@w_s_bitcoin@AlmostHeavenWV_ Tough to say, it wouldn’t take that high a percentage to do it over a few years or so, and combined w treasury ops it’s not that hard to imagine. Once btc price appreciation slows down treasury ops could end up being more important than sats per share too, right?
@w_s_bitcoin@AlmostHeavenWV_ I can figure two possibilities. 1) the btc yield ends up compounding at a rate that gives you more sats/share than sats you would’ve had having just bought btc directly, and/or share price increases at a higher rate bc of the yield from their treasury ops.
@w_s_bitcoin@Chrysalis111 I actually think it’s a good point. I raised a similar question recently but you articulated it much clearer. Do you think part of it could be that their treasury operations revenue over time could eventually provide more value for equity holders as Bitcoin appreciation slows?
@TeddyBitcoins Thanks for the great post! Funny enough, i understood this part. The confusing part to me is why long term holders (anecdotally seen some posts) have been upset that he used the atm faster than they thought he would… just emotional share price reaction?
@PopeToastHead @JamesSurowiecki @JBerneburg Yeah i think that’s perfectly fine, lots of people will take that route. I believe a lot of mstr holders also hold bitcoin too.
@JamesSurowiecki @JBerneburg @PopeToastHead But I’m also newer to this and won’t pretend to have a complete understanding. I just wanted to put that context out in case it helps
@JamesSurowiecki @JBerneburg @PopeToastHead And theoretically, the more btc they acquire, the more “treasury operations” (cbs at the moment, but likely other instruments in the future) they can run, creating more money to accumulate more btc, which would drive that btc/share metric up further, as well asincrease their nav.
@mjwhitemjwhite@ts_hodl Yeah for sure, if you’re going really long term then at some point it still passes. Also, Someone else just told me to that i think similar to your earlier reply, the sentiment seems to be that 6% is ridiculously conservative.
@mjwhitemjwhite@ts_hodl Yeah for sure! To Trey’s point, what i was trying to figure out is if I’m missing something in using just that metric bc it would seem from just that metric that buying actual btc would be the move, but i think there’s more to the story i don’t fully understand.
@mjwhitemjwhite@ts_hodl Haha yeah. 6% is bear case based on their announced target btc yield. From their q3 earnings report, they had a targeted btc yield of 6-10% per year. I’m assuming that’s very conservative given what’s happened this year, but was trying to calculate a bear case.
@mjwhitemjwhite@ts_hodl Gotcha, yeah i think that aligns with my thought process. I calculated that just theoretically, if you only had 1 share of mstr, at .0015 btc/share, and a 6% annual btc yield, it would take that share 15-20 years before reaching .0038 btc/share
@mjwhitemjwhite@ts_hodl Or sorry, i meant to say over 10 years for btc/share to reach parity with the amount of actual btc a $400 share price would buy you today
@mjwhitemjwhite@ts_hodl I was trying to understand this myself. I calculated a bear case that the btc yield only goes up the min target of 6% each year, and in that case, unless I’m missing something, it would take well over 10 years from the .0015 btc/share now to reach over 1 full btc/share.
@mjwhitemjwhite@ts_hodl But i feel like I’m missing something. Like maybe that target is really low and will be much more (as it has been YTD), or maybe given the nature of the stock and business that ratio doesn’t factor in the full value of having the stock or something.
Space Doodles are non-dilutive, extended content for @doodles
it builds on my past experience working with innovations like $WCK whose tech was adapted to make old NFTs work with OpenSea
now, we're improving the tech to reward collectors and unveil our universe
shall i share?