SH

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@BlockZeroB Precisely. It's wrong to ask "Can BTC reach $1m?" just based on price charts and extrapolating.

The right question is "What does it take for BTC to move up the ladder, to become the world's dominant asset?"

[Block Zero ₿ @BlockZeroB]

Can Bitcoin really reach $1 million?

At around $80,000 today, that would require roughly a 12.5x move.

That sounds extreme. But the better question isn’t “Can Bitcoin go up 12x?”

It’s: what would Bitcoin have to become for $1M per BTC to make economic sense?

At $1M, Bitcoin’s current circulating supply would be worth roughly $20 trillion.

For context, the entire above-ground gold market is around $29 trillion today. Gold held by central banks, investors, ETFs, bars, coins and OTC markets is roughly $13 trillion.

So a $1M Bitcoin would mean something much bigger than “digital gold became more popular.”

It would mean Bitcoin had become one of the largest monetary assets on Earth—worth roughly two-thirds of the entire gold market at today’s valuation.

That is the real $1M thesis.

Bitcoin would need to capture a major share of the global demand currently stored in gold and other reserve or store-of-value assets.

There’s also a common misconception:

A $20 trillion Bitcoin market cap does NOT require $20 trillion of new money to flow into Bitcoin.

Market cap is the marginal clearing price multiplied by the outstanding supply.

If long-term holders become less willing to sell while marginal demand keeps rising, the clearing price can move sharply higher without an equivalent dollar-for-dollar inflow.

And Bitcoin has one unusual feature: supply cannot respond to higher prices.

The maximum supply is 21 million BTC, and new issuance keeps declining with each halving. If demand keeps growing, more of that adjustment has to happen through price.

But timing is where the $1M thesis gets harder.

Previous major post-halving peaks came roughly 12–18 months after the halving:

2016 → 2017 peak: ~525 days
2020 → 2021 peak: ~549 days
2024 → 2025 ATH: roughly the same broad window

If that structure survives, the next major window would likely come after the expected 2028 halving—around late 2029 to 2030.

But Bitcoin’s peak-to-peak returns have been compressing:

2013 → 2017: ~17x
2017 → 2021: ~3.5x
2021 → 2025: ~1.8x

The 2025 ATH was about $126K. From there, $1M still requires another ~8x.

So $1M by 2029–2030 would not be a simple continuation of diminishing returns. Something would have to change structurally.

Institutional allocation could accelerate.
Sovereign or central-bank demand could emerge.
Bitcoin could take a much larger share of gold’s monetary role.
Or monetary debasement could materially increase demand for scarce, non-sovereign assets.

Without some combination of those forces, $1M in the next cycle looks difficult to justify from historical cycles alone.

That’s why I’d separate the time horizons:

2029–2030:
Possible, but extremely bullish. Bitcoin would need a major acceleration in monetization.

2033–2034:
More plausible.

If Bitcoin first reaches $300K–$500K in the next major cycle, then $1M in the following cycle would require roughly another 2–3x—not 8x.

That would be more consistent with a maturing asset whose percentage returns keep declining.

None of this guarantees $1M Bitcoin.

The four-year cycle may weaken. Institutional adoption may plateau. Regulation could change. Gold itself will not stay frozen at today’s valuation.

But the $1M debate is often framed incorrectly.

$1M Bitcoin is not really a prediction about a number on a screen.

It is a thesis about Bitcoin becoming a ~$20 trillion monetary asset.

If Bitcoin remains mainly a speculative risk asset, $1M is difficult to justify.

If it becomes a globally held reserve and store-of-value asset on the same order of magnitude as gold, $1M stops looking absurd.

So the real question isn’t:

“Can Bitcoin go up another 12x?”

It’s:

“Can Bitcoin become one of the world’s dominant monetary assets?”

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@kvvlu @ZynxBTC @RoaringRagnar Come on. Everyone has the right to call out perpetrators. Who's the perpetrator - try the CEO in the first instance.

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@kvvlu The issue is the extra 273 million shares that is unearned. The 10th SO benchmarked Dec 2022 position on fully diluted basis which pre-dates 3350's pivot to BTC in early 2024, which subsequently dilutes heavily. This is NOT right to shareholders. Simon MUST fix this.

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@kvvlu @ZynxBTC @RoaringRagnar You are missing the point - "Don’t shoot the messenger; go after the perpetrator".

Who's the perpetrator? How about the CEO?

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@BenjaminStongMD @ZynxBTC @Metaplanet @DylanLeClair @gerovich You call 3350 a clown show?

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@BigpictureBTC Don't shoot the messenger (Zynx), instead, shoot the person (CEO Simon) who can fix this but hasn't done so yet. Major investors are not happy with the 10th SO clause. It should be frozen to Dec 2022, not mid 2026. The extra 273 million shares should be cancelled.

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@metaplanero @RoaringRagnar Shareholders put their capital at risk. Management works for shareholders. NVDA management creates far greater value to shareholders than 3350 and paid much less. 99% of the BTC gains should belong to shareholders who puts their capital at risk. 20% is far, far too much.

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@metaplanero Come on, you know your analysis is completely misleading. You failed to mention the numerous SO that 3350 has done since pivoting to BTC in 2024 - we are talking about the 10th SO gap based on Dec 2022 shares. Using fully diluted up to mid 2026 is just plain wrong.

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@swissBTCmaxi No. The 10th SO is not over yet but just starting. If news outlets carries the gross inequities all over, major investors will get nervous due to trust and integrity issues. When they stop the ratchet, the correct thing to do is to freeze the shares to 10th SO date (2023).

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@DylanLeClair @HODL15Capital @Workiva @DylanLeClair, 3350's original 10th SO is absolutely NOT common at all amongst S&P500 companies, and you know it. Tying the adjustment provision to fully diluted share count is highly inappropriate for a BTCTC. The base should have been the original 10th SO date, much fewer.

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@Jauwnes @odysseusito @ZynxBTC @RoaringRagnar Fact #1 - 10th SO issued prior to 3350 becoming BTCTC.
Fact #2 - compensation should not be done on diluted shares, because their model requires issuing more shares.
Fact #3 - 3350 rolled back in mid 26 future ratchet. It should backdate to pre-23, not mid 26. Obvious mistake.

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@odysseusito @ZynxBTC @RoaringRagnar Yeah. BTC needs to make 25% p.a. returns first, before investors with shares see dilution and unable to make a single cent. How to trust this type of management who refused to acknowledge that this is wrong and need to be fixed urgently during August 18 announcements?

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@skden2020 @HermesLux It is well documented, that thieves when successful, will continue to steal more due to greed, until someone stop them (like the police). If noone stops Simon now on the 10th SO, then, count on greed for more. This is why, major investors leave when trust and integrity is lost.

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@HermesLux 3350 dead? Simon just replied on the weekend, so, not yet dead. More to come in weeks? News outlets haven't carried Bitcoiners outrage yet, major investors are still giving Simon the benefit of the doubt, Simon hasn't been outsted by Board or major investors yet.

[HODL15Capital 🇺🇸 @HODL15Capital]

Bitcoiners bought BTC to escape the Cantillon effect

@Metaplanet's slogan is "Secure the Future with Bitcoin" but it created the most misaligned Cantillonesque structure I've ever seen: 20% insider option that grew every time they printed shares

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@r8sADCOqaZoLXss Many don't agree with the 273 million extra shares. He has not yet sorted out conflicts here. Calls for Simon to resign.

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@clinkie44 If Simon didn't fix the extra 273 million shares, he may be forced to resign. 3350 may not bottom until he is forced out.

[THE BITCOIN PHARAOH @thebtcpharaoh]

Auditors incentivized by the share price would definitely call out issues that might hurt the value of their options..

..or would they?

And don't even get me started on why Eric Trump is on there 😂 Very curious about the "added value" he brought in for shareholders.

#Metaplanet $MPJPY $MTPLF $DN3

[SH @BTC_OG_100]

@BTCoptioneer The extra 273m shares is not an ordinary problem. Investors and Board may force Simon out due to his greed and inaction to fix a gross injustice. If so, it will be a very dark chapter in 3350, but probably bottomed when Simon is removed. Else the stock won't find bottom.