So cool how it looks like Saylor was talking to Kratter... ...but he was also subtly talking to the entire Treasury Company community at the same time. 'BTC Yield is a narrow KPI.' - Nuke 1. 'It is not a measure of financial performance or valuation.' - Nuke 2. The BTC Yield model is now completely destroyed, as was foretold many moons ago. The Age of Net Bitcoin has Begun. Peak Mike. Peak Strategy. Cheers. 🍾

Saifedean doesnt believe that if a 20 year old needs money and a 50 year old has money, that the 50 year old should be able to lend said money for an interest. He prefers you spend your bitcoin and not recapitalize on it and use as an actual financeable asset. This came to light in his interview with Saylor. Saylor ended up calling him an ideologue.

$1B monthly volume on lightning with Sam Wouters | SLP725 @SDWouters, Director of Marketing @River joins me to discuss Bitcoin and Lightning Network adoption. We explore common myths, institutional momentum, businesses adopting Bitcoin and practical strategies for everyday Bitcoin investors. (00:00) - Intro (00:45) - Overview of River’s report on Lightning Network growth (03:31) - Public Lightning Network capacity & usage (09:14) - Lightning Network user insights & transaction patterns (13:25) - Misconceptions among Bitcoiners about Lightning adoption (20:29) - Centralization in Lightning Network (23:27) - OGs selling Bitcoin (28:21) - Growing institutional adoption of Bitcoin (32:33) - Businesses adopting Bitcoin (38:47) - Individual Bitcoin investment patterns (41:19) - The importance of DCA in bear markets (44:38) - Bitcoin evangelism (52:22) - Closing thoughts

I may have been quick to dismiss the growth of the Lightning Network. See Forrest’s point below.

LET’S GO MIKE

FREE SKIPPER

While I get the drive for novel valuation models for $MSTR, we must recognize what our equity actually represents. CEBE | BPS | BTC Yield are KPIs not valuation frameworks or benchmarks. Whether using CEBE or standard BPS, a "per share" metric of $BTC holdings is essentially a backward looking snapshot of asset accumulation. Because a treasury company must constantly alter its share count (either issuing common equity to buy $BTC or fund dividend obligations), BPS is a moving, oscillating target. Market valuation is forward looking & dynamic. Equating a point in time measure of capital efficiency with "value" or performance misses the reality of what these equities are: Sentiment driven optionality engines. Market participats treat these equities, especially $MSTR, as powerful vehicles for $BTC exposure, not as per share allocations of an asset they have no legal claim to.

Stephan Livera explores an alternate view on Lightning’s growth in this episode of his podcast. What do you think? Will Lightning Strike Twice Or Strike Out?

If claims are never due, CEBE never becomes the more relevant metric. The Company owns ALL the Bitcoin. The shareholders own the company.

Saylor is a Perpetual Being.

Put that in your model and smoke it!

Hint: Strategy prefs are infinite duration…

BPS measures Bitcoin per common share before senior claims. CEBE BPS measures Bitcoin per common share after senior claims. CEBE is the conservative risk metric. BPS is the common equity growth metric. BTC Yield measures BPS execution.

There is no technical issue posed by Strategy's rapid accumulation of Bitcoin. Quite the reverse: it benefits all holders of Bitcoin through the additional liquidity and potential price increase. Normative libertarians are still free to transact in Bitcoin in circular economies, and do as they wish. So why do they have a problem with Saylor? The issue is intellectual, not tehcnical. The Saylorian model of Bitcoin Economics - his Capital Currency framework - is incompatible with the earlier version of Bitcoin Economics. Lewis, Ammous, Booth et al, promoted a ideological version of Bitcoin Economics that ignored the realities of political power, credit, and corporate finance. This tension has been bubbling for years now. Go back and watch the 2024 interview between Saifedean and Saylor to witness the first cracks appear in TradBit's world view. @TerriTortuguero run the clip bro.

In my view it’s to do with the cognitive dissonance associated with the major change in industry direction. It turns out we all misunderstood how corporate adoption would play out. That’s difficult to accept when you’ve made a name for yourself “predicting” Bitcoin and have sold thousands/millions of books. You either graciously accept you were wrong, tread a weird middle ground (think Saifedean) or go full on attack (Lewis et all).

It’s why we don’t hear much from Ego Death Capital because lightning is a failure.

This is why Bitcoiners are attacking Saylor. They can’t scale Bitcoin. Saylor can.

Inflation is just the free market discovering the true value of your government’s promises in real time. I am observing the data and buying more Bitcoin accordingly. Pattern recognition is fun.