I agree with your opinions for the most part but I would push back on that more BTCTCs entering the space pushes down their mNAVs. I should lead by saying that there are multiple types of Bitcoin Treasury Companies and that mNAVs are not going to be same for each. On a long enough time horizon all businesses will become BTCTCs just like how all businesses have phones, bank accounts, email addresses, and websites.

I like to use 3 buckets when thinking about BTCTCs

1. Buy & Hodl (TSLA)

2. Leveraged Bitcoin Equities (MSTR, MTPLF, SWC)

3. Bitcoin Operating Companies (XXI)

With a buy and hodl company like TSLA their mNAV is irrelevant because a majority of their earnings is from their core business (although their BTC yield will intensify)

The net asset multiplier has a bunch of variables associated with it. One of the most important is the amount of bitcoin on the company’s balance sheet. Under a 1,000 and the company can demand higher a mNAV because it is much easier for them to cover their premium (mNAV time to cover) We saw SWC trade at a 20 multiple because they started with a single bitcoin and were able to cover their premium in days opposed to months. Between 1,000-10,000 the mNAV should adjust downward. The more bitcoin these companies accumulate the longer and harder it becomes for them to cover their premiums. If we look at MSTR holding 600K+ corn it will take them 18 months if they are lucky to cover their current 1.8x premium. In my opinion the more bitcoin the company holds the lower the mNAV. I'm not saying that all sub 1000 bitcoin companies deserve a high mNAV but ones starting with a small amount of bitcoin, a strong team and a strong core business can justify double digit mNAVs in the early stages.

Number three on your negative list seems to be an outdated argument. Most BTCTCs now are now selling equity instead of taking on debt. I agree there will be poor execution from management teams but that risk applies to all businesses not just BTCTCs

We should also distinguish the differences between BTCTCs with a strong and thriving core businesses versus failing core businesses versus BTCTCs with no core business at all. If the core business has strong cash flows they can DCA through the bear markets and can justifiably attract a higher multiple compared to a business that can not acquire bitcoin through their business operations during a bear market.

One thing is for sure is that BTCTCs have found a product market fit. Also Bitcoin in its current form doesn't scale to billions of people. BTCTCs are serving as an "Uncle Jim" of sorts so to speak by custodying their shareholder’s bitcoin. That's one of the main reasons why I think it's better that there are more BTCTCs. I hope that we see more of these BTCTCs take custody of their bitcoin and that we see more custodians in the space so all these BTCTCs are not relying on Coinbase.

Bitcoin in Cold Storage is obviously the best option but BTCTCs for the sheeple is better than nothing, this will get their foot in the door and get them researching BItcoin once they have skin in the game.