Thank you for taking the time to read and share your thoughts.
I hear where you’re coming from and have considered your point. To speak to your point about the election, I wish Saylor took the same approach here - Don’t say anything.
Also, I’d ask you to consider one important thing. What if this really is his plan? And what if he’s speaking on behalf of the state to some extent. Shouldn’t we be pushing back if that’s the case?
Login to reply
Replies (1)
Thanks Frank - these are good questions. I am an interested stakeholder as a MSTR shareholder. Based in the UK, I like many over here have no other Bitcoin related proxies to match MSTR within a pension. This fact has pushed me into a higher MSTR exposure than I’d rather have, relative to Bitcoin, and the risks are somewhat higher in many ways.
Fully agree with your right to push back on narratives, and of course limit the power of the state. It might be most prudent to assume he was pretty connected and act accordingly. An aside, but one thing that reassures me as a current shareholder is MSTR’s recent Bitcoin principles slide and the transparency of that long term plan. Saylor provides all the right signals in this respect, though of course it doesn’t concern the exact areas under debate here.