Author: TechFlow
There has never been a shortage of legendary stories in the history of Wall Street, but MicroStrategy's transformation path is destined to become a unique new legend.
An obscure enterprise software company made a surprising decision in August 2020 to invest all of its idle $250 million in Bitcoin. This decision not only changed the company's fate, but also created an unprecedented business model.
In just four years, MicroStrategy has transformed from a software company with annual revenue of only $500 million to the world's largest listed Bitcoin holder, holding nearly 390,000 Bitcoins, accounting for 1.8% of the global supply. Even more astonishing is that its stock price has soared from $12 to a maximum of $500, its market value has exceeded $100 billion, and its daily trading volume has once surpassed Nvidia.
This is not just a simple investment story, but a carefully designed art of capital operation. By raising debt at low interest rates and issuing stocks, MicroStrategy has woven an amazing "spiral pull" network.
How did it do this? Is it a business innovation or a hidden crisis?
Guest : Todd (@0x_Todd), Partner at Nothing Research, Co-founder of Ebunker
Background
MicroStrategy was founded in 1989 and listed on NASDAQ in 1998. Its original main business was enterprise analytical software.
In August 2020, under the leadership of Chairman Michael Saylor, MSTR announced that it would spend US$250 million to purchase approximately 21,400 BTC, becoming the world's first listed company to implement a Bitcoin funding strategy.
What makes MicroStrategy different is not only that it was the first to include Bitcoin in its balance sheet, but also that it continued to buy it and dared to borrow money to buy it. MicroStrategy borrowed money to buy Bitcoin at an interest rate of about 1% by issuing stocks and bonds.
Over the past four years, MicroStrategy has made approximately 41 Bitcoin purchase announcements.
As of now, that is, November 26, MSTR holds more than 386,700 bitcoins, accounting for about 1.8% of the total global supply of bitcoin, making it the world's largest publicly traded bitcoin holder.
MSTR has spent a total of US$21.983 billion on purchasing Bitcoin, with an average cost of approximately US$56,849. As of now, its book profit has exceeded US$14 billion.
On November 21, MSTR's stock price exceeded US$500 at one point, and its market value exceeded US$100 billion. Its trading volume on that day even surpassed that of Nvidia, the leading US stock company. Its stock price has more than doubled 40 times from about US$12 when it began hoarding Bitcoin in August 2020. It has increased fivefold since the beginning of the year, and its increase is four times that of Bitcoin.
Although MicroStrategy still maintains its main business, its financial report shows losses for three consecutive quarters and poor performance. However, this has not prevented it from becoming a super bull stock in the US stock market this year. It has successfully become a shadow stock of Bitcoin or a leveraged Bitcoin in the US stock market.
MicroStrategy purchased Bitcoin by issuing stocks and bonds to raise funds, which pushed up the price of Bitcoin. The rise in Bitcoin in turn further boosted MSTR's stock price.
MicroStrategy’s magic trick
TechFlow: Why can an originally mediocre company continue to obtain so much funds in the capital market? What is its spiral pull-up technique?
Todd:
I would like to explain to you from the beginning why MicroStrategy has been able to reach its current level step by step.
In many people's impressions, MicroStrategy does not seem to be a very powerful company. In 2020, MicroStrategy itself was a software development company that developed software for other companies, such as the famous one that developed some software for McDonald's. By 2020, it had about $250 million left on its books.
From a more secular perspective, a company that has been operating for so many years and has a profit of 250 million US dollars on its books is pretty good. But at that time, these funds were just sitting there unused.
Our protagonist today, Michael Saylor, felt that it was time to make a bold decision. He is the chairman of the board of directors, and he personally pushed MicroStrategy to invest almost all of its $250 million in cash in the account into Bitcoin. This is actually a very bold move, and it is difficult for ordinary people to make such a decision.
After investing the money, he felt that the exposure was not big enough, so he began to consider adding leverage. This was the beginning of the entire MicroStrategy magic.
He thought of borrowing some money off-market to continue increasing his Bitcoin holdings, so he adopted a very mature method in the capital market, called convertible preferred bonds.
What he promised the creditors was: You lend me money now, and when it matures, the creditors have two choices: either take away the principal along with interest at a certain point in time, or choose to take equity.
He agreed on a conversion ratio that could convert all the loaned money into equity, so that the creditors would feel more at ease. If there is money on the books, the principal and interest will be repaid. If there is no money, the creditors can also sell the stocks in the secondary market and get some money back. This is a good guarantee for the creditors.
This is how convertible preferred bonds work. As a creditor, you can choose to get back the principal at maturity, or convert the debt into stock, or you can choose to convert part of it. You have to know that all the bonds issued by MicroStrategy at the beginning had 0% interest, and investors valued another opportunity.
Because everyone knows that Saylor wants to bet all his funds on Bitcoin. If Bitcoin rises, the company's stock price will naturally rise. Creditors are interested in the fact that the bond-to-equity ratio is fixed. If Bitcoin rises in the future, MicroStrategy's stock will also rise. At that time, they can choose to convert all of their funds into stocks and complete an arbitrage. Even if the stock price soars, they can still complete the conversion at a very low price.
This forms a very attractive investment logic: at worst you can get your principal back or suffer a small loss, but if MicroStrategy soars, you may invest 1 million and end up with stocks worth 1.5 million or even 2 million .
It was for this reason that MicroStrategy easily raised the first round of funds, and then issued multiple ultra-low interest loans, with interest rates ranging from 0% to 0.8%. Even during the Fed's interest rate hike cycle, when the Treasury bond yield reached 3.4%-5%, investors were still willing to lend them money at ultra-low interest rates.
Later, as Bitcoin and the company's stock price continued to rise, in this situation, although it would be easy for MicroStrategy to borrow money now, to be honest, borrowing money is risky after all, after all, debts must be repaid. So now MicroStrategy has begun to adopt the second idea, directly issuing stocks for financing.
As a listed company, Saylor used his position as chairman of the board to choose to issue additional shares and sell them on the market in compliance with regulations. In recent days, MicroStrategy's trading volume has even exceeded that of Nvidia, a star stock in the bull market. In this way, it has raised nearly $4.6 billion and then continued to increase its Bitcoin holdings. This is also one of the important reasons for pushing Bitcoin to break through $95,000.
This is MicroStrategy's second strategy: after the company's stock price rises, it will raise funds by issuing additional shares. The funds obtained in this way are not debt at all, and there is no repayment pressure.
MicroStrategy is not the next LUNA
Todd:
Many people will ask a question: MicroStrategy has borrowed so much money, will there be pressure to repay in the future?
Regarding MicroStrategy's debt problem, they actually did it very smartly. For example, their earliest 0% interest debt will not mature until 2027. Now it is 2024, so there is still plenty of time for operation. In addition, the current book yield is close to 50%, so there is no immediate repayment pressure at all.
Even if they need to repay in the future, they have multiple options: they can sell some of their Bitcoins or issue new debts, because many people are willing to lend them money. According to the current trend, their repayment pressure is not great.
Some people compare MicroStrategy to Luna, but I don’t think this analogy is appropriate. If you think about it carefully, MicroStrategy just completed a leveraged long position at the right position. It is a normal market behavior to make money by long, not a Ponzi scheme.
They just saw the right timing, used a good leverage, and made a good profit.
MicroStrategy has previously proposed a concept that I very much agree with. They understand this as "volatility sharing." What is volatility sharing? Those bond investors are usually more conservative, and they only like low-volatility investments. Well, then give them the low-volatility part, and MicroStrategy will guarantee the bottom line. The price MicroStrategy pays is to give investors a low-volatility return, while it gets a high-volatility Bitcoin return.
This is why Saylor compares MicroStrategy to a "transformer": just like the power system, the same energy can be converted into low voltage and high voltage. The low voltage is for those conservative investors, and the high voltage is for them to enjoy.
This is actually a very common practice in the financial market, which is to classify assets: sell the low-risk part to others and enjoy the high-risk and high-return part. This model can often be seen in the fund market and securities market in the past.
So in general, MicroStrategy is definitely not a Ponzi scheme like Luna. They are more of a bold choice to long in the right position and bet on the right direction. Of course, they have become part of the market now, but they are not the decisive force in the market. This is an interesting case where MicroStrategy, Bitcoin and creditors can all benefit.
TechFlow: MicroStrategy's approach reminds me of the domestic real estate companies in the TechFlow. Those real estate developers also expanded their land reserves by issuing low-interest convertible bonds to hoard land. Then, when the real estate market was in an upswing, rising land prices drove up stock prices, and then they obtained cash flow by issuing bonds or stocks and continued to hoard land, and the cycle continued.
The two are indeed very similar, but the difference is that Bitcoin is an asset with global consensus and better liquidity across cycles. What I want to ask is, can MicroStrategy continue to leverage over-the-counter financing, buy Bitcoin, and push up stock prices?
Todd:
This is a good question. Indeed, many real estate developers, including Evergrande, have similar operations. But I want to talk about the essential difference between real estate and Bitcoin: Bitcoin has very good liquidity, while real estate is subject to many factors. Building a house requires complex capital chain management, but Bitcoin transactions are much simpler, it is nothing more than borrowing money to buy coins.
An asset with global liquidity and tradable in various currencies has completely different liquidity compared to real estate in a city.
When it comes to whether MicroStrategy's strategy can last forever, there is no magic in the world. But many investors don't really care about what will happen in 5 or 10 years. They care more about the present. From a realistic point of view, at least before MicroStrategy needs to repay the first debt, we don't see them selling Bitcoin.
Here I want to share an important concept of MicroStrategy. Looking at the history of the development of the United States, starting from the original 13 states, it continued to expand through wars and land purchases, buying land from France, Mexico, and Russia, and laying the foundation for the establishment of the country by acquiring land space. MicroStrategy believes that the era of land space has ended and we have entered the era of cyberspace. In this cyberspace dominated by Internet currency, controlling cyberspace is equivalent to controlling the new world, and Bitcoin is the most important currency in this space.
They predicted long ago that countries would build strategic reserves of Bitcoin in the future, because it represents the control of cyberspace, just as land represented the control of real space in the past. Now it seems that, especially in the context of Trump and his team supporting Bitcoin, this prediction is becoming clearer and clearer. In the past, countries needed to hoard land to rise, and now they need to hoard Bitcoin to rise in cyberspace.
From this perspective, although the current price of Bitcoin is much higher than in previous years, if in the future the United States really holds 1 million Bitcoins, accounting for 5%, as a strategic reserve for cyberspace as mentioned in the US Bitcoin Reserve Act, then the current price may still be relatively low.
Of course, this is not an investment advice. But if you think that Bitcoin is at a low level now, MicroStrategy's strategy is essentially a long strategy, and the key lies in the position of building a position. If you predict that Bitcoin is still at a relatively low level, it is not incomprehensible to continue to long and increase leverage. Of course, this is also based on some premises, such as Trump's successful inauguration, his team supporting Bitcoin can successfully take up important positions and advance previous promises, etc.
So overall, MicroStrategy's current strategy, while bold, is not completely ridiculous or crazy, that's my opinion.
The Mystery of Citron Capital’s Defeat
TechFlow: I saw that some institutions including Citron Capital started to TechFlow MicroStrategy, which caused the MicroStrategy stock price to fall. But after reading their statements, I think this should not be a simple short, but a hedging strategy.
They believe that the value of MicroStrategy's stock has deviated from the fundamentals of Bitcoin, and has a premium of about 3 times compared to the Bitcoin it holds. Although Citron is still optimistic about Bitcoin, they think this premium is too outrageous, so they are betting that this premium will return. Do you think Citron will bet right this time? Or do you think the current premium of MicroStrategy is reasonable?
Todd:
Regarding the question of citron, I would like to discuss it from a more interesting perspective .
From a somewhat metaphysical point of view, Citron has a long history and has indeed had many wonderful short-selling short, but they have also had several major failures, and these failures seem to be particularly incompatible with certain specific areas.
Let me give you a few examples. The most impressive one may be the time when Citron short GameStop (GME), and the loss was quite heavy. There was an earlier example in 2018, when Citron continued to be short Tesla, believing that Tesla's production capacity was not good and the valuation was too high. But we all saw how Tesla performed later, and in the end Citron had to admit defeat and withdraw.
Interestingly, Tesla and Bitcoin are highly correlated, and everyone knows Musk’s attitude towards cryptocurrencies. GME is also inextricably linked to cryptocurrencies, and the spirit of the GME community is somewhat similar to that of cryptocurrencies, especially Meme coins. Therefore, these two major failures of Citron are more or less related to Bitcoin.
From this metaphysical perspective, Citron seems to always be inaccurate in its judgment of this type of asset, and several major failures have occurred on these related topics. This time it is MicroStrategy's turn, which is also a target that is strongly tied to Bitcoin. From this perspective, they may not be too smooth this time. If the situation like GME is repeated, MicroStrategy may see an unpredictable increase. Of course, this is just an interpretation from an entertainment perspective and does not constitute investment advice.
If we look at the fundamentals, Citron's statement does make sense. The market is indeed very FOMO now, and the greed index has reached 94-95 a few days ago. So MicroStrategy may be overheated in the short term. They short this premium and may also hold a long position in Bitcoin to hedge, which is also reasonable. But as I said just now, from historical experience, Citron has always been unsuccessful in Bitcoin-related topics. This is just an interesting observation.
MicroStrategy’s potential flaws
TechFlow: It is indeed difficult to find flaws in MicroStrategy’s approach at the TechFlow, but if you have to find one , what do you think is the biggest flaw?
Todd:
This is a very pointed question. I think the biggest flaw is that if MicroStrategy continues to implement such a strategy, the biggest worry is that it may be out of sync with the rhythm of Bitcoin.
Let me give you an example to illustrate this problem.
Let me explain with a concrete example:
There are many "ancient whale" in the Bitcoin market, and the movements of these early holders will have a huge impact on the market. Just like the recent Ethereum, an early investor in the ICO period (when ETH was only $6) has been selling about 100,000 ETH since November 7. You should know that the total buying volume brought by the approval of the Ethereum ETF is only at the level of millions of coins (including Grayscale's inventory). The selling of this whale offset a considerable part of the growth momentum brought by the ETF.
For MicroStrategy, these ancient Bitcoin whale are the biggest potential opponents.
Assuming that these whale believe that $100,000 is the top and place orders intensively in the $95,000-98,000 range, it will be difficult for MicroStrategy alone to break through this price. Because MicroStrategy does not have absolute control over Luna like the Luna Foundation does, it is just one of many market participants. Although borrowing billions of dollars to buy can indeed drive the price of Bitcoin, if the ancient whale do not agree with this strategy and choose to continue selling, the situation will be very different.
This may break MicroStrategy's "spiral upward" model: borrow money to buy coins → drive up stock prices → borrow more money to buy more coins → stock prices continue to rise. Once this cycle is broken, MicroStrategy will face pressure. Although the pressure is not great at present because the cost is more than 50,000 US dollars, if this operation continues, the pressure will gradually increase.
However, we now have many monitoring tools that can track the address movements of these ancient whale and observe whether there are any early bitcoins that suddenly transfer to exchanges. This information can help predict subsequent trends. If these ancient whale cooperate, MicroStrategy's strategy should be able to continue.
TechFlow: This TechFlow of MicroStrategy is a bit like copying the script of Grayscale in the previous cycle. When the market was not good, everyone expected Grayscale to buy coins as a savior. Now it is similar. When the market is not good, everyone is waiting for MicroStrategy’s announcement, hoping that it will buy Bitcoin to raise the price.
However, there is an obvious difference between MicroStrategy and Grayscale. Grayscale's customers also want to cash out and have to sell their coins; while MicroStrategy seems to be able to make money without selling Bitcoin and can directly cash out by issuing stocks.
But will there be a point in time when MicroStrategy will sell its Bitcoin holdings? If this really happens, it will be a big blow to market confidence. Do you think MicroStrategy will sell coins? Under what circumstances will it sell coins?
When will MicroStrategy sell its coins?
Todd:
That’s right. If MicroStrategy starts selling coins, it will be a huge blow to market confidence.
I just mentioned Grayscale, and I would like to talk about the three major contributors to this round of Bitcoin bull market.
Previously, Bitcoin fell to $16,000. Everyone knows the reason. On the one hand, FTX ran away and 3AC went bankrupt. On the other hand, the United States continued to raise interest rates, which pushed Bitcoin to $16,000.
From $16,000 to more than $30,000, the biggest contributor at this time was actually Grayscale, because on the one hand, the SEC did not allow redemption, and many people could not bear it and sold all of them at a discount. On the other hand, he kept suing the SEC, and finally got Gensler (SEC Chairman), who everyone disliked, to reluctantly agree to the issuance of the ETF because he lost the lawsuit.
From more than 30,000 US dollars to more than 60,000 US dollars, this period should be especially thanked to ETF, because BlackRock and Fidelity have dense sales networks all over the world. Under their promotion, many people began to buy Bitcoin through ETFs, bringing in institutional market funds.
From more than 60,000 US dollars to more than 90,000 US dollars, the most important contributor is actually MicroStrategy. When Bitcoin reached more than 60,000 US dollars, it needed a driving force to rise, and MicroStrategy provided the driving force.
I call this the four-stage rocket theory. Just like a rocket, the first stage of the rocket falls, and then the second stage takes over. These are the three major contributors to Bitcoin's rise from 16,000 to 96,000: Grayscale, ETF, and MicroStrategy.
The first three stages have been completed, and there is still a fourth stage to come, which is what we expect Trump to really promote after he comes to power, such as the FIT21 plan, to truly pass the US strategic reserve of Bitcoin. Not only the United States, you can see Poland, Suriname, and the Middle East, these countries are working on their own Bitcoin strategic reserve bills, which will be the fourth stage rocket.
From this perspective, MicroStrategy is now in the middle of the four-stage rocket, and its risks are relatively controllable.
TechFlow w: So in your opinion, there is still a long way to go before he starts selling his coins.
Todd:
By continuously following Michael Saylor's interviews, I think his belief in Bitcoin is around 90%. He has a mature theoretical system, and starting from 2021, many of his predictions have gradually come true, including national strategic reserves, adoption by listed companies, etc. In the future, we may even see technology giants like Microsoft establish Bitcoin reserves.
In the short term, MicroStrategy has no motivation to sell coins. At least until 2027, they can deal with debts by issuing stocks or raising debt. More likely, since the creditors subscribed to the stock at a low price, they may prefer to hold the stock rather than demand repayment.
Why is Saylor 90% loyal instead of 100% loyal? The key lies in a detail: when Bitcoin was about $16,000, MicroStrategy sold 700-800 Bitcoins for tax planning. Although he bought them back soon after, this behavior of swing trading for tax avoidance revealed that he still had 10% of speculative mentality.
As a true HODLER, you should not do any swing trading. Once you have the experience of swing trading, it means that you are still speculative in nature. Therefore, don't expect MicroStrategy to hold the currency for 25 or 50 years. As long as you have done swing trading before, you will definitely try it again in the future. This is human nature. So Saylor is 90% faith and 10% speculation, so he will still sell Bitcoin one day in the future, but we should not see it in the next few years.
TechFlow: Now more and more listed companies are trying to copy MicroStrategy's strategy. For example, Metaplant, a real estate company listed in Japan, and Boyaa Interactive, a listed company in Hong Kong, are both including Bitcoin in their balance sheets. Do you think MicroStrategy's strategy will be copied by more and more listed companies in the future? And are these listed companies that copy it still worth investing in?
Todd:
First of all, this is not financial advice. I have done some deductions on this matter myself. Because MicroStrategy's gamble has been a huge success, many companies, including Marathon, want to emulate MicroStrategy's strategy. I think this is OK.
Why? Because according to the four-stage rocket theory, the first three stages have now finished running. Although MicroStrategy has been building positions since the first stage of the rocket and has gained the most profit so far, if the people behind it really foresee that countries will begin to compete for control of cyberspace in the future, or even further, when AI rules the world, AI may prefer cryptocurrencies controlled by computing power rather than legal currencies.
No matter which distant legend finally comes true, those who come in now as the third-stage rocket can still make considerable profits.
Although it is difficult for other companies to reach this scale, I think there is no big problem with this strategy. The essence is to buy Bitcoin through leveraged long-the-counter transactions. As long as over-the-counter creditors are willing to lend money, because they get low-volatility returns, and these companies bear high volatility, this model is currently feasible.
However, the companies that follow suit now enter the market at different times. If they enter the market late, timing is more important because it directly determines the return level of the strategy. It is recommended that these listed companies think carefully and complete the layout of Bitcoin reserves in the appropriate position.
TechFlow: TechFlow, let’s talk about Michael Saylor. I recently watched some podcasts interviewing him. He mentioned that he spent 1,000 hours learning about Bitcoin theory and successfully brainwashed himself into a Bitcoin maximalist, or a fanatical religious believer. What do you think of this person?
Todd:
Michael Saylor is a graduate of a top prestigious university, MIT. He was very successful at a young age and successfully sold his previous entrepreneurial companies several times. In the end, MicroStrategy was able to make a floating profit of 250 million US dollars, which is quite remarkable.
There is an interesting point in studying his life. He wrote a book about the mobile Internet wave in 2012. At that time, smartphones only became popular in 2012 and 2013. He was able to predict the rise of mobile Internet in 2012, which shows that his judgment was very accurate.
He studied two degrees at MIT: aerospace engineering and history of science. This major combination is very special and almost tailor-made for him. The history of science major combines liberal arts and science to study how science develops in breakthroughs, which is very helpful for him to judge future technological trends.
In interviews, he often quoted the views of scientists such as Newton and Einstein. Whether from his professional background or the book he later wrote, The Wave of Mobile Internet, it is proved that he has clear personal judgments on future technological trends, and these judgments have been verified. His speeches are logically clear and his views are clearly expressed. As an important figure in the Bitcoin community, such a person is very helpful to the spread of Bitcoin.
One of his most famous videos has 10 million views on YouTube, in which he spends three or four hours explaining why he chose Bitcoin. His core argument is that the current economic system is constantly printing money, and inflation appears to be 2%, but in reality it is at least 7% or more, because economists have been adjusting the proportion of the inflation basket. This is his basic creed for investing in Bitcoin.
This theory is hard to overturn because no matter where in the world, governments and central banks are indeed constantly printing money, and this anxiety is universal. In countries like Argentina, currency depreciation may reach dozens of times. Bitcoin has a clear upper limit of 21 million, which will never change.
Two unchanging facts: the government will continue to print money, and the total amount of Bitcoin is fixed. This makes Bitcoin a very robust asset against inflation. Michael Saylor holds such a belief, which will help him go further on the road of Bitcoin investment.
There will be no Ethereum version of MicroStrategy
TechFlow: Ethereum TechFlow in a slight downturn this year, and people often use the strength of Bitcoin and Solana to mock Ethereum. Do you think there will be an Ethereum version of Michael Saylor or MicroStrategy in the future?
Todd:
This is pure prediction, which I think is difficult. The reason is that the emergence of MicroStrategy and Saylor has its own specific background, while Ethereum does not have these conditions.
The narrative of Bitcoin has been eternal since its birth. From the moment Satoshi Nakamoto wrote the news that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was preparing to rescue the banks into the Genesis Block, it established its position as a real store of value against fiat currency inflation.
In Saylor's words, fiat currency is just currency, while Bitcoin is capital, which are completely different concepts.
In contrast, Ethereum is positioned to continuously provide blockchain services using the most advanced technologies. From our experience in operating Ethereum mining pools, Ethereum is constantly evolving: from PoW to PoS to solve energy issues, to the Beacon Chain strategy recently proposed at Devcon in Bangkok, which plans to ZK the entire chain. This shows that Ethereum and Bitcoin have completely different development paths.
For large funds, they prefer predictable and stable investment targets rather than constantly changing projects.
Saylor once mentioned that Satoshi Nakamoto's anonymity is very attractive, which is in line with the typical N-type personality traits in MBTI. Vitalik's continued activity in Ethereum, although he put forward many good ideas, may make some investors hesitate. Just like what was said in "Let the Bullets Fly", "It's not important for me without you", large capital investment requires certainty and does not want the project to suddenly change direction.
Therefore, it may be difficult for the Ethereum version of MicroStrategy to appear, but the possibility of a small-scale version cannot be ruled out. Especially considering that Ethereum’s current market value is relatively low, it does not require a huge amount of capital investment like Bitcoin. There has always been an investment logic in the market that “Bitcoin is too expensive, look for a cheap target”, and Ethereum may become the first choice for such investors.
TechFlow: I TechFlow agree with the discussion on the Bitcoin narrative. The charm of Bitcoin is that it is simple enough, does not require technical delivery, and cannot be falsified. It is like a perfect closed loop, and every crisis strengthens rather than weakens its value proposition. In the crypto world, we see too many grand visions and complex technical solutions, but in the end, the simplest Bitcoin has stood the test of time. It does not require marketing, roadmaps or technical commitments. In a world full of uncertainty, the most precious thing is certainty, which is the greatest charm of Bitcoin.
Finally, thanks to Todd.
Todd:
Finally, I’ll quote Saylor: Bitcoin will win, but not everyone will win with it.
