Michael Saylor has Acquired 121,044 BTC at $3.57 Billion

[Wind_FURY]

The 121,044 BTC was acquired with the total Investment sum of $3.57 billion at the average price of $27,534.

The average price is increased from $27,534 to $30,160 But yeah he is still in profit.

As of Dec. 29, the firm held 124,391 bitcoins, which it bought for nearly $3.8 billion, MicroStrategy CEO Michael Saylor said in a Twitter post on Thursday. The average price it has paid for all of its bitcoin to date is roughly $30,160.

Source:

It will be illustrated in next two bull cycles that Michael Saylor’s risk in Bitcoin during 2020 and 2021 will be one of the biggest generational wealth creating investments in history. Cornelius Vanderbilt. John Rockefeller. Michael Saylor? It’s a laughable comparison today, but what if he becomes a trillionaire through Bitcoin?

[Lucius]

It will be illustrated in next two bull cycles that Michael Saylor’s risk in Bitcoin during 2020 and 2021 will be one of the biggest generational wealth creating investments in history. Cornelius Vanderbilt. John Rockefeller. Michael Saylor? It’s a laughable comparison today, but what if he becomes a trillionaire through Bitcoin?

A question that anyone can ask "what if - and what if not?" Although most members of the forum are highly pro-Bitcoin and believe in its success, none of us are prophets or see the future so we can know what will happen in two bull cycles or after the next two halvings.

I have no doubt that Bitcoin would be able to reach some insane price for us today by the end of the decade - but I also know that it is on a very slippery slope when it comes to the most powerful nations in the world. China has already made its moves, Russia has strange ideas to say the least, and all these banning stories should not be ignored - and the US also has very big proponents of some crazy regulations or even bans.

I know you don't see this as a problem because Bitcoin continues to operate despite any bans, but it's not the same if it operates in the realm of legality and accessibility for all people (or at least most), or if it has to move underground beyond the reach of government.

[perfect999]

Michael Sayor just Tweet that his company, MicroStrategy has acquired additional 7,002 Bitcoins for the price of $414.4 million USD, bring their total holding to 122 044+.

He is accumulating bitcoin as he knows the true potential of bitcoin. I am sure there are many investors who are silently holding bitcoin. It does not matter for us who is holding bitcoin and how much they have invested in bitcoin. What ever they are doing, they re doing for their own benefit.
What matter here is how much you and me are accumulating bitcoins. The more we have bitcoin in our wallets, the better it will be for us. 

No one want to donate his money for nothing or for something where no one can benefit. People like him invest in bitcoin because they know the true potential of it and as we can see he still continue to invest heavily. It looks that they are sure that bitcoin will bring them a lot of profits anytime soon.

Not all investors will tell the world they are investing because they are also scared to what can happen to them but seeing some famous personality invest huge in bitcoin can gave someone a confidence or motivates them to do the same so things like that do matters too somehow because the whole bitcoin community can benefit with it.

[Wind_FURY]

It will be illustrated in next two bull cycles that Michael Saylor’s risk in Bitcoin during 2020 and 2021 will be one of the biggest generational wealth creating investments in history. Cornelius Vanderbilt. John Rockefeller. Michael Saylor? It’s a laughable comparison today, but what if he becomes a trillionaire through Bitcoin?

A question that anyone can ask "what if - and what if not?" Although most members of the forum are highly pro-Bitcoin and believe in its success, none of us are prophets or see the future so we can know what will happen in two bull cycles or after the next two halvings.

That’s true, but wouldn’t you agree with someone if he/she said that “we are still early”?

I have no doubt that Bitcoin would be able to reach some insane price for us today by the end of the decade - but I also know that it is on a very slippery slope when it comes to the most powerful nations in the world. China has already made its moves, Russia has strange ideas to say the least, and all these banning stories should not be ignored - and the US also has very big proponents of some crazy regulations or even bans.

I believe that from a game-theoretical standpoint, if Russia starts mining, or starts allowing Bitcoin mining, China will have no choice but to mine Bitcoin/allow mining too, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5377182.msg59104736#msg59104736

[Lucius]

That’s true, but wouldn’t you agree with someone if he/she said that “we are still early”?

It depends on how someone would interpret the term "early" in the context of Bitcoin if we know that some 12 years have passed since the Genesis block. For some it is a lot of time, for others we are still at the beginning, for me personally we have crossed more than half of the most important path that began in 2009, and will approach one version of the end around 2030 when 99% of all Bitcoin will be mined.

I believe that from a game-theoretical standpoint, if Russia starts mining, or starts allowing Bitcoin mining, China will have no choice but to mine Bitcoin/allow mining too, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5377182.msg59104736#msg59104736

Just assuming that China admits at some point that Bitcoin is important to it, which is very likely not to happen given their political structure. Consequently, it be really stupid if China first banned crypto mining, waited for the US and Russia to position themselves with more than a 50% hash rate, and then jump back into the game? Bitcoin cannot be officially approved in any communist country, or those countries that strive for absolute control, so I don't know how you imagine that China will change its mind?

[qwertyup23]

People like Saylor think long term so short term price action means nothing to people like him. Most people panic & do nothing when the price goes down or even worse, panic sell. Chads like Saylor buy & have no emotion during times like this. He is thinking about the long term future.

It makes me really thing of an answer to this question: when is really the best time to purchase BTC?

I mean, due to its inflationary value and limited supply of 21 million, most people would view it as an investment whether for short or long-term. But in this case, where its price continuous to fluctuate, I really do think that the best time to purchase would be the day when you have the means for it. Long term HODLing can somehow guarantee large amounts of returns if invested properly.

With this acquisition, I think it is also noteworthy to mention supply and demand. If he does indeed, sell all of his BTCs, the price on the market may somehow change with the given increase in circulation.

[Wind_FURY]

That’s true, but wouldn’t you agree with someone if he/she said that “we are still early”?

It depends on how someone would interpret the term "early" in the context of Bitcoin if we know that some 12 years have passed since the Genesis block. For some it is a lot of time, for others we are still at the beginning, for me personally we have crossed more than half of the most important path that began in 2009, and will approach one version of the end around 2030 when 99% of all Bitcoin will be mined.

In the context of adoption, would you agree, or disagree if someone told you that, “We are still early”? Or you probably believe that Bitcoin, as a protocol, as a technological breakthrough, has climbed the highest peak it can reach?

I believe that from a game-theoretical standpoint, if Russia starts mining, or starts allowing Bitcoin mining, China will have no choice but to mine Bitcoin/allow mining too, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5377182.msg59104736#msg59104736

Just assuming that China admits at some point that Bitcoin is important to it, which is very likely not to happen given their political structure. Consequently, it be really stupid if China first banned crypto mining, waited for the US and Russia to position themselves with more than a 50% hash rate, and then jump back into the game? Bitcoin cannot be officially approved in any communist country, or those countries that strive for absolute control, so I don't know how you imagine that China will change its mind?

Why would it be stupid if it made sense from a game-theoretical standpoint?

[TheGreatPython]

Remember, they aren't selling yet. Going by the current market trend, the profit could double to $7.4 Billion before the next year runs out.

Even if they happen to sell in the future, we now know that MicroStrategy has become part of the cryptocurrency market/community, and if they sell it, there is every possibility that they will be buying back again from the market. It’s good how we are now having lots of big and strong institutions who have strongly become part of the crypto community and now backing it. The good thing about these institutions is that they don’t mind the condition of the market, whether it is a bullish trend or bearish trend, they are always out to keep buying Bitcoin, and we should also follow this step to buy now and HODL.

[Webetcoins]

Just assuming that China admits at some point that Bitcoin is important to it, which is very likely not to happen given their political structure. Consequently, it be really stupid if China first banned crypto mining, waited for the US and Russia to position themselves with more than a 50% hash rate, and then jump back into the game? Bitcoin cannot be officially approved in any communist country, or those countries that strive for absolute control, so I don't know how you imagine that China will change its mind?

What you said is true, no communist government would allow Bitcoin to function in their country. In a country where the governments wants to have complete control over everything and not allow people have total freedom, so Bitcoin wouldn’t  work out. The main aim of having Bitcoin is giving people access to freedom.

I have seen countries where people were able to go against the government through Bitcoin. Just like the ENDSARS movement/protest where the government tried to silence the people who were protesting and they were still able to continue funding their protest against the government through Bitcoin. Such a thing would be a communist government’s worst nightmare.

[Lucius]

In the context of adoption, would you agree, or disagree if someone told you that, “We are still early”? Or you probably believe that Bitcoin, as a protocol, as a technological breakthrough, has climbed the highest peak it can reach?

Of course, adaptation is still at an early stage if you mean ordinary people who still haven't figured out (and some never will) what Bitcoin is. But you first compared some rich people from the past and Saylor who according to you could make trillions because he holds 100k+ Bitcoin, now you ask a completely different question...

Why would it be stupid if it made sense from a game-theoretical standpoint?

I don't know what kind of games you mean, but for me, there is not much logic in your obsession with China, which according to you will have no choice "but to pass Bitcoin / allow mining too,", as if Bitcoin is something China depends on or will depend on in the future. From the perspective of mining profits, even if China has 100% control over Bitcoin mining, total mining profits + fees are trivial compared to what China makes from exporting its goods and services. China does not need Bitcoin, nor is it interested in anything other than making its bans work.

[Wind_FURY]

In the context of adoption, would you agree, or disagree if someone told you that, “We are still early”? Or you probably believe that Bitcoin, as a protocol, as a technological breakthrough, has climbed the highest peak it can reach?

Of course, adaptation is still at an early stage if you mean ordinary people who still haven't figured out (and some never will) what Bitcoin is. But you first compared some rich people from the past and Saylor who according to you could make trillions because he holds 100k+ Bitcoin, now you ask a completely different question...

The context is of everything. The fact that “it’s early” in adoption, early in “defining” what it truly is, early in “knowing” its true implications to nation-states, makes its current price/market value also in the early stages. Do you believe price will crash to $10,000 as adoption expands?

Why would it be stupid if it made sense from a game-theoretical standpoint?

I don't know what kind of games you mean, but for me, there is not much logic in your obsession with China, which according to you will have no choice "but to pass Bitcoin / allow mining too,", as if Bitcoin is something China depends on or will depend on in the future. From the perspective of mining profits, even if China has 100% control over Bitcoin mining, total mining profits + fees are trivial compared to what China makes from exporting its goods and services. China does not need Bitcoin, nor is it interested in anything other than making its bans work.

If “some nation-states” utilize a technology to take advantage of “other nation-states” that are not using it, do you believe the “other nation-states” will not try to utilize the same technology to neutralize the advantage of “some nation-states”?