I'm not co-ordinated or against, but I have been voicing doubt on NOSTR about whether MSTR actually own any Bitcoin.
This became amplified after Saylors' 8 minute OPSEC talk during the AGM when asked if they would ever publish wallet addresses.
Signal intelligence states that if somebody chooses to give a complex explanation when a simple answer is possible, this usually indicates lies or an attempt to hide information.
oh i’ve voiced similar opinions on both platforms and i’ll keep doing so until saylor understands the importance of self custody for corporates. what i’m talking about is a nasty campaign trying to paint mstr as a ponzi scheme. this looks almost certainly like a coordinated, well organized effort.
Oh I see, perhaps it's fuelled by these increasing doubts.
TBF if MSTR aren't actually buying any Bitcoin, then it is a ponzi scheme 😂
i believe they did purchase all the btc they announced, but saylor doesn’t seem to get the risk of keeping it on exchanges. when asked, he usually frames it from an audit or regulation perspective to defend his position. what he misses is that an asset this scarce has to be isolated from third parties for security and true ownership.
Agreed about self custody.
I also believe they started off buying the BTC they said, but at some point decided the money they were borrowing and shares they were selling would give a better balance sheet if they didn't spend it all on BTC.
But I don't know. Yet it is the easiest thing in the world to prove self custody Bitcoin if you are a government or public company with citizens or shareholders who would expect to have that verified.
💯
This might frame the debate more fairly. https://bewaterltd.com/p/bitcoin-treasurycos-lessons-from
