Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

🚨Bitcoin’s Catastrophic Problem NO ONE Is Talking About! Bitcoin produces 144 blocks per day. Fees are paid per block, every ~10 minutes. Yesterday, Bitcoin Layer-1 fees totaled ~2.6 BTC for the entire day. (Approx. $180K) That works out to ~0.018 $BTC per block. Meanwhile, the real cost to secure...

FinanceFreeman's profile picture

Finance Freeman 🇺🇸

15,929 subscribers

440,000 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Finanzen
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

The problem with most Bitcoin Layer 2s being worked on today - including Lightning, Ark, pretty much every BitVM-bridged L2, etc - is that they don't meaningfully contribute to Bitcoin's security budget. There exists a fundamental tension between the need for Bitcoin scaling solutions - which ostensibly take txs (and fees) out of blocks - and the need to bolster Bitcoin's security budget with fees as the block subsidy declines. This is something Drivechains almost certainly gets right - L2s that merge mine are incentive-aligned with miners in a way that other L2s fundamentally are not. Paul Sztorc believes this incentive-misalignment will ultimately doom most of the L2s getting attention right now as a result... curious what folks think about this.
0:57

The problem with most Bitcoin Layer 2s being worked on today - including Lightning, Ark, pretty much every BitVM-bridged L2, etc - is that they don't meaningfully contribute to Bitcoin's security budget. There exists a fundamental tension between the need for Bitcoin scaling solutions - which ostensibly take txs (and fees) out of blocks - and the need to bolster Bitcoin's security budget with fees as the block subsidy declines. This is something Drivechains almost certainly gets right - L2s that merge mine are incentive-aligned with miners in a way that other L2s fundamentally are not. Paul Sztorc believes this incentive-misalignment will ultimately doom most of the L2s getting attention right now as a result... curious what folks think about this.

Isabel Foxen Duke⚡️

20,685 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

🚨BREAKING: MICHAEL SAYLOR IS SELLING $BTC His words: “We will probably sell some Bitcoin to pay dividends” And that, by the way - $1,200,000,000/year That's: ~1,300 $BTC per month ~43 $BTC per day ~2 $BTC per hour Strategy holds 818,334 BTC - 3.9% of all Bitcoin that will ever exist For 5 years this man was the floor under every dip Now the same machine works in reverse BTC drops = they sell to cover the bill Selling pushes price down = they need to sell more The biggest buyer in history just became a permanent seller That's not good FOLLOW + NOTIFS ON!
0:30

🚨BREAKING: MICHAEL SAYLOR IS SELLING $BTC His words: “We will probably sell some Bitcoin to pay dividends” And that, by the way - $1,200,000,000/year That's: ~1,300 $BTC per month ~43 $BTC per day ~2 $BTC per hour Strategy holds 818,334 BTC - 3.9% of all Bitcoin that will ever exist For 5 years this man was the floor under every dip Now the same machine works in reverse BTC drops = they sell to cover the bill Selling pushes price down = they need to sell more The biggest buyer in history just became a permanent seller That's not good FOLLOW + NOTIFS ON!

bee🐝

111,647 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

"I used to be a bitcoiner. The transition to a new store of value only happens once every 3,000 years. That's the main prize -- just focus on that. But [security] is the criteria that ultimately convinced me to flip from Bitcoin to ETH." "I have a higher degree of certainty that Ethereum will be around longer [than Bitcoin]. The reason for that is because Bitcoin relies on proof-of-work, which is less efficient than proof-of-stake and doesn't scale with the value of the network. And as the block subsidy of Bitcoin halves every four years, it is increasingly becoming more and more reliant on transaction fees to fund the security budget paid to miners." "If you look at [Bitcoin's] security budget right now, about 0.6% of revenue to miners is transaction fees... The problem with that is if Bitcoin becomes 'digital gold', flips gold, and becomes a $30 trillion asset, but it only costs $10-20 billion to attack it, that's too asymmetric." "You want the security budget to scale with the market cap, similar to how countries spend a % of their GDP on defense. The more valuable something is, the more you need to spend to protect it." "Ethereum, with the Merge, migrated to proof-of-stake, which is fundamentally more secure because it's less reliant on transaction fees and it scales with the value of the network. If 1/3rd of ETH is staked and then you need 1/3rd of those ETH to censor the network, you're looking at roughly 10% of the total market cap as the cost to attack the network." "So if Ethereum flips Bitcoin and gold and becomes a $30 trillion asset, it'll cost ~$3 trillion to attack the Ethereum network versus Bitcoin at like $10 billion." "The other aspect here is that as AI hyperscalers invest more and more in AI, proof-of-work becomes increasingly vulnerable because the cost to attack the Bitcoin network is starting to look close to the quarterly CapEx these hyperscalers are spending on their data centers." Full interview on Bankless with Vivek Raman discussing the new Etherealize "Productive Money" report below.
2:34

"I used to be a bitcoiner. The transition to a new store of value only happens once every 3,000 years. That's the main prize -- just focus on that. But [security] is the criteria that ultimately convinced me to flip from Bitcoin to ETH." "I have a higher degree of certainty that Ethereum will be around longer [than Bitcoin]. The reason for that is because Bitcoin relies on proof-of-work, which is less efficient than proof-of-stake and doesn't scale with the value of the network. And as the block subsidy of Bitcoin halves every four years, it is increasingly becoming more and more reliant on transaction fees to fund the security budget paid to miners." "If you look at [Bitcoin's] security budget right now, about 0.6% of revenue to miners is transaction fees... The problem with that is if Bitcoin becomes 'digital gold', flips gold, and becomes a $30 trillion asset, but it only costs $10-20 billion to attack it, that's too asymmetric." "You want the security budget to scale with the market cap, similar to how countries spend a % of their GDP on defense. The more valuable something is, the more you need to spend to protect it." "Ethereum, with the Merge, migrated to proof-of-stake, which is fundamentally more secure because it's less reliant on transaction fees and it scales with the value of the network. If 1/3rd of ETH is staked and then you need 1/3rd of those ETH to censor the network, you're looking at roughly 10% of the total market cap as the cost to attack the network." "So if Ethereum flips Bitcoin and gold and becomes a $30 trillion asset, it'll cost ~$3 trillion to attack the Ethereum network versus Bitcoin at like $10 billion." "The other aspect here is that as AI hyperscalers invest more and more in AI, proof-of-work becomes increasingly vulnerable because the cost to attack the Bitcoin network is starting to look close to the quarterly CapEx these hyperscalers are spending on their data centers." Full interview on Bankless with Vivek Raman discussing the new Etherealize "Productive Money" report below.

Michael McGuiness

120,514 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Core, ‌the Bitcoin-first ‌chain, and how it’s trying to stretch BTC’s usefulness Core DAO (Core DAO 🔶) brands itself as “The Bitcoin Everything Chain.” The pitch is simple: take Bitcoin’s strengths and push them beyond the usual buy-and-hold story. The protocol centers on one main idea: BTC shouldn’t sit still. Core wants idle Bitcoin to earn, but without giving up the properties people care about most: safety, decentralization, and full self-custody. To get there, Core leans on a mix of Satoshi Plus, timelocks, and a quick Layer 1 EVM chain. Satoshi Plus folds in Delegated Proof of Work (so Bitcoin miners can participate), self-custodial Bitcoin staking, and staking of the $CORE token. Core frames the relationship with Bitcoin as mutualistic. It borrows security and incentive alignment from Bitcoin, then tries to send value back through extra miner rewards, trustless yield opportunities for BTC holders, and infrastructure that makes it easier for Bitcoin products to plug in and scale. Key ways Core aims to expand Bitcoin utility: 1.) Self-custodial Bitcoin staking Lock BTC with timelocks directly on the Bitcoin network (CLTV) and earn CORE yield, no wrapping, no bridges, and no handing custody to anyone else. 2.) Dual staking Stake $BTC and $CORE together to reach higher yield tiers. 3.) Tapping Bitcoin’s hash power Miners can delegate hash power to earn extra CORE rewards, while Core itself is secured using a majority share of Bitcoin’s hash rate. 4.) The “Bitcoin Power Grid” A set of rails Bitcoin products can connect to, built around yield, collateral, payments, and DeFi use cases. 5.) Scalable Bitcoin DeFi An EVM-compatible network designed for faster, cheaper BTCFi apps. 6.) Two-way value flow The goal is to strengthen Bitcoin’s security budget over time, while also turning dormant BTC into something that can actively do work. In plain terms, Core DAO’s broader mission is to make Bitcoin more productive without piling on trust assumptions, converting energy and capital tied up in Bitcoin into yield, DeFi activity, and scalable infrastructure.
0:30

Core, ‌the Bitcoin-first ‌chain, and how it’s trying to stretch BTC’s usefulness Core DAO (Core DAO 🔶) brands itself as “The Bitcoin Everything Chain.” The pitch is simple: take Bitcoin’s strengths and push them beyond the usual buy-and-hold story. The protocol centers on one main idea: BTC shouldn’t sit still. Core wants idle Bitcoin to earn, but without giving up the properties people care about most: safety, decentralization, and full self-custody. To get there, Core leans on a mix of Satoshi Plus, timelocks, and a quick Layer 1 EVM chain. Satoshi Plus folds in Delegated Proof of Work (so Bitcoin miners can participate), self-custodial Bitcoin staking, and staking of the $CORE token. Core frames the relationship with Bitcoin as mutualistic. It borrows security and incentive alignment from Bitcoin, then tries to send value back through extra miner rewards, trustless yield opportunities for BTC holders, and infrastructure that makes it easier for Bitcoin products to plug in and scale. Key ways Core aims to expand Bitcoin utility: 1.) Self-custodial Bitcoin staking Lock BTC with timelocks directly on the Bitcoin network (CLTV) and earn CORE yield, no wrapping, no bridges, and no handing custody to anyone else. 2.) Dual staking Stake $BTC and $CORE together to reach higher yield tiers. 3.) Tapping Bitcoin’s hash power Miners can delegate hash power to earn extra CORE rewards, while Core itself is secured using a majority share of Bitcoin’s hash rate. 4.) The “Bitcoin Power Grid” A set of rails Bitcoin products can connect to, built around yield, collateral, payments, and DeFi use cases. 5.) Scalable Bitcoin DeFi An EVM-compatible network designed for faster, cheaper BTCFi apps. 6.) Two-way value flow The goal is to strengthen Bitcoin’s security budget over time, while also turning dormant BTC into something that can actively do work. In plain terms, Core DAO’s broader mission is to make Bitcoin more productive without piling on trust assumptions, converting energy and capital tied up in Bitcoin into yield, DeFi activity, and scalable infrastructure.

BSCN

26,634 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen

“It’s about $1 million a megawatt all-in, between infrastructure and compute, to build a Bitcoin mining site. The AI site, just the infrastructure without compute, is $10 to $15 million a megawatt.” $MARA CEO Fred Thiel points out the math of Bitcoin miners pivoting to AI: An AI data center costs 10-15x more per megawatt to build than a Bitcoin mine but it earns far more per unit of power. And because the tenants are companies like Google, banks will actually finance it. The pricier build is the easier one to fund. Don’t miss the full interview streaming now.
5:46

“It’s about $1 million a megawatt all-in, between infrastructure and compute, to build a Bitcoin mining site. The AI site, just the infrastructure without compute, is $10 to $15 million a megawatt.” $MARA CEO Fred Thiel points out the math of Bitcoin miners pivoting to AI: An AI data center costs 10-15x more per megawatt to build than a Bitcoin mine but it earns far more per unit of power. And because the tenants are companies like Google, banks will actually finance it. The pricier build is the easier one to fund. Don’t miss the full interview streaming now.

Natalie Brunell ⚡️

45,375 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Strive (ASST) is set up to absolutely moon. The catapult has been loaded. ASST holders might have this question: What happens to common equity if Bitcoin rises and the balance sheet either stays static or keeps accumulating through SATA issuance? Using CEBE math, I modeled two scenarios with Bitcoin going from roughly $68.5k to $126k. Scenario 1: Static balance sheet No new Bitcoin. No new SATA. No additional capital formation. Just the existing balance sheet riding Bitcoin higher. In that scenario, ASST goes from roughly $15.86 to $37.24. That is still a very strong outcome, because the company’s existing Bitcoin exposure appreciates and CEBE per share rises as fixed senior claims shrink in BTC terms. At $126k Bitcoin, CEBE reaches roughly 17,488 sats per share. $37.24 stock price with the multiple staying flat and zero new Bitcoin purchased :) Scenario 2: $200 million of SATA issued every month Same Bitcoin path. Same starting point. But Strive adds $200 million of SATA every month and uses it to acquire more Bitcoin. In this scenario, the stock goes from roughly $15.86 to $54.21. CEBE rises to roughly 25,456 sats per share. The Bitcoin stack grows from about 19,000 BTC to roughly 45,900 BTC. This is where the mechanism gets violent. The static balance sheet benefits from Bitcoin appreciation. The SATA issuance scenario benefits from Bitcoin appreciation plus monthly balance sheet expansion. That means the common equity is not simply waiting for Bitcoin to go up. It is watching the company potentially compound its Bitcoin exposure while the denominator gets partially protected by the capital structure. At the end of the model: Static case: $37.24 stock price SATA monthly case: $54.21 stock price Difference: +$16.97 per share Relative uplift: about 45.6% If SATA issuance is done at attractive terms and deployed into Bitcoin, the common wins big after Bitcoin moons. That is the whole game. This is amplified Bitcoin. And if the market starts pricing that correctly, the stock does not merely track Bitcoin. It can re-rate around the speed and quality of true Bitcoin-per-share growth:
0:23

Strive (ASST) is set up to absolutely moon. The catapult has been loaded. ASST holders might have this question: What happens to common equity if Bitcoin rises and the balance sheet either stays static or keeps accumulating through SATA issuance? Using CEBE math, I modeled two scenarios with Bitcoin going from roughly $68.5k to $126k. Scenario 1: Static balance sheet No new Bitcoin. No new SATA. No additional capital formation. Just the existing balance sheet riding Bitcoin higher. In that scenario, ASST goes from roughly $15.86 to $37.24. That is still a very strong outcome, because the company’s existing Bitcoin exposure appreciates and CEBE per share rises as fixed senior claims shrink in BTC terms. At $126k Bitcoin, CEBE reaches roughly 17,488 sats per share. $37.24 stock price with the multiple staying flat and zero new Bitcoin purchased :) Scenario 2: $200 million of SATA issued every month Same Bitcoin path. Same starting point. But Strive adds $200 million of SATA every month and uses it to acquire more Bitcoin. In this scenario, the stock goes from roughly $15.86 to $54.21. CEBE rises to roughly 25,456 sats per share. The Bitcoin stack grows from about 19,000 BTC to roughly 45,900 BTC. This is where the mechanism gets violent. The static balance sheet benefits from Bitcoin appreciation. The SATA issuance scenario benefits from Bitcoin appreciation plus monthly balance sheet expansion. That means the common equity is not simply waiting for Bitcoin to go up. It is watching the company potentially compound its Bitcoin exposure while the denominator gets partially protected by the capital structure. At the end of the model: Static case: $37.24 stock price SATA monthly case: $54.21 stock price Difference: +$16.97 per share Relative uplift: about 45.6% If SATA issuance is done at attractive terms and deployed into Bitcoin, the common wins big after Bitcoin moons. That is the whole game. This is amplified Bitcoin. And if the market starts pricing that correctly, the stock does not merely track Bitcoin. It can re-rate around the speed and quality of true Bitcoin-per-share growth:

Adam Livingston

14,499 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Everyone obsesses over 21 million Bitcoin. But they memorized the wrong number: 4,000. That's roughly the max transactions in a block. 8 billion people. One transaction each. 60 years to clear the queue. The coin supply tells you the price potential Blockspace tells you who can afford to move the real thing Miners execute the final settlement. Fees are a tiny slice of miner revenue today, and that math has to break eventually. When it does, blockspace becomes the new oil. and you're either pumping it or paying for it.
0:22

Everyone obsesses over 21 million Bitcoin. But they memorized the wrong number: 4,000. That's roughly the max transactions in a block. 8 billion people. One transaction each. 60 years to clear the queue. The coin supply tells you the price potential Blockspace tells you who can afford to move the real thing Miners execute the final settlement. Fees are a tiny slice of miner revenue today, and that math has to break eventually. When it does, blockspace becomes the new oil. and you're either pumping it or paying for it.

Billy ₿oone

23,921 Aufrufe • vor 20 Tagen

"For every 10% Bitcoin goes down, your rate goes up 20 basis points. So even if Bitcoin goes to zero, your rate only increases by 2%. And it works the other way too" CJ Konstantinos, founder of Peoples Reserve, on how the self-repaying mortgage rate moves with Bitcoin "So, even if Bitcoin went to zero, it's just like a regular mortgage at that point, because you have no Bitcoin working for you anymore. We don't believe Bitcoin goes to zero, but if it did, that would be the consequence" "For every 10% Bitcoin goes up, we reduce your rate by 0.2%, up to a 33% LTV, a 300% collateral ratio. If your loan is $500,000 and you post $1.5 million of Bitcoin, or your original $500,000 grows into $1.5 million, we reduce your rate by 400 basis points. So if you're basic with an 8% starting rate but you over-collateralize, you get a 4% rate" "We believe over time Bitcoin will do what it was engineered to do and accrue value. Intraday volatility doesn't matter, it's a 30-day window. At the end of every month before your payment is due, we take a snapshot. So if Bitcoin flash crashes and bounces back, no change to your rate, it has to be a consistent drawdown over 30 days, and we reamortize the loan based on the collateral ratio at that time"
2:08

"For every 10% Bitcoin goes down, your rate goes up 20 basis points. So even if Bitcoin goes to zero, your rate only increases by 2%. And it works the other way too" CJ Konstantinos, founder of Peoples Reserve, on how the self-repaying mortgage rate moves with Bitcoin "So, even if Bitcoin went to zero, it's just like a regular mortgage at that point, because you have no Bitcoin working for you anymore. We don't believe Bitcoin goes to zero, but if it did, that would be the consequence" "For every 10% Bitcoin goes up, we reduce your rate by 0.2%, up to a 33% LTV, a 300% collateral ratio. If your loan is $500,000 and you post $1.5 million of Bitcoin, or your original $500,000 grows into $1.5 million, we reduce your rate by 400 basis points. So if you're basic with an 8% starting rate but you over-collateralize, you get a 4% rate" "We believe over time Bitcoin will do what it was engineered to do and accrue value. Intraday volatility doesn't matter, it's a 30-day window. At the end of every month before your payment is due, we take a snapshot. So if Bitcoin flash crashes and bounces back, no change to your rate, it has to be a consistent drawdown over 30 days, and we reamortize the loan based on the collateral ratio at that time"

The Wolf Of All Streets

90,567 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Watching Strategy accumulate Bitcoin in real time is insane... 4.6 BTC per minute so far today. A few days ago we surpassed 20,000,000 Bitcoin meaning there are less than 999,956 BTC left. People haven't done the math. Michael Saylor has figured out the product that 1% of a $300 trillion bond market is going to want. Satoshi Nakamoto figured out how to make peer to peer electronic cash. Michael Michael Saylor has finally figured out how to dig a channel in the ground from the massive ocean of endless fiat money so that gravity can do the work for water to flow into the kiddie pool that is Bitcoin. STRC is still only $3.8 billion and 1% of $300 trillion is $3 trillion... This Bitcoin price is not sustainable. STRC accumulated now well over 1,100 BTC today. There are less than a million Bitcoin to be issued and a handful of million that can be sold. What happens after 1,000 trading days? Bitcoin is infinity divisible so we won't run out or lose volume, but price must go up. What happens when a major world government simply "copy+paste" this for it's own sovereign debt+currency? The playbook is literally right here in real time. The demand is insatiable because you can print currency forever. "The first country that prints it's own currency for Bitcoin wins." - Michael Saylor
0:31

Watching Strategy accumulate Bitcoin in real time is insane... 4.6 BTC per minute so far today. A few days ago we surpassed 20,000,000 Bitcoin meaning there are less than 999,956 BTC left. People haven't done the math. Michael Saylor has figured out the product that 1% of a $300 trillion bond market is going to want. Satoshi Nakamoto figured out how to make peer to peer electronic cash. Michael Michael Saylor has finally figured out how to dig a channel in the ground from the massive ocean of endless fiat money so that gravity can do the work for water to flow into the kiddie pool that is Bitcoin. STRC is still only $3.8 billion and 1% of $300 trillion is $3 trillion... This Bitcoin price is not sustainable. STRC accumulated now well over 1,100 BTC today. There are less than a million Bitcoin to be issued and a handful of million that can be sold. What happens after 1,000 trading days? Bitcoin is infinity divisible so we won't run out or lose volume, but price must go up. What happens when a major world government simply "copy+paste" this for it's own sovereign debt+currency? The playbook is literally right here in real time. The demand is insatiable because you can print currency forever. "The first country that prints it's own currency for Bitcoin wins." - Michael Saylor

Luke Broyles

144,156 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

🚨 MICHAEL SAYLOR IS ABOUT TO SELL BITCOIN 🚨 And it's much worse for the market than you think. Let me explain Saylor built the most aggressive Bitcoin accumulation machine in corporate history The model was simple: 1. Raise capital 2. Buy BTC 3. Reinvest returns 4. Repeat Every dip was a buy. Every week a new purchase. 5 years straight BUT Then Q1 2026 happened BTC dropped from 87k to 68k in three months. Strategy posted a $12.54B loss But even that's not the real problem Here's the real problem To fund the machine, Saylor issued STRC - preferred stock paying investors 11.5% annual dividend $8.5 billion raised - all of it went into BTC The catch - dividends don't stop when Bitcoin drops Strategy now owes investors $1.2 billion every single year. Regardless of price So yesterday Saylor admitted it publicly The man who screamed "never sell your Bitcoin" on every podcast - may now sell Bitcoin In isolation, selling to cover dividends isn't catastrophic But the narrative just broke And once the narrative breaks, the damage is structural Here's how it plays out Every time BTC drops and stays low - Strategy sells more BTC to cover the $1.2B obligation Every sale pushes price down Lower price means more BTC needed to cover the same obligation Which means more and more selling Strategy holds 818,000 BTC - 3.9% of all Bitcoin that will ever exist At current prices, covering annual dividends alone requires selling roughly 15,500 BTC per year That's not a number the market quietly absorbs For 5 years Saylor was the floor under every dip Now he's potentially the ceiling June 8 - shareholder vote on dividends. Watch that date BTC doesn't like forced sellers. It never has NOTIFS ON!
0:28

🚨 MICHAEL SAYLOR IS ABOUT TO SELL BITCOIN 🚨 And it's much worse for the market than you think. Let me explain Saylor built the most aggressive Bitcoin accumulation machine in corporate history The model was simple: 1. Raise capital 2. Buy BTC 3. Reinvest returns 4. Repeat Every dip was a buy. Every week a new purchase. 5 years straight BUT Then Q1 2026 happened BTC dropped from 87k to 68k in three months. Strategy posted a $12.54B loss But even that's not the real problem Here's the real problem To fund the machine, Saylor issued STRC - preferred stock paying investors 11.5% annual dividend $8.5 billion raised - all of it went into BTC The catch - dividends don't stop when Bitcoin drops Strategy now owes investors $1.2 billion every single year. Regardless of price So yesterday Saylor admitted it publicly The man who screamed "never sell your Bitcoin" on every podcast - may now sell Bitcoin In isolation, selling to cover dividends isn't catastrophic But the narrative just broke And once the narrative breaks, the damage is structural Here's how it plays out Every time BTC drops and stays low - Strategy sells more BTC to cover the $1.2B obligation Every sale pushes price down Lower price means more BTC needed to cover the same obligation Which means more and more selling Strategy holds 818,000 BTC - 3.9% of all Bitcoin that will ever exist At current prices, covering annual dividends alone requires selling roughly 15,500 BTC per year That's not a number the market quietly absorbs For 5 years Saylor was the floor under every dip Now he's potentially the ceiling June 8 - shareholder vote on dividends. Watch that date BTC doesn't like forced sellers. It never has NOTIFS ON!

NoName

57,733 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

🔥METAPLANET = INSANE OPPORTUNITY🔥 I think everyone is SEVERELY underappreciating what Metaplanet is building out in Japan. If Metaplanet can borrow at 4.15% today and carry that debt until Bitcoin reaches $1 million, the economics for existing shareholders resemble selling common equity at more than TEN TIMES NAV. Yup. Imagine being able to issue equity to buy Bitcoin at a 10x mNAV. Let's break it down. The first BitBond issuance was tiny, roughly ¥200 million, or $1.3 million. The pipe behind it could eventually become enormous. Metaplanet can now issue ordinary yen-denominated bonds through its own securities subsidiary, pay investors around 4.15%, use the capital to buy Bitcoin, and roll the principal into new bonds every three years. The bondholders receive a fixed yield in yen. Metaplanet’s common shareholders capture everything Bitcoin earns above that cost of capital. Here’s how absurdly powerful the math gets. Metaplanet borrows $1 at 4.15% and buys $1 of Bitcoin. After 3 years, that $1 of debt has grown to approximately $1.13 if we assume the interest is financed and rolled. If Bitcoin doubles, the Bitcoin is worth $2. Pay the $1.13 obligation and common shareholders are left with $0.87 of incremental equity without issuing a single common share. Economically, that is equivalent to selling common equity at roughly 1.77× mNAV: $2.00 of Bitcoin ÷ $1.13 bond obligation = 1.77×. Starting with Bitcoin around $63,000: At $100,000 BTC, the bond behaves like equity issued at 1.41× mNAV. At $150,000 BTC, it behaves like equity issued at 2.11× mNAV. At $200,000 BTC, it behaves like equity issued at 2.81× mNAV. That matters enormously while Metaplanet’s common stock trades around or below NAV. Selling common shares down here would dilute existing shareholders. BitBonds allow the company to acquire more Bitcoin per share while waiting for the common-stock premium to return. Now extend this idea over the next decade. Assume Bitcoin rises from $63,000 to $1 million over 10 years. Every $1 of Bitcoin purchased today becomes $15.87. $1 borrowed at 4.15% and continuously rolled becomes approximately $1.50 owed. Common shareholders capture the remaining $14.37. The mNAV-equivalent financing multiple becomes: 15.87 ÷ 1.50 = 10.57× mNAV. Read that again. Yes. I'll repeat it for you. Metaplanet can borrow at 4.15% today and carry that debt until Bitcoin reaches $1 million, the economics for existing shareholders resemble selling common equity at more than TEN TIMES NAV. So I modeled a simple scenario. Metaplanet begins with 43,000 BTC at $63,000, giving it roughly $2.71 billion of Bitcoin. It then maintains 10% balance-sheet amplification all the way to $1 million Bitcoin. Gross BTC exposure stays at 1.10× common equity. New bonds are issued monthly at 4.15%, and every bond is rolled after three years. The opening issuance would be approximately $271 million, buying another 4,300 BTC immediately. As Bitcoin appreciates, the balance sheet creates additional borrowing capacity. Metaplanet keeps issuing enough to maintain the same conservative 10% amplification instead of allowing leverage to run wild. Average monthly issuance begins around $8 million during year one. Once the three-year rollover cycle starts, new issuance plus refinancings average approximately: $37 million per month in year 3 $72 million per month in year 6 $101 million per month in year 8 $192 million per month in year 10 Across the full decade, the company issues approximately $8.9 billion of gross bonds, including around $3.5 billion of refinanced maturities. Here is where Metaplanet ends when Bitcoin reaches $1 million (not a prediction, just a projection of these inputs): 59,727 BTC $59.73 billion of gross Bitcoin assets $5.43 billion of outstanding debt $54.30 billion of common NAV Without BitBonds, the original 43,000 BTC would simply be worth $43 billion. The bond strategy therefore creates approximately $11.30 billion of additional common equity. Same common shareholders. Same original 43,000 BTC starting point. Approximately 16,727 additional Bitcoin accumulated through controlled balance-sheet amplification. That produces 26.3% more NAV per share at $1 million Bitcoin without common-share dilution from the bond program. Of course, they still need buyers for the bonds. They must stagger maturities, maintain adequate liquidity, service the coupons and avoid building some psychotic refinancing wall during a Bitcoin bear market. The relevant hurdle is also BTC measured in yen, rather than dollars. But at 10% amplification, Bitcoin only needs to outperform a 4.15% yen cost of capital for the strategy to become accretive. Metaplanet owns 43,000 Bitcoin and now owns the securities platform capable of distributing its debt directly into Japan’s gigantic market for fixed-income savings. This is becoming much bigger than a Bitcoin treasury company. They are building a machine that converts Japanese demand for fixed yen yield into permanently increasing Bitcoin per common share. The bondholders get 4.15%. Metaplanet shareholders get everything Bitcoin does above it for the next decade. Short fiat. Long Bitcoin. This trade is OBSCENE:
0:35

🔥METAPLANET = INSANE OPPORTUNITY🔥 I think everyone is SEVERELY underappreciating what Metaplanet is building out in Japan. If Metaplanet can borrow at 4.15% today and carry that debt until Bitcoin reaches $1 million, the economics for existing shareholders resemble selling common equity at more than TEN TIMES NAV. Yup. Imagine being able to issue equity to buy Bitcoin at a 10x mNAV. Let's break it down. The first BitBond issuance was tiny, roughly ¥200 million, or $1.3 million. The pipe behind it could eventually become enormous. Metaplanet can now issue ordinary yen-denominated bonds through its own securities subsidiary, pay investors around 4.15%, use the capital to buy Bitcoin, and roll the principal into new bonds every three years. The bondholders receive a fixed yield in yen. Metaplanet’s common shareholders capture everything Bitcoin earns above that cost of capital. Here’s how absurdly powerful the math gets. Metaplanet borrows $1 at 4.15% and buys $1 of Bitcoin. After 3 years, that $1 of debt has grown to approximately $1.13 if we assume the interest is financed and rolled. If Bitcoin doubles, the Bitcoin is worth $2. Pay the $1.13 obligation and common shareholders are left with $0.87 of incremental equity without issuing a single common share. Economically, that is equivalent to selling common equity at roughly 1.77× mNAV: $2.00 of Bitcoin ÷ $1.13 bond obligation = 1.77×. Starting with Bitcoin around $63,000: At $100,000 BTC, the bond behaves like equity issued at 1.41× mNAV. At $150,000 BTC, it behaves like equity issued at 2.11× mNAV. At $200,000 BTC, it behaves like equity issued at 2.81× mNAV. That matters enormously while Metaplanet’s common stock trades around or below NAV. Selling common shares down here would dilute existing shareholders. BitBonds allow the company to acquire more Bitcoin per share while waiting for the common-stock premium to return. Now extend this idea over the next decade. Assume Bitcoin rises from $63,000 to $1 million over 10 years. Every $1 of Bitcoin purchased today becomes $15.87. $1 borrowed at 4.15% and continuously rolled becomes approximately $1.50 owed. Common shareholders capture the remaining $14.37. The mNAV-equivalent financing multiple becomes: 15.87 ÷ 1.50 = 10.57× mNAV. Read that again. Yes. I'll repeat it for you. Metaplanet can borrow at 4.15% today and carry that debt until Bitcoin reaches $1 million, the economics for existing shareholders resemble selling common equity at more than TEN TIMES NAV. So I modeled a simple scenario. Metaplanet begins with 43,000 BTC at $63,000, giving it roughly $2.71 billion of Bitcoin. It then maintains 10% balance-sheet amplification all the way to $1 million Bitcoin. Gross BTC exposure stays at 1.10× common equity. New bonds are issued monthly at 4.15%, and every bond is rolled after three years. The opening issuance would be approximately $271 million, buying another 4,300 BTC immediately. As Bitcoin appreciates, the balance sheet creates additional borrowing capacity. Metaplanet keeps issuing enough to maintain the same conservative 10% amplification instead of allowing leverage to run wild. Average monthly issuance begins around $8 million during year one. Once the three-year rollover cycle starts, new issuance plus refinancings average approximately: $37 million per month in year 3 $72 million per month in year 6 $101 million per month in year 8 $192 million per month in year 10 Across the full decade, the company issues approximately $8.9 billion of gross bonds, including around $3.5 billion of refinanced maturities. Here is where Metaplanet ends when Bitcoin reaches $1 million (not a prediction, just a projection of these inputs): 59,727 BTC $59.73 billion of gross Bitcoin assets $5.43 billion of outstanding debt $54.30 billion of common NAV Without BitBonds, the original 43,000 BTC would simply be worth $43 billion. The bond strategy therefore creates approximately $11.30 billion of additional common equity. Same common shareholders. Same original 43,000 BTC starting point. Approximately 16,727 additional Bitcoin accumulated through controlled balance-sheet amplification. That produces 26.3% more NAV per share at $1 million Bitcoin without common-share dilution from the bond program. Of course, they still need buyers for the bonds. They must stagger maturities, maintain adequate liquidity, service the coupons and avoid building some psychotic refinancing wall during a Bitcoin bear market. The relevant hurdle is also BTC measured in yen, rather than dollars. But at 10% amplification, Bitcoin only needs to outperform a 4.15% yen cost of capital for the strategy to become accretive. Metaplanet owns 43,000 Bitcoin and now owns the securities platform capable of distributing its debt directly into Japan’s gigantic market for fixed-income savings. This is becoming much bigger than a Bitcoin treasury company. They are building a machine that converts Japanese demand for fixed yen yield into permanently increasing Bitcoin per common share. The bondholders get 4.15%. Metaplanet shareholders get everything Bitcoin does above it for the next decade. Short fiat. Long Bitcoin. This trade is OBSCENE:

Adam Livingston

24,600 Aufrufe • vor 15 Tagen

OG Barry Silbert believes #Bittensor has the potential to be bigger than #Bitcoin ⚫️ "When I think about ways that #Bitcoin could be improved upon.. I believe, is to utilize the incentive being paid to #Bitcoin miners to incent an activity beyond just securing the network" "So with #Bittensor, potentially, given that it is identical to #Bitcoin and that it was a fair launch, there was no VC funding or foundation or pre-mine, there was no airdrops, it's capped at 21 million, you have halvings.. it's just like #Bitcoin" "But the difference, and I think kind of the benefit, is the incentive used by #Bitcoin miners is instead being redirected to build out #Bittensor and to incent people to engage" "And from that perspective, there's no reason to believe that #Bittensor could not be as big or even bigger than #Bitcoin" Full #Bittensor documentary dropping October 29, 2025 👇 $TAO
1:16

OG Barry Silbert believes #Bittensor has the potential to be bigger than #Bitcoin ⚫️ "When I think about ways that #Bitcoin could be improved upon.. I believe, is to utilize the incentive being paid to #Bitcoin miners to incent an activity beyond just securing the network" "So with #Bittensor, potentially, given that it is identical to #Bitcoin and that it was a fair launch, there was no VC funding or foundation or pre-mine, there was no airdrops, it's capped at 21 million, you have halvings.. it's just like #Bitcoin" "But the difference, and I think kind of the benefit, is the incentive used by #Bitcoin miners is instead being redirected to build out #Bittensor and to incent people to engage" "And from that perspective, there's no reason to believe that #Bittensor could not be as big or even bigger than #Bitcoin" Full #Bittensor documentary dropping October 29, 2025 👇 $TAO

𝗗𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗗 𝗕𝗢𝗡𝗚𝗢

24,786 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

$750 per Bitcoin? How do you reconcile Bitcoin trading over $100,000 on its native network, and the wrapped version $WBTC on Ethereum matching that price… while wrapped Bitcoin $pWBTC on PulseChain.com Ethereum fork including ERC20s sits at just $750? You are either ignoring reality or reality is ignoring you. Oh, and before you dismiss it, take a breath PulseChain’s entire wrapped Bitcoin supply $pWBTC is just 154,410 tokens. Yes, 154,410. That is microscopic compared to the colossal supply of $WBTC on the Ethereum chain and the native $BTC supply on the Bitcoin chain, both of which are 21,000,000. Yes, MILLION. ☑️Scarcity ☑️Discount ☑️Bitcoin $BTC - $100,000+ ☑️Ethereum Wrapped Bitcoin $WBTC - $100,000+ ☑️Pulsechain Wrapped Bitcoin $pWBTC - $750 👀 This is not just a price gap it is a screaming inefficiency. And markets do not leave inefficiencies open forever. This is not financial advice this is financial awareness. Act accordingly. Song: Billy Squier "The Stroke" 🔊
0:27

$750 per Bitcoin? How do you reconcile Bitcoin trading over $100,000 on its native network, and the wrapped version $WBTC on Ethereum matching that price… while wrapped Bitcoin $pWBTC on PulseChain.com Ethereum fork including ERC20s sits at just $750? You are either ignoring reality or reality is ignoring you. Oh, and before you dismiss it, take a breath PulseChain’s entire wrapped Bitcoin supply $pWBTC is just 154,410 tokens. Yes, 154,410. That is microscopic compared to the colossal supply of $WBTC on the Ethereum chain and the native $BTC supply on the Bitcoin chain, both of which are 21,000,000. Yes, MILLION. ☑️Scarcity ☑️Discount ☑️Bitcoin $BTC - $100,000+ ☑️Ethereum Wrapped Bitcoin $WBTC - $100,000+ ☑️Pulsechain Wrapped Bitcoin $pWBTC - $750 👀 This is not just a price gap it is a screaming inefficiency. And markets do not leave inefficiencies open forever. This is not financial advice this is financial awareness. Act accordingly. Song: Billy Squier "The Stroke" 🔊

Rackham Rishel

30,258 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

"Did we actually win the block size war — or did we lose?" Samson Mow asks the question most Bitcoiners won't. Fees as a filter, the jump to 4MB, and why Luke Dashjr may have been right about smaller blocks. The context the BIP 110 fight skips. 👇 Samson Mow on whether we actually won the block size war: "The Core people say the fees are the filter. But that misses the point — you're not looking at the entire network, and what's already happened. Yes, fees filter spam. You pay fees to transact, and a spammer pays fees too. But during the block size war, we changed the whole dynamic. We changed the unit economics — we increased the block size and decreased fee pressure. So we actually made it cheaper to spam the network. Only one person talked about decreasing the block size back then — Luke Dashjr. And I think he was right. So it begs the question: did we actually win the block size war, or did we lose? We had a net increase in effective block space, going to four megabytes — and the repercussions of that, I don't think we've really reasoned out. Maybe it was a mistake to go to four. Maybe we should have kept it at one, and left the settings of the network as they were." Samson Mow on The The Bitcoin Matrix Podcast ⚡️ #243
1:15

"Did we actually win the block size war — or did we lose?" Samson Mow asks the question most Bitcoiners won't. Fees as a filter, the jump to 4MB, and why Luke Dashjr may have been right about smaller blocks. The context the BIP 110 fight skips. 👇 Samson Mow on whether we actually won the block size war: "The Core people say the fees are the filter. But that misses the point — you're not looking at the entire network, and what's already happened. Yes, fees filter spam. You pay fees to transact, and a spammer pays fees too. But during the block size war, we changed the whole dynamic. We changed the unit economics — we increased the block size and decreased fee pressure. So we actually made it cheaper to spam the network. Only one person talked about decreasing the block size back then — Luke Dashjr. And I think he was right. So it begs the question: did we actually win the block size war, or did we lose? We had a net increase in effective block space, going to four megabytes — and the repercussions of that, I don't think we've really reasoned out. Maybe it was a mistake to go to four. Maybe we should have kept it at one, and left the settings of the network as they were." Samson Mow on The The Bitcoin Matrix Podcast ⚡️ #243

Cedric Youngelman ⚡️

41,063 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

🚀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:
0:20

🚀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:

Adam Livingston

66,707 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Did I spam bitcoin? At Braiins, our focus is simple: help miners mine more bitcoin. We love bitcoin. To us, it’s the only truly decentralized digital money. But every once in a while, we’ve used a block to do something else too: mark a moment worth remembering. Leaving a message in a block isn’t exactly new. Satoshi did it in the first one: “The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks.” A newspaper headline, timestamped into history. We’ve followed Satoshi’s example a few times since. Like when El Salvador declared bitcoin legal tender, or when the ESG crowd came for bitcoin mining. And, on a more personal note, when I asked Summer Meng to marry me, which we also captured in this video. Those messages will remain on the bitcoin timechain forever. So, did I spam bitcoin?
1:21

Did I spam bitcoin? At Braiins, our focus is simple: help miners mine more bitcoin. We love bitcoin. To us, it’s the only truly decentralized digital money. But every once in a while, we’ve used a block to do something else too: mark a moment worth remembering. Leaving a message in a block isn’t exactly new. Satoshi did it in the first one: “The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks.” A newspaper headline, timestamped into history. We’ve followed Satoshi’s example a few times since. Like when El Salvador declared bitcoin legal tender, or when the ESG crowd came for bitcoin mining. And, on a more personal note, when I asked Summer Meng to marry me, which we also captured in this video. Those messages will remain on the bitcoin timechain forever. So, did I spam bitcoin?

Kristian Csepcsar

13,262 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

Monero’s tail emission, the permanent 0.6 XMR block reward that kicked in after the main emission curve ended in mid 2022 was deliberately designed to be perpetual and inflationary by a tiny amount not because the developers wanted endless money printing, but to solve a problem most cryptocurrencies pretend doesn’t exist. Unlike Bitcoin, which bets everything on transaction fees eventually being high enough to secure the chain once subsidies end, Monero’s creators openly admitted that a pure fee market might fail under certain conditions (low fees → low security → centralization risk). So they baked in a tiny forever inflation of 0.6 XMR every 2 minutes, trending toward 0% over decades as the total supply grows specifically to guarantee miners always have a baseline incentive, no matter how low fees drop. This makes Monero one of the very few major crypto that mathematically ensures long term security doesn’t rely on hoping people suddenly pay high transaction fees forever. It’s a quiet but bold philosophical departure from the “fixed supply forever” dogma most crypto projects follow. Most people only know Monero equals privacy, but this tail emission choice is actually a pretty hardcore engineering stance on sustainable decentralization
2:20

Monero’s tail emission, the permanent 0.6 XMR block reward that kicked in after the main emission curve ended in mid 2022 was deliberately designed to be perpetual and inflationary by a tiny amount not because the developers wanted endless money printing, but to solve a problem most cryptocurrencies pretend doesn’t exist. Unlike Bitcoin, which bets everything on transaction fees eventually being high enough to secure the chain once subsidies end, Monero’s creators openly admitted that a pure fee market might fail under certain conditions (low fees → low security → centralization risk). So they baked in a tiny forever inflation of 0.6 XMR every 2 minutes, trending toward 0% over decades as the total supply grows specifically to guarantee miners always have a baseline incentive, no matter how low fees drop. This makes Monero one of the very few major crypto that mathematically ensures long term security doesn’t rely on hoping people suddenly pay high transaction fees forever. It’s a quiet but bold philosophical departure from the “fixed supply forever” dogma most crypto projects follow. Most people only know Monero equals privacy, but this tail emission choice is actually a pretty hardcore engineering stance on sustainable decentralization

Crypto Piggie

18,145 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Investing in precious metals is a religion Bitcoin proved this by being better money The precious metals investors don't plan to change their opinion, no matter how many facts are presented (Just like religion) Everything that Peter Schiff mentioned in this debate with Saifedean Ammous as a downside of Bitcoin, can be applied to gold Nobody sends and receives gold to settle transactions today, but Peter wants to convince you that Bitcoin isn't money ("My religion is better") Once you get out of the precious metals echo chamber, you can start analyzing the world with a fresh mind Peter criticizes Michael Saylor for buying $55B of Bitcoin and only being at break-even When Bitcoin is at $150K, MSTR's 700,000 BTC stack will have doubled When Bitcoin is $300K, $MSTR's Bitcoin will be worth 4x what they paid for it When it gets to $1M, MSTR's current holdings would be worth $700 BILLION That's a 13X Even after that happens, Peter will be saying Bitcoin is a scam Because like I said... Investing in precious metals is a religion
8:28

Investing in precious metals is a religion Bitcoin proved this by being better money The precious metals investors don't plan to change their opinion, no matter how many facts are presented (Just like religion) Everything that Peter Schiff mentioned in this debate with Saifedean Ammous as a downside of Bitcoin, can be applied to gold Nobody sends and receives gold to settle transactions today, but Peter wants to convince you that Bitcoin isn't money ("My religion is better") Once you get out of the precious metals echo chamber, you can start analyzing the world with a fresh mind Peter criticizes Michael Saylor for buying $55B of Bitcoin and only being at break-even When Bitcoin is at $150K, MSTR's 700,000 BTC stack will have doubled When Bitcoin is $300K, $MSTR's Bitcoin will be worth 4x what they paid for it When it gets to $1M, MSTR's current holdings would be worth $700 BILLION That's a 13X Even after that happens, Peter will be saying Bitcoin is a scam Because like I said... Investing in precious metals is a religion

Rajat Soni, CFA

13,598 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

The founder of #Cardano $ADA Charles Hoskinson on #BitcoinDeFi "when our team started, a proof on Bitcoin was 40GB, now 28.1MB. It used to take 354s to validate a Bitcoin DeFi proof, now 0.149s. It used to cost $14,000 to validate that transaction, now $37." 👇 What used to take 40 GB of data, 6 minutes, and cost over $14,000 to process now takes under 30 MB, less than a second, and costs about $37 — and they already proved it works on Bitcoin’s main network. In plain English: Bitcoin holders will soon be able to put their BTC to work (earn yield, lend, etc.) on #Cardano without handing it over to a middleman or wrapped-token service. The Bitcoin stays locked safely on the Bitcoin network itself. This is one of the clearest signs yet that real, usable #Bitcoin #DeFi is getting closer. This isn't possible elsewhere. Bullish for $ADA. 🔥
1:12

The founder of #Cardano $ADA Charles Hoskinson on #BitcoinDeFi "when our team started, a proof on Bitcoin was 40GB, now 28.1MB. It used to take 354s to validate a Bitcoin DeFi proof, now 0.149s. It used to cost $14,000 to validate that transaction, now $37." 👇 What used to take 40 GB of data, 6 minutes, and cost over $14,000 to process now takes under 30 MB, less than a second, and costs about $37 — and they already proved it works on Bitcoin’s main network. In plain English: Bitcoin holders will soon be able to put their BTC to work (earn yield, lend, etc.) on #Cardano without handing it over to a middleman or wrapped-token service. The Bitcoin stays locked safely on the Bitcoin network itself. This is one of the clearest signs yet that real, usable #Bitcoin #DeFi is getting closer. This isn't possible elsewhere. Bullish for $ADA. 🔥

🪏Ed n'Stuff

38,008 Aufrufe • vor 9 Tagen