How Much Bitcoin Does MicroStrategy Own In 2023?

[Z-tight]

If there is one company that makes me extremely bullish on BTC its MS. They just buy buy buy, there is no stopping that train. Saylor is sailing in the BTC!!! Its definitely cool seeing that kind of confidence, from a CEO. He is giving other investors exposure into BTC that don't necessarily want to invest in it directly as well.

It is good for the network when institutional investors like MicroStrategy and Michael Saylor purchases a lot of BTC, it can affect the price in a good way if they continue to buy, but i don't think MicroStrategy is giving BTC anymore exposure than it already had before they started buying BTC, and i don't think one should buy BTC because MicroStrategy or Michael Saylor bought, they should buy BTC because they have done their own research and believe that BTC is a good investment for them.

[1715521976]

1715521976

[1715521976]

1715521976

[1715521976]

1715521976

[401kbitcoin]

If there is one company that makes me extremely bullish on BTC its MS. They just buy buy buy, there is no stopping that train. Saylor is sailing in the BTC!!! Its definitely cool seeing that kind of confidence, from a CEO. He is giving other investors exposure into BTC that don't necessarily want to invest in it directly as well.

It is good for the network when institutional investors like MicroStrategy and Michael Saylor purchases a lot of BTC, it can affect the price in a good way if they continue to buy, but i don't think MicroStrategy is giving BTC anymore exposure than it already had before they started buying BTC, and i don't think one should buy BTC because MicroStrategy or Michael Saylor bought, they should buy BTC because they have done their own research and believe that BTC is a good investment for them.

Considering the fact that MicroStrategy is a leader in business intelligence for worldwide services as a centralized platform and doesn't see any plans of slowing down soon, it is good to see them also invest in Bitcoin which is a decentralized blockchain backed cryptocurrency. The company and Michael Saylor must foresee a myriad of blockchain applications related to business intelligence available to Bitcoin users, starting with the blockchain network itself. As a 1% stakeholder in Bitcoin, it would be interesting to see if MicroStrategy continues to build out the Bitcoin ecosystem by empowering existing users with new tools, software, data and analytics that could make the network safer, scalable and secure over time thus increasing the value of Bitcoin as a result.

[ImThour]

A lot, more than any other company I would say. And they don't have to buy more, they just have to make it a utility so that the demand increases naturally instead of them trying to create a market pressure and buying it. If they spend that money to hire Bitcoin Devs which can create amazing products for them, that will be much more beneficial in the long run. They now own almost 152,333 Bitcoin which is worth $4,127,000,000. Spend 1% of that for the actual Bitcoin development and it will be so beneficial for them.

[tbct_mt2]

It is good for the network when institutional investors like MicroStrategy and Michael Saylor purchases a lot of BTC

The network only can be supported if people run more Bitcoin full nodes or more miners join the network and increase total hashrate of the network as well as config their mining rigs to different mining pools with thoughtful consideration on what pools to participate in. Because with more full nodes, the Bitcoin blockchain will be stored more decentralized and more nodes mean more decentralized validators of Bitcoin blocks. Choosing mining pools with intention to avoid very big pools will help to reduce risk of 51% attacks.

it can affect the price in a good way if they continue to buy, but i don't think MicroStrategy is giving BTC anymore exposure than it already had before they started buying BTC, and i don't think one should buy BTC because MicroStrategy or Michael Saylor bought, they should buy BTC because they have done their own research and believe that BTC is a good investment for them.

It is about risk of price impact when big institutional investors like MicroStrategy sell their bitcoins massively. However, if we talk about selling, we should also mention about their considerable impacts on price when they are buying massively in the past.

Is it fair if we only discuss about their selling impacts and skip or try to hide their past buyings which help Bitcoin to rise up a lot?