Adam Livingston's banner
Adam Livingston's profile picture

Adam Livingston

@AdamBLiv • 89,065 subscribers

The Bitcoin Wizard | Vice President, Investments @Strive Christ. Family. Bitcoin. In that order.

Shorts

Want to know something MIND BLOWING? Warren Buffett bought $183 BILLION in T-Bills in Q3 2025. Michael Saylor bought 42,706 Bitcoin in Q3 2025. Those T-Bills will lose value at ~2% per year with 6% M2 money supply inflation. Even with we adjust the PURCHASING POWER DESTRUCTION of the US Dollar, and settle with a REAL 24% Bitcoin CAGR... This is the result of Saylor's Q3 Bitcoin buys vs. Buffett's Q3 T-Bill buys. Buffett's net worth will be a footnote next to Saylor's.

Want to know something MIND BLOWING? Warren Buffett bought $183 BILLION in T-Bills in Q3 2025. Michael Saylor bought 42,706 Bitcoin in Q3 2025. Those T-Bills will lose value at ~2% per year with 6% M2 money supply inflation. Even with we adjust the PURCHASING POWER DESTRUCTION of the US Dollar, and settle with a REAL 24% Bitcoin CAGR... This is the result of Saylor's Q3 Bitcoin buys vs. Buffett's Q3 T-Bill buys. Buffett's net worth will be a footnote next to Saylor's.

1,130,755 次观看

$ASST + $SATA liquidity keeps compounding. Avg weekly dollar volume: First 4 weeks after SATA IPO: $617M Last 4 weeks: $1.47B On average, weekly volume has grown $15M per week for 47 weeks. Today alone: $356M. Top 10 session since the SATA IPO:

$ASST + $SATA liquidity keeps compounding. Avg weekly dollar volume: First 4 weeks after SATA IPO: $617M Last 4 weeks: $1.47B On average, weekly volume has grown $15M per week for 47 weeks. Today alone: $356M. Top 10 session since the SATA IPO:

28,501 次观看

Everyone thinks the stock market has been ripping since 2020. It has. In dollars. The reality is... Bitcoin has ruined index investing for me. Priced in gold, the S&P's 4-year moving average is up just 2%. Priced in Bitcoin, it's down 93%. The question isn't "what did the market do?" It's "what are you measuring it in?" Bitcoin is the apex asset:

Everyone thinks the stock market has been ripping since 2020. It has. In dollars. The reality is... Bitcoin has ruined index investing for me. Priced in gold, the S&P's 4-year moving average is up just 2%. Priced in Bitcoin, it's down 93%. The question isn't "what did the market do?" It's "what are you measuring it in?" Bitcoin is the apex asset:

33,712 次观看

Bitcoin is going to RALLY so VIOLENTLY that Greg from three doors down walks over holding the leaf blower he financed at 26.99 percent APR to ask you, with genuine curiosity, what a satoshi is. So violently that the HOA letter about your mailbox color arrives and you frame it. So violently that the guy who called it tulips in 2017 opens every sentence at the block party with "well, I always said the technology itself was interesting." So violently that your Target Date 2055 fund, which parked 41 percent of your one life in bonds because an actuary in Malvern decided you were fragile, finally gets to rest. So violently that Applebee's 2 for $25 becomes a story you tell your grandchildren and they assume you are describing a prison. So violently that men in their forties feel something real in the Menards rebate aisle and have to sit in the truck for a minute with the engine off. So violently that someone laughs out loud in the Q3 all hands when they say "we're like a family here," and instead of getting fired he becomes the CEO. So violently that the $7,400 deductible your employer calls a High Deductible Health Plan With A Savings Component gets cleared in the time it takes to microwave a Hot Pocket. So violently that your brother in law, who has explained blockchain to you at four consecutive Thanksgivings while holding a Coors Light and getting it wrong in a new way each time, texts you at 2:14 a.m. asking how Coinbase works. So violently that the entire Stanley tumbler economy vaporizes in a single afternoon and the resale market moves to eBay, where it belongs. So violently that the boomer who bought his house in 1987 for $61,000 and calls you entitled becomes extremely interested in what exactly it is you do for work. So violently that "just 11 more years and I retire at 67" dissolves into the air alongside the Wells Fargo $12 monthly maintenance fee, which they waive if you maintain a $1,500 average daily balance, a sentence 1 human wrote and 7 humans approved. So violently that the 78 month auto loan joins leeches and the draft in the museum of things we agreed to when we were confused. So violently that Chase mails you a pre-approved Sapphire offer and you use it as a coaster in a house you own outright. The middle class was always a payment plan with a lifestyle stapled to the front. You read the prepayment clause. It was blank. Stay humble. Stack sats.

Bitcoin is going to RALLY so VIOLENTLY that Greg from three doors down walks over holding the leaf blower he financed at 26.99 percent APR to ask you, with genuine curiosity, what a satoshi is. So violently that the HOA letter about your mailbox color arrives and you frame it. So violently that the guy who called it tulips in 2017 opens every sentence at the block party with "well, I always said the technology itself was interesting." So violently that your Target Date 2055 fund, which parked 41 percent of your one life in bonds because an actuary in Malvern decided you were fragile, finally gets to rest. So violently that Applebee's 2 for $25 becomes a story you tell your grandchildren and they assume you are describing a prison. So violently that men in their forties feel something real in the Menards rebate aisle and have to sit in the truck for a minute with the engine off. So violently that someone laughs out loud in the Q3 all hands when they say "we're like a family here," and instead of getting fired he becomes the CEO. So violently that the $7,400 deductible your employer calls a High Deductible Health Plan With A Savings Component gets cleared in the time it takes to microwave a Hot Pocket. So violently that your brother in law, who has explained blockchain to you at four consecutive Thanksgivings while holding a Coors Light and getting it wrong in a new way each time, texts you at 2:14 a.m. asking how Coinbase works. So violently that the entire Stanley tumbler economy vaporizes in a single afternoon and the resale market moves to eBay, where it belongs. So violently that the boomer who bought his house in 1987 for $61,000 and calls you entitled becomes extremely interested in what exactly it is you do for work. So violently that "just 11 more years and I retire at 67" dissolves into the air alongside the Wells Fargo $12 monthly maintenance fee, which they waive if you maintain a $1,500 average daily balance, a sentence 1 human wrote and 7 humans approved. So violently that the 78 month auto loan joins leeches and the draft in the museum of things we agreed to when we were confused. So violently that Chase mails you a pre-approved Sapphire offer and you use it as a coaster in a house you own outright. The middle class was always a payment plan with a lifestyle stapled to the front. You read the prepayment clause. It was blank. Stay humble. Stack sats.

53,331 次观看

What happens if Bitcoin goes to $1,000,000 in 8 years and MSTR never issues another senior or preferred share? No new leverage. No new preferred stack. No mNAV expansion. Just Bitcoin going up and the current structure sitting there. At $63.2k BTC: MSTR implied price: ~$95.71 CEBE: ~143,535 sats/share CEBE mNAV: 1.055x At $1,000,000 BTC, with the exact same mNAV: MSTR implied price: ~$2,086 CEBE: ~197,678 sats/share Bitcoin return: 15.8x MSTR return: 21.8x That is ~38% more return than Bitcoin. Why? Because the senior/preferred claim stack is fixed in dollars. As Bitcoin rises, that claim stack collapses in BTC terms: ~310,379 BTC of senior claims today → ~19,616 BTC at $1M Bitcoin The common equity absorbs the difference. This is what you are getting in exchange for paying the STRC dividends. AMPLIFICATION of BITCOIN. This is what the market keeps missing. MSTR does not need the multiple to expand to outperform Bitcoin. It can outperform because fixed-dollar claims get nuked in Bitcoin terms. CEBE is the lens. Bitcoin is the detonator:

What happens if Bitcoin goes to $1,000,000 in 8 years and MSTR never issues another senior or preferred share? No new leverage. No new preferred stack. No mNAV expansion. Just Bitcoin going up and the current structure sitting there. At $63.2k BTC: MSTR implied price: ~$95.71 CEBE: ~143,535 sats/share CEBE mNAV: 1.055x At $1,000,000 BTC, with the exact same mNAV: MSTR implied price: ~$2,086 CEBE: ~197,678 sats/share Bitcoin return: 15.8x MSTR return: 21.8x That is ~38% more return than Bitcoin. Why? Because the senior/preferred claim stack is fixed in dollars. As Bitcoin rises, that claim stack collapses in BTC terms: ~310,379 BTC of senior claims today → ~19,616 BTC at $1M Bitcoin The common equity absorbs the difference. This is what you are getting in exchange for paying the STRC dividends. AMPLIFICATION of BITCOIN. This is what the market keeps missing. MSTR does not need the multiple to expand to outperform Bitcoin. It can outperform because fixed-dollar claims get nuked in Bitcoin terms. CEBE is the lens. Bitcoin is the detonator:

104,738 次观看

Good morning, everyone! It seems as though there are still people selling Bitcoin for $63,000. This is irrational, considering it is going to $1,000,000.

Good morning, everyone! It seems as though there are still people selling Bitcoin for $63,000. This is irrational, considering it is going to $1,000,000.

63,610 次观看

Great post by Matt here explaining why Bitcoin amplification can matter dramatically more than cost of capital. A lot of people like to obsess over the dividend rates, but what actually hits the common stock? It is cost × scale × amplification. Here’s an actual sensitivity test with two mathematical examples. I ran the exact same Bitcoin treasury model twice. They have the same BTC purchases, same preferred issuance, same capital structure, and same BTC path. The only thing I changed was the dividend rate on new preferred capital: 13% vs. 15%. If Bitcoin ends at $150K: 13% prefs → 26,662 sats/share 15% prefs → 26,466 sats/share Difference: 0.74% If Bitcoin ends at $250K: 13% prefs → 32,225 sats/share 15% prefs → 32,062 sats/share Difference: 0.50% Obviously, cheaper capital is better when everything else is equal. But that's the point. A 200 bps difference in preferred cost moved the modeled common-equity outcome by less than 1%. Matt's math is right. Now take the thought experiment one step further. Assume two companies each begin with $100M of common equity, Bitcoin rises 50%, and both can invest their preferred proceeds into Bitcoin. Company A can raise $50M of preferred capital at 13%. $150M of Bitcoin appreciates to $225M. Subtract $50M of preferred principal and $6.5M of dividends. Ending common equity: $168.5M Common equity return: +68.5% Company B has to pay 15%, but its investor base and liquidity allow it to raise twice as much: $100M. $200M of Bitcoin appreciates to $300M. Subtract $100M of preferred principal and $15M of dividends. Ending common equity: $185M Common equity return: +85.0% So the company paying the higher cost of capital produces the higher common-equity return: 13% financing → +68.5% 15% financing → +85.0% That is a 16.5 percentage point advantage despite paying 200 bps more for capital. Assuming an unchanged valuation multiple and no common-share dilution (could be accretive economically), those are also approximately the stock returns. This is why obsessing over the lowest possible preferred coupon can miss the bigger variable. Cost of capital matters, but how much accretive capital can you raise and deploy is a lot more important. Amplification overwhelmingly drives shareholder returns:

Great post by Matt here explaining why Bitcoin amplification can matter dramatically more than cost of capital. A lot of people like to obsess over the dividend rates, but what actually hits the common stock? It is cost × scale × amplification. Here’s an actual sensitivity test with two mathematical examples. I ran the exact same Bitcoin treasury model twice. They have the same BTC purchases, same preferred issuance, same capital structure, and same BTC path. The only thing I changed was the dividend rate on new preferred capital: 13% vs. 15%. If Bitcoin ends at $150K: 13% prefs → 26,662 sats/share 15% prefs → 26,466 sats/share Difference: 0.74% If Bitcoin ends at $250K: 13% prefs → 32,225 sats/share 15% prefs → 32,062 sats/share Difference: 0.50% Obviously, cheaper capital is better when everything else is equal. But that's the point. A 200 bps difference in preferred cost moved the modeled common-equity outcome by less than 1%. Matt's math is right. Now take the thought experiment one step further. Assume two companies each begin with $100M of common equity, Bitcoin rises 50%, and both can invest their preferred proceeds into Bitcoin. Company A can raise $50M of preferred capital at 13%. $150M of Bitcoin appreciates to $225M. Subtract $50M of preferred principal and $6.5M of dividends. Ending common equity: $168.5M Common equity return: +68.5% Company B has to pay 15%, but its investor base and liquidity allow it to raise twice as much: $100M. $200M of Bitcoin appreciates to $300M. Subtract $100M of preferred principal and $15M of dividends. Ending common equity: $185M Common equity return: +85.0% So the company paying the higher cost of capital produces the higher common-equity return: 13% financing → +68.5% 15% financing → +85.0% That is a 16.5 percentage point advantage despite paying 200 bps more for capital. Assuming an unchanged valuation multiple and no common-share dilution (could be accretive economically), those are also approximately the stock returns. This is why obsessing over the lowest possible preferred coupon can miss the bigger variable. Cost of capital matters, but how much accretive capital can you raise and deploy is a lot more important. Amplification overwhelmingly drives shareholder returns:

20,466 次观看

🚀METAPLANET MEGA EXPLOSION🚀 Alright, kids. Time to dust off the bullishness. These sad sack models SUCK. Bitcoin is going to become to global monetary base and Metaplanet is poised to take incredible advantage of that situation :) ASSUMPTIONS: BITCOIN GOES TO $600,000 BY JULY 2030. $50 MILLION PER MONTH ISSUED IN PREFS AT 5% DIVIDEND RATE. mNAV GOES TO 2.0. At $600.00K BTC: Ending BTC stack: 58,246 ₿ Ending CEBE sats/share: 3,999 CEBE Sats Yield: 11.0% annualized Ending implied stock price: $47.99 Total return vs today: 2,937% Metaplanet only ends with 58,246 Bitcoin. LOL. But the stock 30x's from here. $48 MPJPY. A 30x for Metaplanet versus a 9.3x for Bitcoin. THE JAPANESE HOTEL COMPANY WILL REACH ETERNAL GLORY:

🚀METAPLANET MEGA EXPLOSION🚀 Alright, kids. Time to dust off the bullishness. These sad sack models SUCK. Bitcoin is going to become to global monetary base and Metaplanet is poised to take incredible advantage of that situation :) ASSUMPTIONS: BITCOIN GOES TO $600,000 BY JULY 2030. $50 MILLION PER MONTH ISSUED IN PREFS AT 5% DIVIDEND RATE. mNAV GOES TO 2.0. At $600.00K BTC: Ending BTC stack: 58,246 ₿ Ending CEBE sats/share: 3,999 CEBE Sats Yield: 11.0% annualized Ending implied stock price: $47.99 Total return vs today: 2,937% Metaplanet only ends with 58,246 Bitcoin. LOL. But the stock 30x's from here. $48 MPJPY. A 30x for Metaplanet versus a 9.3x for Bitcoin. THE JAPANESE HOTEL COMPANY WILL REACH ETERNAL GLORY:

72,142 次观看

Why I like buying MSTR over IBIT: IBIT = 1:1 Bitcoin exposure. MSTR = 1:1 Bitcoin exposure PLUS consistent growth in Bitcoin per share. BTC grows at whatever CAGR the market gives you. MSTR grows BTC holdings per share on top of that. That’s convexity. That’s leverage without liquidation. That’s why I buy MSTR over IBIT. In a world where exposure is free, I want the asset that increases my exposure every year. 30% BTC CAGR and 10% BTC Yield gets you 2.58x outperformance over a decade. $100k into IBIT: $1,378,600 after 10 years $100k into MSTR: $3,560,000 after 10 years I'll take a 35.6x over a 13.8x. 158% outperformance.

Why I like buying MSTR over IBIT: IBIT = 1:1 Bitcoin exposure. MSTR = 1:1 Bitcoin exposure PLUS consistent growth in Bitcoin per share. BTC grows at whatever CAGR the market gives you. MSTR grows BTC holdings per share on top of that. That’s convexity. That’s leverage without liquidation. That’s why I buy MSTR over IBIT. In a world where exposure is free, I want the asset that increases my exposure every year. 30% BTC CAGR and 10% BTC Yield gets you 2.58x outperformance over a decade. $100k into IBIT: $1,378,600 after 10 years $100k into MSTR: $3,560,000 after 10 years I'll take a 35.6x over a 13.8x. 158% outperformance.

132,040 次观看

🚀ASST TO $700 PER SHARE?!?🚀 YOU THINK I'M JOKING? THINK AGAIN, BUCKO. Current ASST snapshot: BTC holdings: 15,000.5 BTC BTC price: $80,593 Bitcoin NAV: $1.21B Total debt: $10M Preferred outstanding: $495.95M Debt + preferred: $505.95M Amplification ratio: 41.9% Current stock price: $15.85 Now here’s the model, and this isn't MOONBOY NONSENSE, kids. This is with Bitcoin at $750k in 2036, not $1 million in 2034. ASST maintains their current 41.9% amplification ratio for 10 years. Translation for normal people: For every $1.00 of Bitcoin NAV, ASST keeps roughly $0.419 of senior claims through debt/preferred financing. The bears hear that and immediately start sweating through a Men’s Wearhouse suit. But this is the actual machine. As Bitcoin rises, the Bitcoin NAV rises. When the NAV rises, the old preferred stack becomes smaller relative to the treasury. So ASST issues more SATA to keep amplification at 41.9%. That new SATA capital buys more Bitcoin. Then Bitcoin goes up again. Then the NAV goes up again. Then the amplification ratio drops again. Then they issue more SATA again. Then they buy more Bitcoin again. This is how you turn a balance sheet into a legally registered orange crocodile. Now we add the funding mix: 75% of new Bitcoin accumulation comes from SATA. 25% comes from issuing common stock. And the common stock is issued at 1.2x EV mNAV. Meaning they are selling equity at a 20% premium to the enterprise value of the Bitcoin stack. That matters. Because issuing common below NAV is financial self-harm. Issuing common above NAV is accretive treasury sorcery. Now assume Bitcoin compounds at 25% per year for 10 years. BTC price goes from: $80,593 today to roughly: $750,579 in year 10 That is a 9.3x move in Bitcoin. Now what happens to ASST? Starting BTC stack: 15,000.5 BTC Projected year 10 BTC stack: 143,425 BTC That is 9.6x more Bitcoin. Starting Bitcoin NAV: $1.21B Projected year 10 Bitcoin NAV: $107.65B That is 89x larger. Now the bears will say: “BUT THE PREFERREDS!” Yes, Carl. The preferreds are the point. Senior claims rise from $505.95M to $45.11B because the model intentionally keeps amplification at 41.9%. That sounds terrifying until you remember the Bitcoin NAV grew to $107.65B. The stack got bigger. The senior claims got bigger. The common equity claim got bigger too. This is where CEBE comes in. CEBE = Common Equity Bitcoin Exposure. It answers the only question that matters: After debt and preferred holders get their claim, how much Bitcoin exposure does the common shareholder really own? Today: Gross BPS: 20,222 sats CEBE/share: 11,759 sats Year 10: Gross BPS: 95,380 sats CEBE/share: 55,416 sats That means common-equity Bitcoin exposure per share rises about 4.7x. Even after common issuance. Even after maintaining the preferred stack. Even after the bears finish their sacred ritual of screaming “DILUTION” into a spreadsheet they opened sideways. Now the share count. Current implied diluted shares: 74.2M Projected year 10 shares: 150.4M So yes, the share count roughly doubles in this model. But the Bitcoin stack goes 9.6x. This is the entire game. If Bitcoin holdings grow much faster than shares outstanding, the common shareholder’s Bitcoin exposure goes up. The bears think all issuance is bad because they learned finance from a Yahoo message board during a divorce. The actual question is: Does issuance increase Bitcoin per share after senior claims? In this model, yes. Now the stock price. Strict 1.2x EV mNAV model gets ASST to about: $559/share But if we anchor the model to today’s actual ASST price of $15.85, the same growth path gets you to roughly: $696/share Call it $700. There it is. ASST to $700 per share is not “vibes.” It is a model. BTC compounds at 25%. SATA funds 75% of accumulation. Common funds 25% at 1.2x EV mNAV. Amplification stays at 41.9%. BTC stack grows from 15,000 BTC to 143,425 BTC. Bitcoin NAV goes from $1.21B to $107.65B. CEBE/share goes from 11,759 sats to 55,416 sats. The stock goes from $15.85 to roughly $700. This is why small Bitcoin treasury companies are so insane. Strategy is the Death Star. ASST is the weird little orange lab experiment in the basement where someone accidentally discovers corporate finance methamphetamine. Tiny denominator. Preferred financing. Bitcoin accumulation. Premium equity issuance. CEBE expansion. A compounding treasury loop. The bear case is that dilution kills the common. The bull case is that accretive dilution plus preferred financing creates a Bitcoin-per-share machine that eats capital markets and leaves behind a pile of traumatized short sellers asking why their model still says “book value.” ASST to $700? If the machine works, yes. If Bitcoin does 25% CAGR, absolutely possible. If SATA scales and common gets issued above NAV, the goblin gets fed. And once the goblin gets fed, the spreadsheet starts looking like it was written by Saylor, Dylan LeClair, and a sleep-deprived Austrian economist locked inside a treasury dashboard with three Celsius energy drinks. This is not financial advice. This is FINANCIAL ENTERTAINMENT:

🚀ASST TO $700 PER SHARE?!?🚀 YOU THINK I'M JOKING? THINK AGAIN, BUCKO. Current ASST snapshot: BTC holdings: 15,000.5 BTC BTC price: $80,593 Bitcoin NAV: $1.21B Total debt: $10M Preferred outstanding: $495.95M Debt + preferred: $505.95M Amplification ratio: 41.9% Current stock price: $15.85 Now here’s the model, and this isn't MOONBOY NONSENSE, kids. This is with Bitcoin at $750k in 2036, not $1 million in 2034. ASST maintains their current 41.9% amplification ratio for 10 years. Translation for normal people: For every $1.00 of Bitcoin NAV, ASST keeps roughly $0.419 of senior claims through debt/preferred financing. The bears hear that and immediately start sweating through a Men’s Wearhouse suit. But this is the actual machine. As Bitcoin rises, the Bitcoin NAV rises. When the NAV rises, the old preferred stack becomes smaller relative to the treasury. So ASST issues more SATA to keep amplification at 41.9%. That new SATA capital buys more Bitcoin. Then Bitcoin goes up again. Then the NAV goes up again. Then the amplification ratio drops again. Then they issue more SATA again. Then they buy more Bitcoin again. This is how you turn a balance sheet into a legally registered orange crocodile. Now we add the funding mix: 75% of new Bitcoin accumulation comes from SATA. 25% comes from issuing common stock. And the common stock is issued at 1.2x EV mNAV. Meaning they are selling equity at a 20% premium to the enterprise value of the Bitcoin stack. That matters. Because issuing common below NAV is financial self-harm. Issuing common above NAV is accretive treasury sorcery. Now assume Bitcoin compounds at 25% per year for 10 years. BTC price goes from: $80,593 today to roughly: $750,579 in year 10 That is a 9.3x move in Bitcoin. Now what happens to ASST? Starting BTC stack: 15,000.5 BTC Projected year 10 BTC stack: 143,425 BTC That is 9.6x more Bitcoin. Starting Bitcoin NAV: $1.21B Projected year 10 Bitcoin NAV: $107.65B That is 89x larger. Now the bears will say: “BUT THE PREFERREDS!” Yes, Carl. The preferreds are the point. Senior claims rise from $505.95M to $45.11B because the model intentionally keeps amplification at 41.9%. That sounds terrifying until you remember the Bitcoin NAV grew to $107.65B. The stack got bigger. The senior claims got bigger. The common equity claim got bigger too. This is where CEBE comes in. CEBE = Common Equity Bitcoin Exposure. It answers the only question that matters: After debt and preferred holders get their claim, how much Bitcoin exposure does the common shareholder really own? Today: Gross BPS: 20,222 sats CEBE/share: 11,759 sats Year 10: Gross BPS: 95,380 sats CEBE/share: 55,416 sats That means common-equity Bitcoin exposure per share rises about 4.7x. Even after common issuance. Even after maintaining the preferred stack. Even after the bears finish their sacred ritual of screaming “DILUTION” into a spreadsheet they opened sideways. Now the share count. Current implied diluted shares: 74.2M Projected year 10 shares: 150.4M So yes, the share count roughly doubles in this model. But the Bitcoin stack goes 9.6x. This is the entire game. If Bitcoin holdings grow much faster than shares outstanding, the common shareholder’s Bitcoin exposure goes up. The bears think all issuance is bad because they learned finance from a Yahoo message board during a divorce. The actual question is: Does issuance increase Bitcoin per share after senior claims? In this model, yes. Now the stock price. Strict 1.2x EV mNAV model gets ASST to about: $559/share But if we anchor the model to today’s actual ASST price of $15.85, the same growth path gets you to roughly: $696/share Call it $700. There it is. ASST to $700 per share is not “vibes.” It is a model. BTC compounds at 25%. SATA funds 75% of accumulation. Common funds 25% at 1.2x EV mNAV. Amplification stays at 41.9%. BTC stack grows from 15,000 BTC to 143,425 BTC. Bitcoin NAV goes from $1.21B to $107.65B. CEBE/share goes from 11,759 sats to 55,416 sats. The stock goes from $15.85 to roughly $700. This is why small Bitcoin treasury companies are so insane. Strategy is the Death Star. ASST is the weird little orange lab experiment in the basement where someone accidentally discovers corporate finance methamphetamine. Tiny denominator. Preferred financing. Bitcoin accumulation. Premium equity issuance. CEBE expansion. A compounding treasury loop. The bear case is that dilution kills the common. The bull case is that accretive dilution plus preferred financing creates a Bitcoin-per-share machine that eats capital markets and leaves behind a pile of traumatized short sellers asking why their model still says “book value.” ASST to $700? If the machine works, yes. If Bitcoin does 25% CAGR, absolutely possible. If SATA scales and common gets issued above NAV, the goblin gets fed. And once the goblin gets fed, the spreadsheet starts looking like it was written by Saylor, Dylan LeClair, and a sleep-deprived Austrian economist locked inside a treasury dashboard with three Celsius energy drinks. This is not financial advice. This is FINANCIAL ENTERTAINMENT:

66,707 次观看

You will learn CEBE because it is the future. Trust the math. Not feelings. $MSTR $BTC

You will learn CEBE because it is the future. Trust the math. Not feelings. $MSTR $BTC

49,090 次观看

BITCOIN IS DIGITAL CAPITAL. $BTC

BITCOIN IS DIGITAL CAPITAL. $BTC

57,817 次观看

Strategy vs. the top corporate treasuries over the next 20 years. BTC at a 35% CAGR vs. 8% USD debasement. Strategy is becoming a company of totally unparalleled financial strength.

Strategy vs. the top corporate treasuries over the next 20 years. BTC at a 35% CAGR vs. 8% USD debasement. Strategy is becoming a company of totally unparalleled financial strength.

122,374 次观看

🔥STRATEGY WILL BE THE WORLD'S MOST VALUABLE COMPANY🔥 Strategy bought OVER 56,000 Bitcoin in April. That number is so absurd people are psychologically incapable of processing it. Post-halving miners produce roughly 13,500 BTC per month. Strategy just bought about 4.1x an entire month of new miner supply in one month. Now run the simple monster math: Today: Strategy BTC stack: 818,334 BTC Bitcoin price: $76,196 Bitcoin NAV: $62.35B Assume Strategy keeps buying 56,000 BTC per month for 5 years. That is: ASSUMING STRC GROWTH TOTALLY STOPS (LOL) ~672,000 BTC per year ~3,360,000 BTC over 5 years Their stack goes from: 818,334 BTC to 4,178,334 BTC Now assume Bitcoin compounds at 25% CAGR. Bitcoin goes from: $76,196 to roughly: $232,532 So the Bitcoin NAV becomes: 4,178,334 BTC × $232,532 = roughly $971.5 BILLION Almost $1 TRILLION in Bitcoin NAV. And the funniest part? This model assumes no mNAV expansion. No premium insanity. No additional acceleration. No credit flywheel getting stronger. No market panic as everyone realizes Strategy is vacuuming Bitcoin off the planet like a publicly traded monetary black hole. Just: 56,000 BTC per month. 25% Bitcoin CAGR. 5 years. That’s it. Don't think they can accumulate that much Bitcoin at that low of a CAGR? Think the Bitcoin CAGR has to go higher? Cool. That only helps Strategy buy more Bitcoin. The bear case is basically: “Sure, they are absorbing multiples of new supply, building the largest corporate Bitcoin balance sheet in history, converting fiat capital markets into Bitcoin ownership, and compounding NAV at escape velocity, but have you considered that I am emotionally upset?” MSTR is becoming the most aggressive Bitcoin accumulation machine ever built. The fiat world is still modeling it like a tech stock with a weird treasury policy. GOOD LUCK.

🔥STRATEGY WILL BE THE WORLD'S MOST VALUABLE COMPANY🔥 Strategy bought OVER 56,000 Bitcoin in April. That number is so absurd people are psychologically incapable of processing it. Post-halving miners produce roughly 13,500 BTC per month. Strategy just bought about 4.1x an entire month of new miner supply in one month. Now run the simple monster math: Today: Strategy BTC stack: 818,334 BTC Bitcoin price: $76,196 Bitcoin NAV: $62.35B Assume Strategy keeps buying 56,000 BTC per month for 5 years. That is: ASSUMING STRC GROWTH TOTALLY STOPS (LOL) ~672,000 BTC per year ~3,360,000 BTC over 5 years Their stack goes from: 818,334 BTC to 4,178,334 BTC Now assume Bitcoin compounds at 25% CAGR. Bitcoin goes from: $76,196 to roughly: $232,532 So the Bitcoin NAV becomes: 4,178,334 BTC × $232,532 = roughly $971.5 BILLION Almost $1 TRILLION in Bitcoin NAV. And the funniest part? This model assumes no mNAV expansion. No premium insanity. No additional acceleration. No credit flywheel getting stronger. No market panic as everyone realizes Strategy is vacuuming Bitcoin off the planet like a publicly traded monetary black hole. Just: 56,000 BTC per month. 25% Bitcoin CAGR. 5 years. That’s it. Don't think they can accumulate that much Bitcoin at that low of a CAGR? Think the Bitcoin CAGR has to go higher? Cool. That only helps Strategy buy more Bitcoin. The bear case is basically: “Sure, they are absorbing multiples of new supply, building the largest corporate Bitcoin balance sheet in history, converting fiat capital markets into Bitcoin ownership, and compounding NAV at escape velocity, but have you considered that I am emotionally upset?” MSTR is becoming the most aggressive Bitcoin accumulation machine ever built. The fiat world is still modeling it like a tech stock with a weird treasury policy. GOOD LUCK.

61,611 次观看

🔥THE SIMPLE PATH TO $1,000 MSTR🔥 I modeled Strategy buying BTC at its current 2026 pace of 1,822 BTC per business day all the way through EOY 2027. Assumptions: BTC goes from $77K to $275K ($275k is the Power Law trend price EOY 2027, not moonboi nonsense) Every purchase is funded with 100% STRC issuance STRC costs 11.5% Strategy sells BTC every month to pay the dividend The cool part about this is that it shows what happens if STRC adoption stays flat from here, when in reality it is scaling quickly. Starting point: 843,738 BTC $13.52B preferred $8.21B debt 384.2M diluted shares Result by Dec 2027: Gross BTC bought: 743,246 BTC sold for dividends: 66,942 Net BTC added: 676,304 Ending stack: 1,520,042 BTC CEBE/share: 146K sats → 251K sats CEBE NAV/share: $112.56 → $691.01 If the market keeps paying today’s 1.48x price-to-CEBE multiple, the common stock projects to: $166.63 → $1,022.75 So the “crippling” 11.5% cost of capital ends up forcing monthly BTC sales of only 66.9K BTC total, while the machine inhales 743K BTC gross. Wall Street built a preferred-stock blood bank for a Bitcoin black hole, and the black hole is still hungry. Boom. Not hard. Bitcoin reverts back to trend price and Strategy stays on the pace they're on. $1,000 MSTR. If this math is even directionally right, people are grotesquely underestimating what happens when scarce collateral is funded by infinite boomer paper.

🔥THE SIMPLE PATH TO $1,000 MSTR🔥 I modeled Strategy buying BTC at its current 2026 pace of 1,822 BTC per business day all the way through EOY 2027. Assumptions: BTC goes from $77K to $275K ($275k is the Power Law trend price EOY 2027, not moonboi nonsense) Every purchase is funded with 100% STRC issuance STRC costs 11.5% Strategy sells BTC every month to pay the dividend The cool part about this is that it shows what happens if STRC adoption stays flat from here, when in reality it is scaling quickly. Starting point: 843,738 BTC $13.52B preferred $8.21B debt 384.2M diluted shares Result by Dec 2027: Gross BTC bought: 743,246 BTC sold for dividends: 66,942 Net BTC added: 676,304 Ending stack: 1,520,042 BTC CEBE/share: 146K sats → 251K sats CEBE NAV/share: $112.56 → $691.01 If the market keeps paying today’s 1.48x price-to-CEBE multiple, the common stock projects to: $166.63 → $1,022.75 So the “crippling” 11.5% cost of capital ends up forcing monthly BTC sales of only 66.9K BTC total, while the machine inhales 743K BTC gross. Wall Street built a preferred-stock blood bank for a Bitcoin black hole, and the black hole is still hungry. Boom. Not hard. Bitcoin reverts back to trend price and Strategy stays on the pace they're on. $1,000 MSTR. If this math is even directionally right, people are grotesquely underestimating what happens when scarce collateral is funded by infinite boomer paper.

54,471 次观看

HOW BADLY DO WE NEED $STRC BACK AT PAR? Turning the STRC machine back on would juice MSTR’s return by as much as 11.55 percentage points on the exact same move to $100,000 Bitcoin... with zero mNAV expansion. Bitcoin goes from $64,846 to $100,000: +54.21%. With no new STRC, MSTR goes from $97.91 to $172.66: +76.35%, beating Bitcoin by 22.13 points. Then we restart the preferred trebuchet: $500M/month → MSTR +79.26% → beats BTC by 25.05 points $1B/month → MSTR +82.16% → beats BTC by 27.95 points $1.5B/month → MSTR +85.04% → beats BTC by 30.83 points $2B/month → MSTR +87.90% → beats BTC by 33.69 points The incremental return created specifically by new STRC is 2.92%, 5.81%, 8.69% and 11.55%, respectively. At $2B per month, STRC generates 13.14% of MSTR’s entire return and 34.29% of its outperformance over Bitcoin. Issuing $24B over the year buys 301,208 BTC at an average modeled price of $79,679. Those coins are worth $30.12B when Bitcoin reaches $100,000, while the additional preferred principal remains . That creates $6.12B of gross residual common equity before the associated dividend and dilution drag. After including that drag, CEBE still finishes 10,916 sats per share above the zero-issuance scenario, adding $11.31 to MSTR’s ending share price. Credit investors get a 12% coupon and a warm glass of milk. Common shareholders get whatever survives when $100,000 Bitcoin runs the fixed-dollar liability through an industrial meat grinder. The preferred stack is expensive capital when Bitcoin goes sideways. On an orderly climb, it becomes a machine for purchasing BTC below its destination price while the liability remains frozen in dollars. I love Strategy's model. It's simple. Continue to manufacture yield for the dollar economy, and then harvest the residual convexity for common shareholders:

HOW BADLY DO WE NEED $STRC BACK AT PAR? Turning the STRC machine back on would juice MSTR’s return by as much as 11.55 percentage points on the exact same move to $100,000 Bitcoin... with zero mNAV expansion. Bitcoin goes from $64,846 to $100,000: +54.21%. With no new STRC, MSTR goes from $97.91 to $172.66: +76.35%, beating Bitcoin by 22.13 points. Then we restart the preferred trebuchet: $500M/month → MSTR +79.26% → beats BTC by 25.05 points $1B/month → MSTR +82.16% → beats BTC by 27.95 points $1.5B/month → MSTR +85.04% → beats BTC by 30.83 points $2B/month → MSTR +87.90% → beats BTC by 33.69 points The incremental return created specifically by new STRC is 2.92%, 5.81%, 8.69% and 11.55%, respectively. At $2B per month, STRC generates 13.14% of MSTR’s entire return and 34.29% of its outperformance over Bitcoin. Issuing $24B over the year buys 301,208 BTC at an average modeled price of $79,679. Those coins are worth $30.12B when Bitcoin reaches $100,000, while the additional preferred principal remains . That creates $6.12B of gross residual common equity before the associated dividend and dilution drag. After including that drag, CEBE still finishes 10,916 sats per share above the zero-issuance scenario, adding $11.31 to MSTR’s ending share price. Credit investors get a 12% coupon and a warm glass of milk. Common shareholders get whatever survives when $100,000 Bitcoin runs the fixed-dollar liability through an industrial meat grinder. The preferred stack is expensive capital when Bitcoin goes sideways. On an orderly climb, it becomes a machine for purchasing BTC below its destination price while the liability remains frozen in dollars. I love Strategy's model. It's simple. Continue to manufacture yield for the dollar economy, and then harvest the residual convexity for common shareholders:

33,368 次观看

BITCOIN VS. THE S&P 500 - THE NEXT 10 YEARS There is a lot of talk and crying about how Bitcoin has diminishing returns and it's not worth the volatility. And to that I say: LOL. Since January 1st, 2020: Bitcoin CAGR: 44% Bitcoin Vol: 60% SPY CAGR: 14% SPY Vol: 20% Bitcoin gave you roughly 3x the volatility but slightly more than 3x the compound growth rate. Now lets walk forward a decade, SEVERELY HANDICAPPING Bitcoin but not touching S&P 500. Yup. Let's cut Bitcoin's CAGR and Vol in HALF. New BTC CAGR: 22% New BTC Vol: 30% Now a Monte Carlo simulation of a $10,000 investment in each with 100,000 paths! Median ending value: Bitcoin: $72,827 (7.3x return) SPY: $37,046 (3.7x return) 5th percentile return: Bitcoin: $15,105 SPY: $13,091 95th percentile: Bitcoin: $347,226 SPY: $104,765 The chance of your investment winding up greater than $100k: Bitcoin: 36.8% SPY: 5.8% Let's run it again with 6% inflation eating both of them. Real CAGR after the government takes its cut: Bitcoin: 15.1% SPY: 7.5% Median ending value: Bitcoin: $40,666 (4.1x) SPY: $20,686 (2.1x) 5th percentile: Bitcoin: $8,435 SPY: $7,310 Yes, both of them lose in the left tail. Inflation stays undefeated down there. Choose your poison honestly. 95th percentile: Bitcoin: $193,889 SPY: $58,500 Odds of simply keeping your purchasing power: Bitcoin: 93.1% SPY: 87.5% Odds of ending with more than $100,000 in today's dollars: Bitcoin: 17.2% SPY: 0.6% Nominally that gap was 6x. In real terms it becomes 27x, because $100k sits way out on the S&P's skinny little tail. I handicapped Bitcoin with half the return, half the volatility, and Bitcoin still buys the house while SPY buys the down payment. Bitcoin remains the APEX GROWTH ASSET and the S&P 500 remains the preferred choice for khaki-wearing midwits stuck in a beige office chair from 1994:

BITCOIN VS. THE S&P 500 - THE NEXT 10 YEARS There is a lot of talk and crying about how Bitcoin has diminishing returns and it's not worth the volatility. And to that I say: LOL. Since January 1st, 2020: Bitcoin CAGR: 44% Bitcoin Vol: 60% SPY CAGR: 14% SPY Vol: 20% Bitcoin gave you roughly 3x the volatility but slightly more than 3x the compound growth rate. Now lets walk forward a decade, SEVERELY HANDICAPPING Bitcoin but not touching S&P 500. Yup. Let's cut Bitcoin's CAGR and Vol in HALF. New BTC CAGR: 22% New BTC Vol: 30% Now a Monte Carlo simulation of a $10,000 investment in each with 100,000 paths! Median ending value: Bitcoin: $72,827 (7.3x return) SPY: $37,046 (3.7x return) 5th percentile return: Bitcoin: $15,105 SPY: $13,091 95th percentile: Bitcoin: $347,226 SPY: $104,765 The chance of your investment winding up greater than $100k: Bitcoin: 36.8% SPY: 5.8% Let's run it again with 6% inflation eating both of them. Real CAGR after the government takes its cut: Bitcoin: 15.1% SPY: 7.5% Median ending value: Bitcoin: $40,666 (4.1x) SPY: $20,686 (2.1x) 5th percentile: Bitcoin: $8,435 SPY: $7,310 Yes, both of them lose in the left tail. Inflation stays undefeated down there. Choose your poison honestly. 95th percentile: Bitcoin: $193,889 SPY: $58,500 Odds of simply keeping your purchasing power: Bitcoin: 93.1% SPY: 87.5% Odds of ending with more than $100,000 in today's dollars: Bitcoin: 17.2% SPY: 0.6% Nominally that gap was 6x. In real terms it becomes 27x, because $100k sits way out on the S&P's skinny little tail. I handicapped Bitcoin with half the return, half the volatility, and Bitcoin still buys the house while SPY buys the down payment. Bitcoin remains the APEX GROWTH ASSET and the S&P 500 remains the preferred choice for khaki-wearing midwits stuck in a beige office chair from 1994:

19,930 次观看

Videos

LIVE
1.2k

Anya Rossi

sweetdream.ai

SweetDream.aiSponsored•Livecam
Streaming Now

Watch Anya Live

Anya is streaming live right now! Join her private show and enjoy exclusive content.

HD live stream
Exclusive private shows
1.2k viewers online

Free preview available • Premium content

Saylor succinctly explains difference between MSTR and all the different Strategy credit instruments in 3 minutes. This should be your go-to video for the quick primer for anyone in your life who wants to easily understand the different investments.
3:14
AdamBLiv's profile picture

Saylor succinctly explains difference between MSTR and all the different Strategy credit instruments in 3 minutes. This should be your go-to video for the quick primer for anyone in your life who wants to easily understand the different investments.

Adam Livingston

1,801,626 次观看 • 11 个月前

Saylor telling you how you can get 10% tax-free dividends with $STRC: "The tax-equivalent yield is 16-20%. It's like a bank paying you 20% interest. It's because we're built on Bitcoin. A Bitcoin treasury company is the most tax-efficient fixed income generator in the world."
1:19
AdamBLiv's profile picture

Saylor telling you how you can get 10% tax-free dividends with $STRC: "The tax-equivalent yield is 16-20%. It's like a bank paying you 20% interest. It's because we're built on Bitcoin. A Bitcoin treasury company is the most tax-efficient fixed income generator in the world."

Adam Livingston

1,043,161 次观看 • 11 个月前

Everyone thinks the stock market has been ripping since 2020. It has. In dollars. The reality is... Bitcoin has ruined index investing for me. Priced in gold, the S&P's 4-year moving average is up just 2%. Priced in Bitcoin, it's down 93%. The question isn't "what did the market do?" It's "what are you measuring it in?" Bitcoin is the apex asset:
0:20
AdamBLiv's profile picture

Everyone thinks the stock market has been ripping since 2020. It has. In dollars. The reality is... Bitcoin has ruined index investing for me. Priced in gold, the S&P's 4-year moving average is up just 2%. Priced in Bitcoin, it's down 93%. The question isn't "what did the market do?" It's "what are you measuring it in?" Bitcoin is the apex asset:

Adam Livingston

33,712 次观看 • 16 天前

Why are we at $63,000 Bitcoin in 2026... and why will it be $200k soon? Let me tell you. Because the move above $100,000 was the largest economic changing of the guard Bitcoin has ever seen. And almost everyone is looking at the aftermath backwards. Bitcoin spent 340 days in its six-figure regime. On December 8, 2024, Bitcoin closed at roughly $101,000. By November 12, 2025, it was still roughly $101,000. Price change? Basically ZERO. But underneath the surface, something absolutely enormous happened. Bitcoin's realized price - essentially the aggregate on-chain cost basis of the network - exploded from $38,233 to $56,194. That's +47%. Read that again. Bitcoin spent almost a YEAR going sideways while the economic acquisition basis underneath the entire asset repriced nearly 50% higher. Why? Because OGs were selling. And for the first time in Bitcoin's history, the market had enough liquidity at six-figure prices to absorb an absolutely gigantic redistribution of ancient coins. The data is insane. During this period, the trailing-year share of spent Bitcoin coming from: 2+ year old coins reached the 99.2nd percentile historically. 5+ year old coins reached the 99.7th percentile. 10+ year old coins reached roughly the 98th percentile. Long-Term Holder Coin Days Destroyed confirms the same thing. 2025 produced 5.79 BILLION LTH coin-days destroyed. The highest calendar-year total in the dataset. Even higher than 2017. And 58% higher than 2021. Combine 2024 + 2025 and you get: 11.47 BILLION long-term-holder coin-days destroyed. That's 47% more than the 2016–2017 cycle. And 65% more than 2020–2021. This was an enormous transfer of Bitcoin from ancient, low-cost-basis holders into an entirely new ownership base. At the end of 2023, coins older than two years represented 40.8% of Bitcoin's realized capitalization. By November 2025? 13.2%. And capital represented by coins younger than one year exploded from 43.8% to 74.1%. That's the changing of the guard. Think about what actually happens economically when an OG who bought Bitcoin at $1,000 sells it for $100,000. The supply of Bitcoin doesn't change. But the CHARACTER of that supply changes dramatically. The seller had a 100x embedded gain and enormous incentive to monetize. The new buyer has a $100,000 cost basis. You have replaced an incredibly profitable latent seller... ...with someone who just committed $100,000 of fresh capital to own the exact same coin. Do this across millions of economically ancient coins and you haven't merely changed ownership. You have RECAPITALIZED the network. Bitcoin eventually fell almost 50% from its $124,700 ATH. Yet realized price barely gave back the enormous increase created during the redistribution. At the first $100k close, the realized price was $38,233. Today the realized price is ~$52,645. So while spot Bitcoin fell from $101k to ~$62k... The aggregate network cost basis is STILL 38% HIGHER. The price got crushed. The capitalization reset survived. And now comes the part I think almost everyone is missing. Those "new buyers" aren't new anymore. At the end of the six-figure regime, coins aged 6 months–2 years represented about 32.8% of realized cap. Today? 59.2%. Nearly SIXTY PERCENT of Bitcoin's realized capitalization now sits in coins that haven't moved for 6–24 months. The hot money is seasoning. The new ownership cohort is becoming the long-term holder cohort. And ancient-holder spending has COLLAPSED from its 2025 highs. On a trailing 180-day basis: 2+ year spending intensity: down ~62%. 3+ year: down ~69%. 5+ year: down ~51%. The OG supply avalanche is drying up. So zoom out. In 2024–2025, old, massively profitable holders distributed into unprecedented liquidity. Bitcoin absorbed it. The network cost basis exploded higher. Price eventually corrected. The new holders DIDN'T collectively dump their coins back onto the market. They aged. Now Bitcoin sits around $62,000 with a realized price near $52,600. The speculative premium has been annihilated. At $100k, Bitcoin traded around 2.65x realized price. Today? About 1.19x. The market has compressed almost all the way back toward aggregate cost basis... AFTER one of the largest economic ownership resets in Bitcoin history. And this is where $200,000 becomes interesting. Bitcoin just needs another demand expansion against a supply base that has already been dramatically recapitalized. If realized price climbs toward $70,000 during the next expansion... $200,000 Bitcoin would represent about 2.86x realized price. The peak of the most recent cycle was already ~2.77x. In other words... you don't need 2017 insanity. You don't even need 2021 insanity. You need continued capitalization of the network combined with a holder base that is now dramatically less eager to sell at the prices where the previous generation unloaded. THAT is the setup. The $100,000 was a massive clearing event. Bitcoin used six-figure liquidity to transfer ancient coins out of the hands of people sitting on absurd gains... ...and into the hands of investors willing to capitalize the network at vastly higher prices. Then the bear market compressed the speculative premium while leaving much of that higher cost basis intact. Now the coins are aging. OG spending is fading. The network has been recapitalized. And the next wave of demand will be competing against a very different supply curve. $62,000 Bitcoin looks depressing if you're staring at the chart. It looks completely different when you look at WHO owns the coins now. This may be the most important holder redistribution Bitcoin has ever experienced. And I think we're watching the foundation for the move to $200,000+ being built in real time.
0:24
AdamBLiv's profile picture

Why are we at $63,000 Bitcoin in 2026... and why will it be $200k soon? Let me tell you. Because the move above $100,000 was the largest economic changing of the guard Bitcoin has ever seen. And almost everyone is looking at the aftermath backwards. Bitcoin spent 340 days in its six-figure regime. On December 8, 2024, Bitcoin closed at roughly $101,000. By November 12, 2025, it was still roughly $101,000. Price change? Basically ZERO. But underneath the surface, something absolutely enormous happened. Bitcoin's realized price - essentially the aggregate on-chain cost basis of the network - exploded from $38,233 to $56,194. That's +47%. Read that again. Bitcoin spent almost a YEAR going sideways while the economic acquisition basis underneath the entire asset repriced nearly 50% higher. Why? Because OGs were selling. And for the first time in Bitcoin's history, the market had enough liquidity at six-figure prices to absorb an absolutely gigantic redistribution of ancient coins. The data is insane. During this period, the trailing-year share of spent Bitcoin coming from: 2+ year old coins reached the 99.2nd percentile historically. 5+ year old coins reached the 99.7th percentile. 10+ year old coins reached roughly the 98th percentile. Long-Term Holder Coin Days Destroyed confirms the same thing. 2025 produced 5.79 BILLION LTH coin-days destroyed. The highest calendar-year total in the dataset. Even higher than 2017. And 58% higher than 2021. Combine 2024 + 2025 and you get: 11.47 BILLION long-term-holder coin-days destroyed. That's 47% more than the 2016–2017 cycle. And 65% more than 2020–2021. This was an enormous transfer of Bitcoin from ancient, low-cost-basis holders into an entirely new ownership base. At the end of 2023, coins older than two years represented 40.8% of Bitcoin's realized capitalization. By November 2025? 13.2%. And capital represented by coins younger than one year exploded from 43.8% to 74.1%. That's the changing of the guard. Think about what actually happens economically when an OG who bought Bitcoin at $1,000 sells it for $100,000. The supply of Bitcoin doesn't change. But the CHARACTER of that supply changes dramatically. The seller had a 100x embedded gain and enormous incentive to monetize. The new buyer has a $100,000 cost basis. You have replaced an incredibly profitable latent seller... ...with someone who just committed $100,000 of fresh capital to own the exact same coin. Do this across millions of economically ancient coins and you haven't merely changed ownership. You have RECAPITALIZED the network. Bitcoin eventually fell almost 50% from its $124,700 ATH. Yet realized price barely gave back the enormous increase created during the redistribution. At the first $100k close, the realized price was $38,233. Today the realized price is ~$52,645. So while spot Bitcoin fell from $101k to ~$62k... The aggregate network cost basis is STILL 38% HIGHER. The price got crushed. The capitalization reset survived. And now comes the part I think almost everyone is missing. Those "new buyers" aren't new anymore. At the end of the six-figure regime, coins aged 6 months–2 years represented about 32.8% of realized cap. Today? 59.2%. Nearly SIXTY PERCENT of Bitcoin's realized capitalization now sits in coins that haven't moved for 6–24 months. The hot money is seasoning. The new ownership cohort is becoming the long-term holder cohort. And ancient-holder spending has COLLAPSED from its 2025 highs. On a trailing 180-day basis: 2+ year spending intensity: down ~62%. 3+ year: down ~69%. 5+ year: down ~51%. The OG supply avalanche is drying up. So zoom out. In 2024–2025, old, massively profitable holders distributed into unprecedented liquidity. Bitcoin absorbed it. The network cost basis exploded higher. Price eventually corrected. The new holders DIDN'T collectively dump their coins back onto the market. They aged. Now Bitcoin sits around $62,000 with a realized price near $52,600. The speculative premium has been annihilated. At $100k, Bitcoin traded around 2.65x realized price. Today? About 1.19x. The market has compressed almost all the way back toward aggregate cost basis... AFTER one of the largest economic ownership resets in Bitcoin history. And this is where $200,000 becomes interesting. Bitcoin just needs another demand expansion against a supply base that has already been dramatically recapitalized. If realized price climbs toward $70,000 during the next expansion... $200,000 Bitcoin would represent about 2.86x realized price. The peak of the most recent cycle was already ~2.77x. In other words... you don't need 2017 insanity. You don't even need 2021 insanity. You need continued capitalization of the network combined with a holder base that is now dramatically less eager to sell at the prices where the previous generation unloaded. THAT is the setup. The $100,000 was a massive clearing event. Bitcoin used six-figure liquidity to transfer ancient coins out of the hands of people sitting on absurd gains... ...and into the hands of investors willing to capitalize the network at vastly higher prices. Then the bear market compressed the speculative premium while leaving much of that higher cost basis intact. Now the coins are aging. OG spending is fading. The network has been recapitalized. And the next wave of demand will be competing against a very different supply curve. $62,000 Bitcoin looks depressing if you're staring at the chart. It looks completely different when you look at WHO owns the coins now. This may be the most important holder redistribution Bitcoin has ever experienced. And I think we're watching the foundation for the move to $200,000+ being built in real time.

Adam Livingston

112,034 次观看 • 2 个月前

🔥COFFEEZILLA REFUTED - STRC IS THE GREATEST FIXED INCOME INVESTMENT EVER🔥 Coffeezilla just made an 18 minute CHARACTER ASSASSINATION on Strategy by saying it was comparable to a PONZI SCHEME. He made ZERO arguments in his video, provided ZERO mechanisms by which the structure is fraudulent, and provided ZERO proof that Strategy hasn't disclosed the proper risks. This didn't stop thousands of people from immediately thinking that Strategy is FRAUDELENT. DO BETTER, COFFEEZILLA. THIS IS YOUR RECKONING:
32:05
AdamBLiv's profile picture

🔥COFFEEZILLA REFUTED - STRC IS THE GREATEST FIXED INCOME INVESTMENT EVER🔥 Coffeezilla just made an 18 minute CHARACTER ASSASSINATION on Strategy by saying it was comparable to a PONZI SCHEME. He made ZERO arguments in his video, provided ZERO mechanisms by which the structure is fraudulent, and provided ZERO proof that Strategy hasn't disclosed the proper risks. This didn't stop thousands of people from immediately thinking that Strategy is FRAUDELENT. DO BETTER, COFFEEZILLA. THIS IS YOUR RECKONING:

Adam Livingston

294,265 次观看 • 6 个月前

Strive now holds 29,462 bitcoin. Our holdings are up 3.9x in 2026, and the last six weeks alone added 9,216 BTC, a 46% increase. 10,000 BTC: Jan 16 15,000 BTC: May 1 20,000 BTC: Jul 24 25,000 BTC: Sep 11 29,462 BTC: Oct 2 Total cost: $2.65 billion. Average cost: $89,994 per bitcoin, down from $116,610 on our first purchase.
0:39
AdamBLiv's profile picture

Strive now holds 29,462 bitcoin. Our holdings are up 3.9x in 2026, and the last six weeks alone added 9,216 BTC, a 46% increase. 10,000 BTC: Jan 16 15,000 BTC: May 1 20,000 BTC: Jul 24 25,000 BTC: Sep 11 29,462 BTC: Oct 2 Total cost: $2.65 billion. Average cost: $89,994 per bitcoin, down from $116,610 on our first purchase.

Adam Livingston

24,713 次观看 • 13 天前

🔥SAYLOR HAS WON: THE BITCOIN SINGULARITY IS HERE🔥 THIS IS THE BIGGEST STORY IN FINANCE. THE BEARS ARE ON LIFE SUPPORT. ASSUMING LAST WEEK'S CAPTURE RATE, STRATEGY JUST RAISED MORE THAN THEIR ENTIRE ANNUAL DIVIDEND OBLIGATION... ...IN ONE TRADING SESSION... ...WITH ZERO MSTR ISSUANCE NEEDED. $1.2 BILLION OF BITCOIN PURCHASED IN ONE DAY. THE CAPITAL FROM THE WORLD'S LARGEST INCOME POOL IS FLOODING INTO BITCOIN. STRC. THE GREATEST SHARPE RATIO IN HISTORY. 11.5% YIELD. 1.7% VOLATILITY. HIGH LIQUIDITY. NOTHING CAN COMPETE WITH SAYLOR'S BITCOIN WAR MACHINE. THIS IS THE GREATEST WEALTH TRANSFER IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY:
16:21
AdamBLiv's profile picture

🔥SAYLOR HAS WON: THE BITCOIN SINGULARITY IS HERE🔥 THIS IS THE BIGGEST STORY IN FINANCE. THE BEARS ARE ON LIFE SUPPORT. ASSUMING LAST WEEK'S CAPTURE RATE, STRATEGY JUST RAISED MORE THAN THEIR ENTIRE ANNUAL DIVIDEND OBLIGATION... ...IN ONE TRADING SESSION... ...WITH ZERO MSTR ISSUANCE NEEDED. $1.2 BILLION OF BITCOIN PURCHASED IN ONE DAY. THE CAPITAL FROM THE WORLD'S LARGEST INCOME POOL IS FLOODING INTO BITCOIN. STRC. THE GREATEST SHARPE RATIO IN HISTORY. 11.5% YIELD. 1.7% VOLATILITY. HIGH LIQUIDITY. NOTHING CAN COMPETE WITH SAYLOR'S BITCOIN WAR MACHINE. THIS IS THE GREATEST WEALTH TRANSFER IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY:

Adam Livingston

243,532 次观看 • 6 个月前

SAYLOR NOW PAYING 11% CASH DIVIDENDS WITH STRC - TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE? They told you 11% paid monthly must be a scam. They said it was “too risky.” They said “where are the cash flows?” Then they went back to buying government bonds from a country that can’t pay its bills without printing. In this video, I break down STRC, Michael Saylor’s income vehicle paying 11% cash, paid monthly, and why it’s making traditional finance people short-circuit. This is what happens when a product: • Already has decades of dividend coverage on the balance sheet • Doesn’t need refinancing windows to stay alive • Doesn’t depend on consumers, confidence, or GDP fairy tales • Pays real cash while fiat melts quietly Meanwhile, the same critics call it “dangerous” while lending money to: • Governments running permanent deficits • Corporations drowning in rollover debt • Pensions powered by optimism and vibes We’re going to walk through why STRC is being priced like junk credit despite behaving nothing like it, how cash-backed income breaks the modern risk framework, and why people trained on spreadsheets panic when money actually already exists.
22:59
AdamBLiv's profile picture

SAYLOR NOW PAYING 11% CASH DIVIDENDS WITH STRC - TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE? They told you 11% paid monthly must be a scam. They said it was “too risky.” They said “where are the cash flows?” Then they went back to buying government bonds from a country that can’t pay its bills without printing. In this video, I break down STRC, Michael Saylor’s income vehicle paying 11% cash, paid monthly, and why it’s making traditional finance people short-circuit. This is what happens when a product: • Already has decades of dividend coverage on the balance sheet • Doesn’t need refinancing windows to stay alive • Doesn’t depend on consumers, confidence, or GDP fairy tales • Pays real cash while fiat melts quietly Meanwhile, the same critics call it “dangerous” while lending money to: • Governments running permanent deficits • Corporations drowning in rollover debt • Pensions powered by optimism and vibes We’re going to walk through why STRC is being priced like junk credit despite behaving nothing like it, how cash-backed income breaks the modern risk framework, and why people trained on spreadsheets panic when money actually already exists.

Adam Livingston

355,428 次观看 • 9 个月前

The Ultimate Beginner's Guide to STRC + MSTR Is Strategy running a ponzi scheme? No. This is video, I take an objective, no-nonsense approach to explaining STRC, MSTR, and the risks behind both. I go into detail of Strategy's strategy so your grandma can understand this perfectly. Whether you want to get paid 11.5% annual dividends, paid monthly with STRC... ...or you want amplified Bitcoin exposure via MSTR. This is the ultimate beginner's guide to understanding Strategy:
23:38
AdamBLiv's profile picture

The Ultimate Beginner's Guide to STRC + MSTR Is Strategy running a ponzi scheme? No. This is video, I take an objective, no-nonsense approach to explaining STRC, MSTR, and the risks behind both. I go into detail of Strategy's strategy so your grandma can understand this perfectly. Whether you want to get paid 11.5% annual dividends, paid monthly with STRC... ...or you want amplified Bitcoin exposure via MSTR. This is the ultimate beginner's guide to understanding Strategy:

Adam Livingston

212,328 次观看 • 6 个月前

WHY $STRF IS THE GREATEST FIXED INCOME PRODUCT EVER The death of legacy fixed income is here. Michael Saylor, Bitcoin, and Strategy are here with $STRF to fill that gap. I aim to give a comprehensive breakdown of the most mind-blowing financial instrument today:
17:18
AdamBLiv's profile picture

WHY $STRF IS THE GREATEST FIXED INCOME PRODUCT EVER The death of legacy fixed income is here. Michael Saylor, Bitcoin, and Strategy are here with $STRF to fill that gap. I aim to give a comprehensive breakdown of the most mind-blowing financial instrument today:

Adam Livingston

520,684 次观看 • 1 年前

I ran a BRUTAL 3-year MSTR stress test. Not the cute kind. The “Bitcoin crashes 55% from here, mNAV collapses below 0.50x, capital markets are closed, cash gets burned, BTC has to be sold to pay the senior stack, and everyone on X is filming their victory lap in the clown mirror” kind. Starting point: BTC: $59,135 MSTR: $87.64 Total BTC: 847,363 Cash: $1.4B CEBE: 138,161 sats/share Claim ratio: 41.5% Then the model nukes BTC to $26,611 by month 6. The senior stack does exactly what fixed-dollar claims do when collateral crashes. It explodes in BTC terms. Senior claims go from 351,567 BTC to 819,073 BTC. Claim ratio spikes from 41.5% to 96.7%. Common equity BTC collapses from 495,796 BTC to 28,290 BTC. CEBE gets annihilated: 138,161 sats/share → 7,884 sats/share. MSTR stock gets modeled from $87.64 to $1.01. That is the horror movie. Would the stock price actually go this low in that scenario? I doubt it. 2022 had NEGATIVE -14,000+ of common equity sats exposure and the stock never dropped below $10. But here is where the bear case gets uncomfortable. The model assumes: Zero new BTC buys. Zero common issuance. $167.7M/month of obligations. Cash gone by month 9. BTC sales begin after cash is exhausted. Over 3 years, MSTR sells 115,727 BTC to keep servicing the stack. That is real damage. But it still ends with 731,636 BTC. Final state: BTC: $48,498 MSTR: $51.86 mNAV: 1.40x Common equity BTC: 274,093 CEBE: 76,380 sats/share Claim ratio: 62.5% MSTR survives. The common gets dragged through flaming glass for 18 months, but it survives. The real risk is not “instant bankruptcy" like all the FUD spreaders are telling you. The real risk is CEBE compression while fixed-dollar senior claims temporarily consume almost the entire Bitcoin stack in BTC-equivalent terms. Survival is not comfort. But death spiral? This model says no.
0:53
AdamBLiv's profile picture

I ran a BRUTAL 3-year MSTR stress test. Not the cute kind. The “Bitcoin crashes 55% from here, mNAV collapses below 0.50x, capital markets are closed, cash gets burned, BTC has to be sold to pay the senior stack, and everyone on X is filming their victory lap in the clown mirror” kind. Starting point: BTC: $59,135 MSTR: $87.64 Total BTC: 847,363 Cash: $1.4B CEBE: 138,161 sats/share Claim ratio: 41.5% Then the model nukes BTC to $26,611 by month 6. The senior stack does exactly what fixed-dollar claims do when collateral crashes. It explodes in BTC terms. Senior claims go from 351,567 BTC to 819,073 BTC. Claim ratio spikes from 41.5% to 96.7%. Common equity BTC collapses from 495,796 BTC to 28,290 BTC. CEBE gets annihilated: 138,161 sats/share → 7,884 sats/share. MSTR stock gets modeled from $87.64 to $1.01. That is the horror movie. Would the stock price actually go this low in that scenario? I doubt it. 2022 had NEGATIVE -14,000+ of common equity sats exposure and the stock never dropped below $10. But here is where the bear case gets uncomfortable. The model assumes: Zero new BTC buys. Zero common issuance. $167.7M/month of obligations. Cash gone by month 9. BTC sales begin after cash is exhausted. Over 3 years, MSTR sells 115,727 BTC to keep servicing the stack. That is real damage. But it still ends with 731,636 BTC. Final state: BTC: $48,498 MSTR: $51.86 mNAV: 1.40x Common equity BTC: 274,093 CEBE: 76,380 sats/share Claim ratio: 62.5% MSTR survives. The common gets dragged through flaming glass for 18 months, but it survives. The real risk is not “instant bankruptcy" like all the FUD spreaders are telling you. The real risk is CEBE compression while fixed-dollar senior claims temporarily consume almost the entire Bitcoin stack in BTC-equivalent terms. Survival is not comfort. But death spiral? This model says no.

Adam Livingston

122,377 次观看 • 3 个月前

Long but VERY IMPORTANT POST on the importance of Bitcoin amplification while Bitcoin is cheap. Bitcoin treasury X has spent months litigating preferred dividends. "9% is smart. 13% is expensive. 15% is reckless." If you're underwriting a long-term bull thesis, you're arguing about the wrong variable. So I built a model. Three hypothetical companies. Same $10 stock. Same Bitcoin per share. Bitcoin compounds 25% a year for ten years, $75k to ~$698k. mNAV is pinned at 1.0x the entire time. No premium, no reflexivity, no ATM magic. The only difference is how much amplification they buy (preferred notional ÷ Bitcoin holdings) and what they pay for it: A: 9% dividend, sliding to 0% by year ten. 10% amplification. B: 13% dividend. 35% amplification. C: 15% dividend. 60% amplification. The preferred is senior, perpetual, and a fixed-dollar claim. Proceeds buy Bitcoin. Each company keeps issuing at a steady monthly pace, and every dividend gets paid by issuing common at NAV. Every coupon dollar costs shareholders real Bitcoin. Year ten: A: $123 B: $146 C: $166 Just owning Bitcoin: $93 The ranking is perfectly backwards to cost of capital. The cheapest money finished dead last. So let's be generous. Give Company A a 0% dividend rate from day one. Yup. Free money, forever. $134. Still last. C could pay 17% and still tie free money. Over the decade C pays $5.3 billion in dividends. A pays $84 million. C nearly quadruples its share count funding those coupons and still grows Bitcoin per share 78%. A grows it 32%. The first-order math explains it: Extra return ≈ (preferred per $1 of equity) × (Bitcoin return − dividend) A has the better spread: 25 minus 9 is 16 points. C's is 10. But C carries $1.50 of preferred per dollar of equity. A carries 11 cents. The dividend is a subtraction. Amplification is a multiplier. You can't subtract your way past someone who's multiplying. It also tells you exactly when the coupon matters: in proportion to the amplification it's attached to. A cheap coupon on a sliver of amplification is just a very efficient way to own less Bitcoin. Now the attribution. Treat your Bitcoin path as the given, since that is literally the thesis you're underwriting, and run Shapley over the two players left: amplification and mNAV. Remember... mNAV sat at 1.0x for ten years, so its Shapley value is exactly zero. Bitcoin paid every company the same +$83. Amplification, net of every dividend: A +$30, B +$53, C +$73. All of the outperformance is amplification, and mNAV hasn't even entered the equation. Put any premium you like on top. It multiplies an amplified NAV. Timing is the part people miss. A fixed-dollar claim locked in while Bitcoin is cheap gets melted by the run. Company C issues preferred every single month and still drifts from 60% amplification to 21% by year ten. The bull market de-levers you for free. Run C's exact playbook but wait for Bitcoin to double before starting: $150 instead of $166. Same coupon, same ratio, worse entry. The real question if you are a Bitcoin bull is "how fast do you think Bitcoin compounds?" If your answer is under 20%, the coupon is the least of your problems. If you think Bitcoin is cheap, amplify while it's cheap. Penny pinching the coupon is optimizing the toll on a road you're barely driving on. Hypothetical model, not investment advice. Explainer video below:
1:50
AdamBLiv's profile picture

Long but VERY IMPORTANT POST on the importance of Bitcoin amplification while Bitcoin is cheap. Bitcoin treasury X has spent months litigating preferred dividends. "9% is smart. 13% is expensive. 15% is reckless." If you're underwriting a long-term bull thesis, you're arguing about the wrong variable. So I built a model. Three hypothetical companies. Same $10 stock. Same Bitcoin per share. Bitcoin compounds 25% a year for ten years, $75k to ~$698k. mNAV is pinned at 1.0x the entire time. No premium, no reflexivity, no ATM magic. The only difference is how much amplification they buy (preferred notional ÷ Bitcoin holdings) and what they pay for it: A: 9% dividend, sliding to 0% by year ten. 10% amplification. B: 13% dividend. 35% amplification. C: 15% dividend. 60% amplification. The preferred is senior, perpetual, and a fixed-dollar claim. Proceeds buy Bitcoin. Each company keeps issuing at a steady monthly pace, and every dividend gets paid by issuing common at NAV. Every coupon dollar costs shareholders real Bitcoin. Year ten: A: $123 B: $146 C: $166 Just owning Bitcoin: $93 The ranking is perfectly backwards to cost of capital. The cheapest money finished dead last. So let's be generous. Give Company A a 0% dividend rate from day one. Yup. Free money, forever. $134. Still last. C could pay 17% and still tie free money. Over the decade C pays $5.3 billion in dividends. A pays $84 million. C nearly quadruples its share count funding those coupons and still grows Bitcoin per share 78%. A grows it 32%. The first-order math explains it: Extra return ≈ (preferred per $1 of equity) × (Bitcoin return − dividend) A has the better spread: 25 minus 9 is 16 points. C's is 10. But C carries $1.50 of preferred per dollar of equity. A carries 11 cents. The dividend is a subtraction. Amplification is a multiplier. You can't subtract your way past someone who's multiplying. It also tells you exactly when the coupon matters: in proportion to the amplification it's attached to. A cheap coupon on a sliver of amplification is just a very efficient way to own less Bitcoin. Now the attribution. Treat your Bitcoin path as the given, since that is literally the thesis you're underwriting, and run Shapley over the two players left: amplification and mNAV. Remember... mNAV sat at 1.0x for ten years, so its Shapley value is exactly zero. Bitcoin paid every company the same +$83. Amplification, net of every dividend: A +$30, B +$53, C +$73. All of the outperformance is amplification, and mNAV hasn't even entered the equation. Put any premium you like on top. It multiplies an amplified NAV. Timing is the part people miss. A fixed-dollar claim locked in while Bitcoin is cheap gets melted by the run. Company C issues preferred every single month and still drifts from 60% amplification to 21% by year ten. The bull market de-levers you for free. Run C's exact playbook but wait for Bitcoin to double before starting: $150 instead of $166. Same coupon, same ratio, worse entry. The real question if you are a Bitcoin bull is "how fast do you think Bitcoin compounds?" If your answer is under 20%, the coupon is the least of your problems. If you think Bitcoin is cheap, amplify while it's cheap. Penny pinching the coupon is optimizing the toll on a road you're barely driving on. Hypothetical model, not investment advice. Explainer video below:

Adam Livingston

20,022 次观看 • 15 天前

I think MSTR could go to around all-time high at only a 1.4x mNAV + $150k BTC. $150k Bitcoin is going to be incredibly cheap compared to the long term trend 1 year from now. If we start the climb back now, STRC gets turned back w/ $2b per month issued, and $500m of MSTR gets issued per month. This pace would still be under their 2026 YTD capital raising pace. The beach ball is being held underwater it's just waiting for Bitcoin to move.
0:26
AdamBLiv's profile picture

I think MSTR could go to around all-time high at only a 1.4x mNAV + $150k BTC. $150k Bitcoin is going to be incredibly cheap compared to the long term trend 1 year from now. If we start the climb back now, STRC gets turned back w/ $2b per month issued, and $500m of MSTR gets issued per month. This pace would still be under their 2026 YTD capital raising pace. The beach ball is being held underwater it's just waiting for Bitcoin to move.

Adam Livingston

115,146 次观看 • 3 个月前

BITCOIN is about to EXPLODE: Bitcoin is sitting around $63k, down roughly 50% from the ATH, basically stapled to its 4-year moving average. So I ran 20,000 historically conditioned Monte Carlo paths from here. The model uses actual historical Bitcoin return blocks and conditions on the kind of state we’re in now: BTC near its 4-year MA 90-day return deeply negative drawdown near 50% realized volatility compressed long-term moving average still rising Then I asked a simple question: What tends to happen next if Bitcoin behaves like Bitcoin? Here’s the raw 24-month distribution: 10th percentile: $79K 25th percentile: $108K Median: $179K 75th percentile: $255K 90th percentile: $402K Median outcome: $63K → $179K That’s roughly a +183% total return (68% CAGR) In the middle of a bear market. While everyone is currently examining a -2.7% candle like the Warren Commission examining the Zapruder film. The path to those outcomes is also aggressively Bitcoin. Across the simulations: 93.3% suffer a 30%+ drawdown somewhere along the way. Median maximum drawdown: -42.7% So the model is basically saying: “Congratulations. You may become much richer. First, however, Bitcoin would like to put your nervous system in a Home Depot paint shaker.” The simulation practically expects emotional property damage. But when I look at this distribution, the question becomes less: “What if Bitcoin drops again?” and more: “What if this is the part everyone remembers later as obvious?” Bear markets are where conviction gets tested. Sometimes they’re also where the future CAGR is quietly being manufactured while everyone else is refreshing the chart and developing a magnesium deficiency:
0:28
AdamBLiv's profile picture

BITCOIN is about to EXPLODE: Bitcoin is sitting around $63k, down roughly 50% from the ATH, basically stapled to its 4-year moving average. So I ran 20,000 historically conditioned Monte Carlo paths from here. The model uses actual historical Bitcoin return blocks and conditions on the kind of state we’re in now: BTC near its 4-year MA 90-day return deeply negative drawdown near 50% realized volatility compressed long-term moving average still rising Then I asked a simple question: What tends to happen next if Bitcoin behaves like Bitcoin? Here’s the raw 24-month distribution: 10th percentile: $79K 25th percentile: $108K Median: $179K 75th percentile: $255K 90th percentile: $402K Median outcome: $63K → $179K That’s roughly a +183% total return (68% CAGR) In the middle of a bear market. While everyone is currently examining a -2.7% candle like the Warren Commission examining the Zapruder film. The path to those outcomes is also aggressively Bitcoin. Across the simulations: 93.3% suffer a 30%+ drawdown somewhere along the way. Median maximum drawdown: -42.7% So the model is basically saying: “Congratulations. You may become much richer. First, however, Bitcoin would like to put your nervous system in a Home Depot paint shaker.” The simulation practically expects emotional property damage. But when I look at this distribution, the question becomes less: “What if Bitcoin drops again?” and more: “What if this is the part everyone remembers later as obvious?” Bear markets are where conviction gets tested. Sometimes they’re also where the future CAGR is quietly being manufactured while everyone else is refreshing the chart and developing a magnesium deficiency:

Adam Livingston

59,916 次观看 • 2 个月前

🚨SAYLOR DESTROYS ALL CRITICS WITH USD CASH RESERVE - STRATEGY UPDATE 12.1.25🚨 Michael Saylor just broke the brains of every critic who spent 5 years predicting Strategy’s collapse. The $1.44B cash reserve announcement completely destroys the “LUNA 2.0” narrative and exposes how unserious the crypto commentariat really is. Strategy holds 650,000 BTC and enough cash to run the company for nearly two years with ZERO BITCOIN SELLING. In this video, I walk through the entire update like adults while laughing at the panic influencers who still think “MSTR bad” is a sophisticated thesis. S&P Global got addressed directly. Insolvency claims got vaporized. Market access concerns got resolved in real time. Critics are now scrambling to pretend they understood any of this. Watch the breakdown. Watch the receipts. Watch the complete destruction of the “death spiral” storyline. Strategy is not failing. Strategy is expanding. THE CRITICS ARE FAILING:
19:56
AdamBLiv's profile picture

🚨SAYLOR DESTROYS ALL CRITICS WITH USD CASH RESERVE - STRATEGY UPDATE 12.1.25🚨 Michael Saylor just broke the brains of every critic who spent 5 years predicting Strategy’s collapse. The $1.44B cash reserve announcement completely destroys the “LUNA 2.0” narrative and exposes how unserious the crypto commentariat really is. Strategy holds 650,000 BTC and enough cash to run the company for nearly two years with ZERO BITCOIN SELLING. In this video, I walk through the entire update like adults while laughing at the panic influencers who still think “MSTR bad” is a sophisticated thesis. S&P Global got addressed directly. Insolvency claims got vaporized. Market access concerns got resolved in real time. Critics are now scrambling to pretend they understood any of this. Watch the breakdown. Watch the receipts. Watch the complete destruction of the “death spiral” storyline. Strategy is not failing. Strategy is expanding. THE CRITICS ARE FAILING:

Adam Livingston

244,611 次观看 • 10 个月前

Bitcoin vs. Amplified Bitcoin I ran 500,000 paired Monte Carlo simulations over four years. Bitcoin starts at $86,000, with a 40% geometric CAGR assumption and 40% annualized volatility. The amplified model takes 1.5× each simulated daily Bitcoin return, producing roughly 60% volatility. Same Bitcoin shocks. Same $86,000 starting investment. Different sensitivity. Median ending value: Bitcoin: $330,057 - 3.84× Amplified Bitcoin: $508,584 - 5.91× At the 95th percentile: Bitcoin: $1.235 million Amplified Bitcoin: $3.676 million At the 99th percentile: Bitcoin: $2.132 million Amplified Bitcoin: $8.327 million The probability of finishing at 10× or more rises from 11.6% to 33.1%. Amplified Bitcoin finishes ahead in 85.9% of the paired simulations. But the wider upside distribution comes with a materially rougher ride. Median maximum drawdown increases from 42.2% to 57.7%. The probability of finishing below the starting investment rises from 4.7% to 7.0%. A company targeting sustained amplified exposure needs to actively manage its capital structure and Bitcoin exposure. Issuing preferred equity once does not permanently lock in 1.5× stock-price sensitivity, and balance-sheet amplification is not the same as market beta. These are the mathematical results of a maintained-sensitivity projection, not a forecast for any company. Financing costs, preferred dividends, dilution, valuation changes, and company-specific risks are excluded. Volatility is vitality:
0:30
AdamBLiv's profile picture

Bitcoin vs. Amplified Bitcoin I ran 500,000 paired Monte Carlo simulations over four years. Bitcoin starts at $86,000, with a 40% geometric CAGR assumption and 40% annualized volatility. The amplified model takes 1.5× each simulated daily Bitcoin return, producing roughly 60% volatility. Same Bitcoin shocks. Same $86,000 starting investment. Different sensitivity. Median ending value: Bitcoin: $330,057 - 3.84× Amplified Bitcoin: $508,584 - 5.91× At the 95th percentile: Bitcoin: $1.235 million Amplified Bitcoin: $3.676 million At the 99th percentile: Bitcoin: $2.132 million Amplified Bitcoin: $8.327 million The probability of finishing at 10× or more rises from 11.6% to 33.1%. Amplified Bitcoin finishes ahead in 85.9% of the paired simulations. But the wider upside distribution comes with a materially rougher ride. Median maximum drawdown increases from 42.2% to 57.7%. The probability of finishing below the starting investment rises from 4.7% to 7.0%. A company targeting sustained amplified exposure needs to actively manage its capital structure and Bitcoin exposure. Issuing preferred equity once does not permanently lock in 1.5× stock-price sensitivity, and balance-sheet amplification is not the same as market beta. These are the mathematical results of a maintained-sensitivity projection, not a forecast for any company. Financing costs, preferred dividends, dilution, valuation changes, and company-specific risks are excluded. Volatility is vitality:

Adam Livingston

27,793 次观看 • 27 天前

🔥BITCOIN TO 10X?!? THE CRAZY MATH BEHIND BITCOIN'S GROWTH!🔥 Bitcoin’s next major cycle could be far bigger than most investors are prepared for. I ran millions of Monte Carlo simulations to model Bitcoin’s next several years across different return and volatility assumptions... ...and the upside gets wild even without assuming Bitcoin repeats its historical performance. FULL BREAKDOWN:
16:26
AdamBLiv's profile picture

🔥BITCOIN TO 10X?!? THE CRAZY MATH BEHIND BITCOIN'S GROWTH!🔥 Bitcoin’s next major cycle could be far bigger than most investors are prepared for. I ran millions of Monte Carlo simulations to model Bitcoin’s next several years across different return and volatility assumptions... ...and the upside gets wild even without assuming Bitcoin repeats its historical performance. FULL BREAKDOWN:

Adam Livingston

17,830 次观看 • 16 天前

Great post by Matt here explaining why Bitcoin amplification can matter dramatically more than cost of capital. A lot of people like to obsess over the dividend rates, but what actually hits the common stock? It is cost × scale × amplification. Here’s an actual sensitivity test with two mathematical examples. I ran the exact same Bitcoin treasury model twice. They have the same BTC purchases, same preferred issuance, same capital structure, and same BTC path. The only thing I changed was the dividend rate on new preferred capital: 13% vs. 15%. If Bitcoin ends at $150K: 13% prefs → 26,662 sats/share 15% prefs → 26,466 sats/share Difference: 0.74% If Bitcoin ends at $250K: 13% prefs → 32,225 sats/share 15% prefs → 32,062 sats/share Difference: 0.50% Obviously, cheaper capital is better when everything else is equal. But that's the point. A 200 bps difference in preferred cost moved the modeled common-equity outcome by less than 1%. Matt's math is right. Now take the thought experiment one step further. Assume two companies each begin with $100M of common equity, Bitcoin rises 50%, and both can invest their preferred proceeds into Bitcoin. Company A can raise $50M of preferred capital at 13%. $150M of Bitcoin appreciates to $225M. Subtract $50M of preferred principal and $6.5M of dividends. Ending common equity: $168.5M Common equity return: +68.5% Company B has to pay 15%, but its investor base and liquidity allow it to raise twice as much: $100M. $200M of Bitcoin appreciates to $300M. Subtract $100M of preferred principal and $15M of dividends. Ending common equity: $185M Common equity return: +85.0% So the company paying the higher cost of capital produces the higher common-equity return: 13% financing → +68.5% 15% financing → +85.0% That is a 16.5 percentage point advantage despite paying 200 bps more for capital. Assuming an unchanged valuation multiple and no common-share dilution (could be accretive economically), those are also approximately the stock returns. This is why obsessing over the lowest possible preferred coupon can miss the bigger variable. Cost of capital matters, but how much accretive capital can you raise and deploy is a lot more important. Amplification overwhelmingly drives shareholder returns:
0:20
AdamBLiv's profile picture

Great post by Matt here explaining why Bitcoin amplification can matter dramatically more than cost of capital. A lot of people like to obsess over the dividend rates, but what actually hits the common stock? It is cost × scale × amplification. Here’s an actual sensitivity test with two mathematical examples. I ran the exact same Bitcoin treasury model twice. They have the same BTC purchases, same preferred issuance, same capital structure, and same BTC path. The only thing I changed was the dividend rate on new preferred capital: 13% vs. 15%. If Bitcoin ends at $150K: 13% prefs → 26,662 sats/share 15% prefs → 26,466 sats/share Difference: 0.74% If Bitcoin ends at $250K: 13% prefs → 32,225 sats/share 15% prefs → 32,062 sats/share Difference: 0.50% Obviously, cheaper capital is better when everything else is equal. But that's the point. A 200 bps difference in preferred cost moved the modeled common-equity outcome by less than 1%. Matt's math is right. Now take the thought experiment one step further. Assume two companies each begin with $100M of common equity, Bitcoin rises 50%, and both can invest their preferred proceeds into Bitcoin. Company A can raise $50M of preferred capital at 13%. $150M of Bitcoin appreciates to $225M. Subtract $50M of preferred principal and $6.5M of dividends. Ending common equity: $168.5M Common equity return: +68.5% Company B has to pay 15%, but its investor base and liquidity allow it to raise twice as much: $100M. $200M of Bitcoin appreciates to $300M. Subtract $100M of preferred principal and $15M of dividends. Ending common equity: $185M Common equity return: +85.0% So the company paying the higher cost of capital produces the higher common-equity return: 13% financing → +68.5% 15% financing → +85.0% That is a 16.5 percentage point advantage despite paying 200 bps more for capital. Assuming an unchanged valuation multiple and no common-share dilution (could be accretive economically), those are also approximately the stock returns. This is why obsessing over the lowest possible preferred coupon can miss the bigger variable. Cost of capital matters, but how much accretive capital can you raise and deploy is a lot more important. Amplification overwhelmingly drives shareholder returns:

Adam Livingston

20,466 次观看 • 19 天前

🚨HOW SAYLOR AND STRATEGY WILL EAT ENTIRE INDUSTRIES🚨 Global finance is about to get sentimental in the worst possible way. Bonds are crying in the shower, banks are stress eating, and pension funds are looking up “career change” on Google because Michael Saylor just figured out how to issue yield backed by the one asset that does not inflate, expire, or bend the knee to central banks. This is asset-class euthanasia dressed in a suit. I break down exactly how Bitcoin backed perpetual preferreds are about to embarrass the entire fixed income market, force CFOs into an existential crisis, and trigger the largest capital migration since humans discovered that fire is better than freezing to death. If you think Wall Street hates Bitcoin now, wait until they realize Saylor is offering 8 to 13 percent yield while they are still selling bonds that yield a bowl of lukewarm oatmeal.
23:45
AdamBLiv's profile picture

🚨HOW SAYLOR AND STRATEGY WILL EAT ENTIRE INDUSTRIES🚨 Global finance is about to get sentimental in the worst possible way. Bonds are crying in the shower, banks are stress eating, and pension funds are looking up “career change” on Google because Michael Saylor just figured out how to issue yield backed by the one asset that does not inflate, expire, or bend the knee to central banks. This is asset-class euthanasia dressed in a suit. I break down exactly how Bitcoin backed perpetual preferreds are about to embarrass the entire fixed income market, force CFOs into an existential crisis, and trigger the largest capital migration since humans discovered that fire is better than freezing to death. If you think Wall Street hates Bitcoin now, wait until they realize Saylor is offering 8 to 13 percent yield while they are still selling bonds that yield a bowl of lukewarm oatmeal.

Adam Livingston

209,933 次观看 • 10 个月前

MSTY - THE GREATEST INCOME PRODUCT EVER? I break down the INSANE mechanics behind the YieldMax MSTY ETF - the most aggressive, brilliantly engineered Bitcoin volatility siphon on Wall Street. $MSTY is generating 100+% headline yields from Saylor's BITCOIN NUCLEAR REACTOR.
15:53
AdamBLiv's profile picture

MSTY - THE GREATEST INCOME PRODUCT EVER? I break down the INSANE mechanics behind the YieldMax MSTY ETF - the most aggressive, brilliantly engineered Bitcoin volatility siphon on Wall Street. $MSTY is generating 100+% headline yields from Saylor's BITCOIN NUCLEAR REACTOR.

Adam Livingston

280,243 次观看 • 1 年前