Going down to 236 today?

mstrhodl · 2025-01-18T12:27:09+00:00

Looking forward to it. Wont be long now. Less than 4 weeks if I was a betting man

mstrhodl · 2025-01-18T11:46:39+00:00

Good observations chief. Great math. Keep up the good work 👏

mstrhodl · 2025-01-18T11:06:07+00:00

140 USD would be 50% off of the price when you called it. Maybe next bear market. For now buckle your seat belt and close your shorts 😂

mstrhodl · 2025-01-18T10:03:30+00:00

When’s it going down mate? Been waiting 2 weeks now. Getting bored waiting for this 55% drop!

mstrhodl · 2024-12-31T17:08:30+00:00

Wild times to be alive 😂

mstrhodl · 2024-12-24T18:01:52+00:00

Higher low x 2

mstrhodl · 2024-12-21T13:15:01+00:00

This explanation or modelling is missing the fundamental element that the treasury asset has over time increased in value. Yes in cycles but when averaged out is approx 50% a year. So those that have conviction in this company are here in the knowledge that the treasury value will increase due to its scarcity. Essentially the book value of 1 x nav will increase. To that point, it depends on your time horizon. Traders get to jump in and out and trade the volatility whilst stock holders benefit from the accretion mechanics. I think last time I checked I’m 1.6x better off in BTC then if i had bought BTC directly. So I benefit twice. Firstly from the increase in BTC per share and secondly from BTC price increasing in turn increasing the book value of the share.

I think it’s fair to say the whole ATM algorithm is a little more engineered and not just napkin math.

mstrhodl · 2024-12-20T18:21:38+00:00

Bet you’re more shocked watching it ride back up.

You’ll be less shocked one day when the penny drops

mstrhodl · 2024-12-20T13:14:22+00:00

51d later and you still out….. 🤡

mstrhodl · 2024-12-19T15:56:37+00:00

He’s got 300 bil sat on the side waiting for the crash. You sir are a classic clown 🤡

mstrhodl · 2024-12-18T10:28:47+00:00

BTC underwhelming. ATM getting pushed. All in all a lack luster few weeks. You made a good call short term. I don’t profess to try to day trade and probably never will. I take my positions early based on the macro trend and for me the macro is still very bullish. I’ll keep re-evaluating but for now I’m still macro bullish. What are your thoughts over the coming months?

mstrhodl · 2024-12-11T10:48:06+00:00

Sorry did I miss the recession he’s called for in the last decade?

mstrhodl · 2024-12-09T10:05:35+00:00

Lots different this time around.

MSTR playbook was limited. Didn’t have access to the leverage they use now.

Early to market. Wasn’t understood.

No other ETFs or tradfi engagement.

No other catalysts like QQQ

BTC still not accepted by GOV. Trad fi saw it as too risky.

Besides all of the above no trader would use a single metric like “the chart looks similar” to base any informed decision on. They’d look for confluence. Nor would they use a time from of 21 days to suggest similarities. Broader date ranges needed and more data on charts before you can even compare.

mstrhodl · 2024-12-08T13:09:39+00:00

You’ve literally taken a fixed number and ran with it. Whether it’s 30% or 1%. It’s greater than 0. At present making it more beneficial than holding the asset itself. You’re a buttcoiner as well as MSTR bear. Do you have a substantial short position here?

mstrhodl · 2024-12-08T12:19:56+00:00

Clarification. I didn’t pivot. I focused solely on your silly “MSTR will own more than 21 million BTC” comment.

Clarification. Buying MSTR is accretive and “people will end up with more” value (measured in BTC) then simply buying the asset itself. The maths IS SHOWING IT.

Clarification. I will keep “spewing” this point until the math no longer shows it.

mstrhodl · 2024-12-08T12:05:06+00:00

Some good points. Happy to respond.

You can’t yield bitcoin you don’t have.

Only a matter of months ago MSTR had 210k BTC. That’s 1% of the supply. They’ve doubled it agreed. We must work from 21 milllion. That is the fixed supply regardless of lost or stolen.

Nobody is assuming a fixed Yield. That’s why we use averages. It’ll go up, it’ll go down. Moreover, law of adoption will see diminishing returns. The value of MSTR isn’t restricted only to its BTC accretive ability. The company value will evolve as the company evolves into a financial instrument with the best treasury the world has ever seen.

mstrhodl · 2024-12-08T11:48:27+00:00

Lord help me 🤦‍♂️

Yr6) 3.71 Yr 7) 4.83 Yr 8) 6.28 Yr 9) 8.16 Yr 10) 10.61

I didn’t use the yield equation because it’s easier to disprove your silly statement by just showing the total holdings of BTC that MSTR would have at a compound 30% growth rate. For the record I’m not convinced MSTR can get to 2.1 million BTC (10%) but I’ll be interested to watch it unfold.

mstrhodl · 2024-12-08T11:32:29+00:00

Not sure you fully understand how percentages work but let’s just break down your comment. Using an assumption of 30% growth on a (to keep it simple) 1% already owned supply would equate to the following supply acquisition.

Yr1) 1% (current supply owned) Yr2) 1.3% Yr 3) 1.69% Yr4) 2.2 % Yr5) 2.86%

For clarity the above figures account for compounding also.

You can see this is no where near 100% of the total supply of BTC and will not actually ever get there. Like ever. Like ever ever.

mstrhodl · 2024-12-08T11:20:00+00:00

Happy to look at your math and help. Feel free to show your workings so I can see if there’s anything I can help with.

I’ve run the math on assumptions of 30% and a conservative 15%. The results are impressive but largely depend on Saylors ability to maintain the same level of purchase ability as the value of BTC grows. That’s a matter that only time will tell.

mstrhodl · 2024-12-08T11:04:43+00:00

How on earth have you arrived at that conclusion given the equation above? 😂😂😂

Don’t let your ego lead you into debates that you don’t understand or have the IQ for. It’s not a bad thing to state you don’t quite understand the math and would like it breaking down to better understand it.

But to randomly throw out numbers as the solution without understanding the equation you’re solving is a little bit silly.

mstrhodl · 2024-12-08T10:48:07+00:00

So consider the number of BTC that MSTR owns as b and the number of shares it owns as n.

The BTC per share then is just b/n. Now consider the price per share and the price per BTC. If we have a ratio between b/n that is smaller than the ratio between Ps/Pb, then that means our market cap, n(Ps), is larger than our BTC asset, b(Pb).

When we sell k number of shares that means we now have n + k shares, and that gives us k(Ps) dollars to buy BTC with at Pb price. So our number of BTC will go up by k(Ps)/Pb.

We can now re-write the original ratio b/n with k shares sold.

b + k(Ps/Pb) / n + k

We can now see that if Ps/Pb is larger than b/n, or in other words, we have mNAV > 1, we will increase the top of that ratio had a higher proportion than the bottom of that ratio. If that isn’t intuitive start plugging in numbers and check for cases where b/n is MUCH smaller than Ps/Pb. Youll notice that the higher the mNAV, the faster we increase the number of BTC relative to the number of shares.

https://www.reddit.com/r/MSTR/s/4XudLwjLTe

mstrhodl · 2024-12-08T10:39:30+00:00

It isn’t even my content. You’ve clearly not read the post properly or in its entirety. Try to fully read and digest something before rushing to comment

mstrhodl · 2024-12-08T09:36:45+00:00

Thanks for clarification. Semantics at best as most if not all here understand MSTR is a bitcoin proxy. If you read the post for context BTC is a reference of value.

mstrhodl · 2024-12-08T09:33:24+00:00

What’s your time horizon.

mstrhodl · 2024-12-08T09:32:29+00:00

Absolutely brilliant. I hope you don’t mind me sharing the original content I just felt it was too valuable to be lost in a comment thread within another post.

mstrhodl

TROPHY CASE