But I will say this. It is easy to dunk on all these companies and their strategies after Bitcoin has tanked almost 50% from its all time high.
These companies brought massive buying pressure to the market but the selling pressure was much more prevalent thus the price collapse.
Saying these companies robbed the bull market would mean the net selling would had to slow down as the price rose. This article didn’t mention when the companies were buying who was selling? When Saylor bought +200k coins a seller came to the market thus keeping the price from exploding higher.
But as price rises more holders will come to the market to sell.
This is one of the major biases Bitcoiners have about the credit markets. Things go down in fiat terms and everyone wants to point the finger and share an opinion that completely undermines the point companies enter the markets in the first place.
To raise capital.
All the companies listed are trying to raise money to buy Bitcoin. Those companies who are successful will indeed have an opportunity to outperform Bitcoin due to growth dynamics in fiat terms. Those who don’t will fail liquidate their bitcoin and go bankrupt.
Plus even as the price of the stock trends to zero if the company has zero debt and can pay it’s obligations and never sell a sat they will be in a very strong position once the market goes risk on again.
The article does a good job pointing that out and encourages people to just buy real Bitcoin and store it away but companies will come and will bring products to the market built on Bitcoin that will appeal to different investors.
Of course price makes everyone come to the yard. Both buyers and sellers.
This is my main critique of the article. The folks selling bitcoin are completely ignored and the companies that are massively down in fiat still hold BTC which is way ahead of the trend.
Isn't it true for every industry for some extent? That chunk of everything that it produces disappears into extractive financial engineering layer built on top of it?
I agree with 90% of this post.
But I will say this. It is easy to dunk on all these companies and their strategies after Bitcoin has tanked almost 50% from its all time high.
These companies brought massive buying pressure to the market but the selling pressure was much more prevalent thus the price collapse.
Saying these companies robbed the bull market would mean the net selling would had to slow down as the price rose. This article didn’t mention when the companies were buying who was selling? When Saylor bought +200k coins a seller came to the market thus keeping the price from exploding higher.
But as price rises more holders will come to the market to sell.
This is one of the major biases Bitcoiners have about the credit markets. Things go down in fiat terms and everyone wants to point the finger and share an opinion that completely undermines the point companies enter the markets in the first place.
To raise capital.
All the companies listed are trying to raise money to buy Bitcoin. Those companies who are successful will indeed have an opportunity to outperform Bitcoin due to growth dynamics in fiat terms. Those who don’t will fail liquidate their bitcoin and go bankrupt.
Plus even as the price of the stock trends to zero if the company has zero debt and can pay it’s obligations and never sell a sat they will be in a very strong position once the market goes risk on again.
The article does a good job pointing that out and encourages people to just buy real Bitcoin and store it away but companies will come and will bring products to the market built on Bitcoin that will appeal to different investors.
Paper Bitcoin is part of the market.
I'm not convinced this is right. Brought lots of dormant coins out of hiding (eg, Adam Backs of the world).
Of course price makes everyone come to the yard. Both buyers and sellers.
This is my main critique of the article. The folks selling bitcoin are completely ignored and the companies that are massively down in fiat still hold BTC which is way ahead of the trend.
Isn't it true for every industry for some extent? That chunk of everything that it produces disappears into extractive financial engineering layer built on top of it?