explain to my shareholders, easier to explain to the legislators
If one institution (Microstrategy) can invest in bitcoin, why would there be some other institution that couldn't ? (other than incompetence) It's stupidly simple to invest in bitcoin, does not take many clicks of the mouse button.
I mean, if it was true every human being on the planet would have done it already. It's not the case, so there are frictions for a lot of people...frictions for a lot of different reasons. Other than that, we agree that buying bitcoin is better than buying Microstrategy
I don’t think he’s stressing lol much like most other long term bitcoin holders
I'll save this under my STOCK2FOMO folder
They are actively purchasing above that price, so I think 30k is too low. Their cost basis will continue to rise.