Replying to Avatar mike

You can rehypothecate a synthetic?

Let’s break it down and explain why you might want to care.

A synthetic asset, also known as a "synth", is a financial instrument that mimics the characteristics of another asset or asset class without requiring the owner to own the original asset.

Rehypothecation is a financial practice where a broker or financial institution uses a client's collateral for their own purposes.

Rehypothecation can be risky, as over-leveraging assets can lead to complex chains of obligations. This can increase systemic risk if the market declines.

My understanding of the 2007/8 financial crises is these are the methods used. With the property market as asset base and with the banks playing the role of bad actors.

This is now what Saylor is doing with $MSTR he is buying Bitcoin, packaging that Bitcoin up as $MSTR shares, these shares have no direct relationship to the underlying asset.

Then investment firms are creating funds tracking the performance of $MSTR shares either betting for or against them and selling synthetics at multiple times the underlying asset of $MSTR shares, which has multiple times the underlying asset of $BTC.

This model is actively being replicated by many other firms copying this model, believing it to be sound.

Why should you care about this?

We know that the 2007/8 crises was a tremor and we are yet to experience the actual earthquake.

Bitcoin was created by Satoshi to counteract what happened in 2007/8 by creating hard money.

Saylor through $MSTR and others through ETFs, which while currently backed by real Bitcoin (as far as we can tell), are creating synthetics and being rehypothecated.

Meaning that Bitcoin is becoming part of the problem rather than the solution. Not only that, it is dramatically increasing the size of the problem.

It has never been more important for us to self custody Bitcoin and not allow its use as a Synthetic or to allow it to be rehypothecated.

Saylor discusses this here, it sounds clever, and to be frank I don’t understand most of it, but it is actually using Bitcoin as a leverage device:

https://v.nostr.build/C0z85M8H3Gbyc6Y2.mp4

nostr:note19stecwggn4c5u6qntdc42vxnv09q9dy6vvh3sfyzwx9296xtgess8cwmdp

👆U are not wrong🤔

… it seems predicting future economic catastrophes is not difficult… it’s the timing of the catastrophe that is difficult to predict and it seems is currently being engineered by peepl in the know (who will almost certainly profit from the process)🤨

… it’s the vile fiat game which seems to grow more and more corrupt with the passage of time and will be applied to BTC to the extent possible by the creation of paper btc assets/derivatives🤷🏽‍♂️

…I can’t agree with u more on the importance of self custody which gives BTC some of its most important attributes (ie portability, resistance to permission and censorship and authentic scarcity)🫡🙌🏽🌅

Jus one idgit’s opinion

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

The vast majority of that rehypothecation ends up in the derivatives market and the numbers there, well😬😂. When them contracts become due and can't be settled by the brokerage houses, as I say EVERYTHING will legally be own by the BIS and it's benefactors.

Ima big fan of David Web but haven’t read the great taking yet (I will tho…thnx for reminding me🫡).

I have heard him discuss the great taking on several podcasts and I think his proposed scenario is one of the possible eventualities…the problem with all the speculation of the eventual outcome is it’s like speculating on a game of chess as u play it… the guy on the other side of the table will always have some effect on the endgame.

IMHO if/when the economies of the west collapse there will likely be some form of asset seizure (ie various taxes, regulatory penalties/fines, liens, eminent domain, etc). However, it’s much harder (not impossible) to seize hard assets in self custody and even harder if said asset is extremely portable (ie btc). People like money will flow to where they are treated best (to the extent that they can). The difficulty will always be leaving behind the security of what u and ur family have built but history shows that in dire straights people will do it.

Just my 2 sats…but keep in mind ima idgit and my oldest son kix my ass in chess🤷🏽‍♂️

👆💯

I also agree that the actual value of the derivative market is prolly incalculable and on the higher side of any of our guesses (most people think linearly and can’t begin to comprehend the value of $1quadrillion…it becomes just a word).

As a hard asset/btc guy I also think that hard assets will eat a large part of the value of that collapsed market…I don’t subscribe to a soft landing but as I’ve said I’m wrong a lot.

Ha ha, all we can do is have as many sats as is possible. That's our little insurance policy for when the ride starts to get really wild!!

Tru dat

Freedom on my libertarian brotha🌅