-
@ Skanderbeg
2025-05-14 19:33:13
Heresy incoming.
With all of these Bitcoin companies emerging on an almost daily basis, I think it's a good time to remember that, for an individual or family, just stacking sats is likely the best and most sovereign way forward. Definitely the most mentally stable way forward.
It's an impossible and futile task for an individual to keep track of all these Bitcoin "treasury or whatever" companies and trying to pick out which one will be the best or even buy all of them - not worth the stress or return imo.
However.
I think what is interesting, particularly with Saylor and those trying to copycat, is that this is to some degree a natural evolution of the Bitcoin thesis. Corporate and nation state adoption is inevitable as the fiat machine continues to print the fuel feeding it's decline. That said, the anarchocapitalist view of the future is likely unrealistic and so then the question becomes of how best to manage that transition. Additionally, what these folks are catching onto is that just matching monetary supply creation (i.e. S&P) is not adequate. If they are going to be worthy of investors, they need to beat digital gold.
What Saylor et al are doing is providing onramps for highly regulated capital markets to feed into the Bitcoin ecosystem. He is arbitraging the future to create product now that these institutions can participate in while making a profit and doing it in a pretty darn smart way imo.
Does the individual need to participate in that? Probably best just to stack sats in cold storage. However, some might have trapped funds in tax protected accounts, and imo Bitcoin ets while providing price exposure are just a fiat fake replacement for the real thing. So, is it unreasonable to allocate a little of those funds to some of these companies as a risk-on bet on the Bitcoin thesis? I don't think so.