Start
Avisering
Profil
Populära artiklar
Nyheter
Bokmärk och gillad
Historik
Kreatörcenter
Inställningar
BitcoinPierre
--
Följ
Bitcoin 2025 in Las Vegas felt like a family reunion, political convention, shareholder meeting, military muster, religious jubilee, trade show, and clandestine ops briefing all wrapped into one. The movement has never been stronger.
#BTC
Ansvarsfriskrivning: Inkluderar åsikter från tredje part. Ingen ekonomisk rådgivning. Kan innehålla sponsrat innehåll.
Se användarvillkor.
BTC
104 962,32
-1.48%
4
0
Utforska de senaste kryptonyheterna
⚡️ Var en del av de senaste diskussionerna inom krypto
💬 Interagera med dina favoritkreatörer
👍 Ta del av innehåll som intresserar dig
E-post/telefonnummer
Registrera dig
Inloggning
Relevant kreatör
BitcoinPierre
@BitcoinPierre
Följ
Utforska mer från Creator
I’m worried about people not buying BTC for their long-term self-custody cold storage because crypto influencers persuaded them that “over-levered bitcoin treasury companies are going to collapse and you can buy their coins for cheap when the market crashes.”Don’t time the market
--
Fiatbros: “bitcoin treasury companies have destroyed the ethos of Wall Street. The system is supposed to be about financing private equity dentistry rollups and burrito food deliveries, not just holding unproductive bitcoin out of cynical greed. Elizabeth Warren was right.”
--
In a theoretical world of costless arbitrage, mNAV > 1 could plausibly be shorted down. But in the real world, shorting the premium is expensive with borrow fees, has squeeze risk, can be slowed by ATM pause or buybacks, and is capital-intensive with BTC long. Add in upward volatility skew, potential positive carry of BTC on balance sheet, and the company’s option value of future leverage. These are durable structural factors for mNAV > 1 mean-reversion after bear markets.
--
I don’t understand Nic’s perspective. Why is it good for institutional Authorized Participants to earn a spread arbing IBIT create/redeem, but it’s bad for a company to accrete BPS for the benefit of its retail shareholders by doing the same? Seems like a double-standard.
--
Equating GBTC premium with bitcoin treasury company mNAV >1x doesn’t really work: the economics of creating GBTC at par accrued to third parties competing with each other and thus no self-limiting factor, and BPS drifted down with the fee. With a bitcoin treasury company it’s the common stock that accrues BPS from creating at par (ATM) and the self-limiting factor is that the company has a monopoly option on its own stock issuance, so it maximizes value by self-restraining issuance to balance its sell pressure (negative mNAV impact) with expectations of future BTC yield (positive mNAV impact). Add on top of that zero-coupon converts. Of course these companies have/can/will trade at <1x mNAV in a bear market, but that’s not a wipeout if the mNAV subsequently expands back to >1x in a bull market.
--
Senaste nytt
K Wave Media Secures $500 Million for Bitcoin Treasury Strategy
--
U.S. Treasury Yields Reach Lowest Level Since Early May
--
Global X Launches Bitcoin Covered Call ETF
--
U.S. Economic Recession Probability Declines, Kalshi Data Shows
--
Ethereum Falls Below $2600 Amid Daily Decline
--
Visa mer
Webbplatskarta
Cookie-inställningar
Plattformens villkor