I’m not a huge fan of proof of reserves because I consider it solvency theater. It tells you nothing about the liabilities the business has. So I think it provides a false sense of security.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Is it better than an open-ended promise? Especially for an entity that will likely hold the significant portion of their reserves in perpetuity (or at least very long duration)?

I see how technically your answer is valid however I still like to see blockchain verification behind the public announcements. Don’t let perfect stand in the way of good.

I know that we as bitcoiners don’t trust the traditional system, but if Saylor didn’t actually have the coins its fraud of the highest order and it would destroy his accounting firm, law firm and custodian in addition to microstrategy. I personally feel very confident that they have every coin they say they do.

I’m more concerned with Coinbase than MSTR specifically. Corporate and government custody has the potential to become a daisy chain of risk spreading…just like the banking system.

I’d like to see more of an effort to leverage these unique attributes of bitcoin to show the market that they actually have claim to a fully-reserved stockpile.

If I was Saylor, I also would believe the markets I am targeting would only value my entity more if I could show (on the blockchain) where my reserves sat. Regardless of the liabilities.

But I’m simply a toxic maxi wanting a bitcoin standard. Maybe I am wrong for barking up this tree. But I’m not gonna stop barking until this gap is addressed.

They’re claiming they are literally buying an entire year’s worth of new bitcoin issuance. More incoming. Their legitimacy matters.

Now that sab 151 is done. Can Microstrategy change custodians to a bank of their choosing?

Wot

What part of that confuses you

Maybe I’m mixing up my definitions - isn’t proof of reserves proving MSTR actually have the Bitcoin (I believe is - maybe - with Coinbase Prime atm) - are you saying you don’t need MSTR to prove they have the Bitcoin ? As I would love them to. Ala El Salvador and Metaplanet. Via nostr:npub18d4r6wanxkyrdfjdrjqzj2ukua5cas669ew2g5w7lf4a8te7awzqey6lt3

I think it would be a good thing for them to do, but I don’t need them to do it.

Exactly. Who cares if they have 50,000 in Bitcoin reserves if they have 250k worth of liabilities.

Once we see the bitcoin on the blockchain, then we can worry about the liability question.

I understand proof of reserves isn’t perfect, however it is better than “just trust me, bro”

The counterparty I am most concerned about is Coinbase. Whether or not MSTR and their auditors are comfortable with a certain amount of fractional reserving from Coinbase is also a question.

But I want to see the bitcoin addresses. Like River. Like El Salvador. Seems like an obvious compliment to the MSTR bitcoin strategy. Only adds confidence (therefore value) in the fiat markets.

Unless they are a public company, the liabilities will never be shown. There is zero chance kraken, or whoever will announce they ftx 9 gazillion, and so on...