Don’t know about El Salvador’s liabilities, but we can at least attest they are stacking the bitcoin.
Proof of reserves is better than nothing.
nostr:npub1rtlqca8r6auyaw5n5h3l5422dm4sry5dzfee4696fqe8s6qgudks7djtfs nostr:note1gu40hfuqk6vdr8xgh7eew97d4xpc3zkzrzpk5w645at5uxv0qj5spjz2r7
I own MSTR. As a shareholder, I can be vocal about MSTR implementing proof of reserves. My voice matters.
(Objectively) Worst. Bull. Run. Ever. nostr:note1mug0wd5e7ua3n7r8cves8rc5gwl4jxl4vvrh7hyvu8aw92r943lsfkxqan
👀 Howard “30% allocated to bitcoin” Lutnick specifically called out. nostr:note1xwwxppqdmpelmnvpxwyqrzsv6ft4xnndqptrjhrvk32cu87ke7dq2zd3z9
The blow-off tops of earlier cycles suggest this is incorrect.
If you’re calling me out for owning MSTR and FBTC , it’s a small amount of my overall position AND it’s illiquid with penalty. I just don’t get the IRA products where you hold your own coins…bitcoin is meant to be used.
If MSTR goes to zero I will feel validated in my concerns. And if MSTR moons because their speculative attack on fiat is real, I get the enjoyment of that, too.
Also, without shorting MSTR, it is the only way I can have legitimate skin in the game to call Saylor out. He works for me as a shareholder.
(Objectively) Worst. Bull. Run. Ever. nostr:note105eyayvvc4qjjzqqlf57qlc28d0l638nhp9suavrp37vdu2hq4fqsm9kvm
No idea but if Saylor rugs the bitcoin faithful he’s gonna take out the credibility of SEVERAL top notch bitcoin personalities. They aped their reputations into the theory without verifying the work on the backend.
The most interesting post from the last 24 hours is nostr:npub1sg6plzptd64u62a878hep2kev88swjh3tw00gjsfl8f237lmu63q0uf63m ‘s re: nostr:npub15dqlghlewk84wz3pkqqvzl2w2w36f97g89ljds8x6c094nlu02vqjllm5m and XRP.
I am a MSTR shareholder calling for proof of reserves. nostr:note1ucpengggnqsmuak59spn6jgd46uke8uazwjj4sh2tzaant5mf8ysvppjnn
Remember when bull runs generated +300% appreciation as the norm? nostr:note1gtp78r9udy534kka84y4edwacf3h29urerpf7j4yurpsg0xe9zdsywaccg
(Objectively) Worst. Bull. Run. Ever. nostr:note10lrpsrltu4d8zruw2hfk0m6pqth5885vy05qyf0l4spjtsras9tqzs77uz
Don’t think this is accurate. The difficulty adjustment will kick in and lots of energy won’t be economic. Heating with electricity in most places is already inefficient. Doing it with bitcoin miners which aren’t designed to put off heat as their primary purpose won’t heat efficiently. And the electricity costs will not be competitive with other energy sources so they won’t win enough bitcoin to justify the miner expense. Further, miners that run 100% of the time are preferred to those that run intermittently. Heating environments that have electric heaters usually don’t need heat constantly, otherwise gas / propane is a better heating technology.
There will be some niche applications, sure. But widespread electric mining replacing electric heating is too optimistic, IMO. Sorry to be a Debbie downer.
Longest 3 months of my life incoming.
Huge (unlevered) bet made.
Reputation on the line.
I bitch but I believe.
Bitcoin, LFG!
LFG!
🚀 nostr:note1gtsqmd80klsuxycjrx0hkwkcc07h6f4qxm84x9n2uktv0urpa8yswtvqhw
It’s measured in productive time. How many years labor? Or oz gold? Or certain type of house. But ultimately it is a measure of productivity stored in bitcoin.
(GDP + historical capital asset value) / 21M bitcoin
I think you’ve missed my point. I explicitly state NGU is measured as time stored per bitcoin. That metric is purchasing power and has nothing to do with dollars or any other fiat measure. It has to do with how much productivity is stored per bitcoin. That has to go up, forever AND - at this stage - it has to go up quite a lot to compensate for the risks taken.
It is interesting how many of my favorite Bitcoin podcasters and personalities have moved into (bitcoin) VC investing. VC investing is one of the riskiest and least profitable (on a portfolio basis) methods of investing capital.
One would think if we believe bitcoin is an asset with 50%+ “risk-free” returns it would yield fewer VC efforts, seeing as they don’t make sense at 5% FFR and increasing the hurdle rate would just mean fewer investment theses and VC portfolios would meet the higher return expectations.
But alas…here we are. It seems like this is the way that “bitcoin personalities” are monetizing their niche clout. Very curious to see how these funds turn out and how quickly they start to raise future funds.
(Before I found bitcoin, I truly believed the VC/PE fund model was corrupt and tailored to deliver poor business results due to the (1) requirement to invest and (2) requirement to exit within (3) a defined fund duration. Also, raising money the first time seemed to be the toughest part of the equation…with future funds being easier to raise regardless of prior fund performance. Free(ish) money is lazy money.)
Purchase by power of bitcoin still needs to increase over time. Time afforded per bitcoin is the right measure…and that measure will vary from person to person.
But NGU (time afforded/bitcoin) has to keep going up and still needs to go up exponentially at this level of adoption.
It might be easy for those who have already experienced the NGU windfall to discount the importance of NGU but I can assure you that for those of us yet to experience a bull market windfall, it is still incredibly important.