Bitcoin and Michael Sellor fud, Michael Sellor is the new Do Kwon?

[d5000]

Mmh, thanks for your explanation but I still don't know if I agree.

1. ETFs and other instrument make Bitcoin shorting easier, and this can increase selling pressure at times especially in short-term and during panic runs.

But it can also make leveraged longs easier, and longs in a long-term uptrend will probably be the dominant method of speculation. In addition, we get more potential for short squeezes.

2. Derivatives are able to influence short-term price, so we went from a price discovery process that was happening only in the spot Bitcoin market on centralized exchanges to a diversified and integrated market. So large institutions are able to hedge derivatives rather than buying spot Bitcoin, and with this you have a reduction in short-term buying pressure compared to the time before where everyone actually had to buy BTC.

Here I also don't understand something. Most of the high-volume derivatives are spot ETFs with Bitcoin backing. So the buying potential only transfers to the OTC market where the ETF companies buy their Bitcoins.

The only case I could make here is that the spot market is more prone to extreme FOMO phases. An ETF will probably try to time the market a bit. If that's what you mean then I at least can understand the idea partly, even if I'm still not sure if the effect really is net negative. Because the opposite works as well, we could have less panic dumps due to this diversification.

3. Increased market efficiency tames the bubbles.

That's basically what I wrote in the last paragraph. Possible but I would need data to confirm it.

This cycle will test how it plays out fully, but if the bottom is much lower than 50% of the ATH then it would negate your theory of taming both sides.

Here I disagree strongly. It would already a very significant taming if the price only fell to 35% of the ATH, because in earlier occasions the "taming" to the upside looked always stronger (2013->17->21) than to the downside (2015->18->22). The low in 2015 was 10% of the previous ATH, the low in 2018 was 15%, and the 2022 low 22% of the ATH. This means the "expected" value this time would be around 28%-30% (or a 70-72% dump) if we take the past "taming cycles" (to call it that way ). So even if we fall to slightly below 40,000$ (35% of the ATH), the taming effect would still be noticeable.

Edit: In addition we have to always consider external factors. We have the "Sellor" factor this time, which has a strong effect on sentiment currently. We had Do Kwon in 2022 but "Sellor" may be even stronger.

No, I don't think that is a technical question but involves a lot of aspects such as taxes, costs, appeal to institutional investors.

Thanks for your explanation but I still don't understand how this tames only the upside again ... But yeah, we probably should start another thread for that

[bbc.reporter]

@bbc.reporter we are missing your update.   I didn't check yet, but I see people posting that Strategy has announced a willingness to sell up to $1 billion worth of Bitcoin. Something in that direction.

Yes, Michael Sellor has transformed his financial experiment from a bitcoin accumulation roadmap into something similar to a bitcoin-dollar fund. There is nothing wrong with this transformation, however, this is certainly bad for Sellor because he is starting this new bitcoin-dollar fund with more than $12 billion loss in their investment on bitcoin and they need to sell bitcoin with a loss hehehe.

Michael Sellor's financial experiment has certainly become a headshaking occurrence. But I wishfully hope that this transformation will avoid an occurrence where Sellor might become a Korean!

[bbc.reporter]

News update.

Michael Sellor has sold more bitcoin and this was a bigger amount. There were people in the forum who were jeering at me for speculating that Saylor will become Sellor heheheeh. It appears that the speculation is correct, similar to the other speculation on FTX to bite the dust where I was also jeered heheheh.



Strategy selling hundreds of millions worth of bitcoin raises question about its capital-allocation playbook

Strategy's (MSTR) recent bitcoin trades suggest the company is attempting to find its footing amid bitcoin's bear-market slide, which raises questions about its capital markets strategy.

Alongside today's news of $216 million worth of bitcoin sales, the company also disclosed that it had booked an "unrealized" loss of $8.31 billion on its bitcoin holdings in the second quarter as the price fell from about $68,000 on April 1 to close June at roughly $60,000. While it took a "realized" loss of $0.9 million. An unrealized loss occurs when the total value of an asset depreciates on the balance sheet, without selling it. Realized losses are booked when assets are sold at a price lower than their carrying amount.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2026/07/06/one-month-that-shook-the-market-saylor-s-struggles-over-bitcoin-strategy-yields-big-loss

[bbc.reporter]

What the article does not mention is the latest source of liquid cash for Microstrategy was the dumpage of more MSTR stock and this dilutes the holders of this stock. It very much appears that presently, Michael Sellor has valuing dollars more than his company's stock heheheh. He would like to buy this stock if Sellor will continue to dump this?



Strategy pauses its Bitcoin buying spree to hoard a massive $3 billion cash cushion

On Monday, Strategy increased its U.S. dollar reserve to approximately $3 billion. Based on annualized preferred-stock dividends and debt interest of roughly $1.76 billion, the reserve now provides about 20.4 months of coverage.

However, if bitcoin were to fall further and reach new lows, the $3 billion reserve may prove insufficient, potentially forcing Strategy to raise additional funds or sell more bitcoin, which could place further pressure on both STRC and MSTR.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2026/07/13/strategy-pauses-its-bitcoin-buying-spree-to-hoard-a-massive-usd3-billion-cash-cushion

[d5000]

I think the 3500 BTC sale which was only noted after the fact was a smart move. It may not be enough of course, but it provides some air to breath for Strategy during months where the market is full of fear and expects lower lows, which could be dangerous for Strategy without enough reserves.

Now I had first problems understanding this part:

However, if bitcoin were to fall further and reach new lows, the $3 billion reserve may prove insufficient, potentially forcing Strategy to raise additional funds or sell more bitcoin, which could place further pressure on both STRC and MSTR.

It seems however that they refer mostly to a situation if STRC falls further, then MSTR could rise the dividends to appease the investors and prevent a further fall. And then the original cash reserves + the 3588 BTC sold would be no longer enough for 20 months, but perhaps less than a year if everything goes wrong.

Thus it would imo be an intelligent move to sell more BTC now, preferrably if the price stays well above 60k to prevent triggering lower lows. It may seem highly counter-productive as it may be a price near the bottom. But if the cash reserves can be increased further to 30+ months, then the risk of forced and unplanned BTC liquidations in the case of a further BTC price decline, which would be much more harmful to the market, would be minimized.

[Dogedegen]

On Monday, Strategy increased its U.S. dollar reserve to approximately $3 billion. Based on annualized preferred-stock dividends and debt interest of roughly $1.76 billion, the reserve now provides about 20.4 months of coverage.

This is not bad but the best strategy for this situation would be to buy back all the obligations when the market is very bullish again, that would be the move of the century and would turn Strategy into an amazing vehicle again. That is what I am hoping for but I have to stay patient a bit longer to see if they go this way.

However, if bitcoin were to fall further and reach new lows, the $3 billion reserve may prove insufficient, potentially forcing Strategy to raise additional funds or sell more bitcoin, which could place further pressure on both STRC and MSTR.[/i]

They need to stop adding things like this because they are always true in the bear market, it is like if the sun comes out today the weather will be warmer. The opposite is also always true, if Bitcoin were to rise further and reach new highs, then the reserve will be a good cushion and they may increase it without anything.

I think the 3500 BTC sale which was only noted after the fact was a smart move. It may not be enough of course, but it provides some air to breath for Strategy during months where the market is full of fear and expects lower lows, which could be dangerous for Strategy without enough reserves.

We are coming back again and again to the topic is this still a 4 year cycle or not, and it all depends on that. If it is so then this cushion is more than enough based on the months that were noted. If we follow the past then the low is about 5 months from now, and after that we are going steadily up. 20 months from now puts us at March 2028 so around 1 month before the next halving based on the current estimates. This will be only an issue if the cycle theory is finally broken and it is broken in a very negative way. If it is confirmed or we become more bullish than expected and earlier then there are no issues.

[bbc.reporter]

I think the 3500 BTC sale which was only noted after the fact was a smart move. It may not be enough of course, but it provides some air to breath for Strategy during months where the market is full of fear and expects lower lows, which could be dangerous for Strategy without enough reserves.

It was 1 of the only 2 actions that Michael Sellor can do to raise liquid cash to pay the dividends to STRC holders. This was not smart, Sellor has only 2 choices hehehe. However, there is a 3rd choice and this is to sell more debt to pay the dividends but this will make STRC a ponzi scheme.

I reckon if Sellor stopped buying bitcoin after 2024 and only continued to hold what he has bought already, he would not have this problem.

[SilverCryptoBullet]

It was 1 of the only 2 actions that Michael Sellor can do to raise liquid cash to pay the dividends to STRC holders. This was not smart, Sellor has only 2 choices hehehe. However, there is a 3rd choice and this is to sell more debt to pay the dividends but this will make STRC a ponzi scheme

Saylor already gambled too much since months ago, and he was either too confident that Bitcoin market will treat him well with his gamble, or he was too naive that the other market makers, big players in the market will not take advantage of bear market to kill positions of Strategy. Strategy and Saylor are actually on the verge of something really bad in coming months when the Bitcoin market has yet fallen to the bottom, and like there will be a last market wash to kill some big players like Strategy before recovering and taking off to a new market cycle.

I reckon if Sellor stopped buying bitcoin after 2024 and only continued to hold what he has bought already, he would not have this problem.

I agree with you. Recent months, he and his company over gambled on Bitcoin market and now they are facing with not comfortable consequences from that.

[Dogedegen]

I think the 3500 BTC sale which was only noted after the fact was a smart move. It may not be enough of course, but it provides some air to breath for Strategy during months where the market is full of fear and expects lower lows, which could be dangerous for Strategy without enough reserves.

It was 1 of the only 2 actions that Michael Sellor can do to raise liquid cash to pay the dividends to STRC holders. This was not smart, Sellor has only 2 choices hehehe. However, there is a 3rd choice and this is to sell more debt to pay the dividends but this will make STRC a ponzi scheme.

I reckon if Sellor stopped buying bitcoin after 2024 and only continued to hold what he has bought already, he would not have this problem.

I don't think that you have understood his post, unless I am also mistaken. When he mentioned that it was smart, he was talking about that the sale was only noted after it happened. So by doing this they have avoided the market panicking and front-running that we had last time even if the sale does not have any real impact on liquidity. So yes doing a sale and announcing that it has already happened is definitely the smarter strategy out of the two choice, comparing it to announcing that they will sell something. There are simply too many irrational market participants that are currently fearful, so any kind of announcements before the fact are not good.

Strategy and Saylor are actually on the verge of something really bad in coming months when the Bitcoin market has yet fallen to the bottom, and like there will be a last market wash to kill some big players like Strategy before recovering and taking off to a new market cycle.

No they are not, please stop spreading misinformation about Strategy if you have not read its financial statements. They have very good financial positions to last several years, and even in the worst cases they can last many more years after that by using its Bitcoin assets. They do not face any risk of bankruptcy or collapse, so any speculations about being killed are just bad and wrong.

[bbc.reporter]

It was 1 of the only 2 actions that Michael Sellor can do to raise liquid cash to pay the dividends to STRC holders. This was not smart, Sellor has only 2 choices hehehe. However, there is a 3rd choice and this is to sell more debt to pay the dividends but this will make STRC a ponzi scheme

Saylor already gambled too much since months ago, and he was either too confident that Bitcoin market will treat him well with his gamble, or he was too naive that the other market makers, big players in the market will not take advantage of bear market to kill positions of Strategy. Strategy and Saylor are actually on the verge of something really bad in coming months when the Bitcoin market has yet fallen to the bottom, and like there will be a last market wash to kill some big players like Strategy before recovering and taking off to a new market cycle.

I reckon if Sellor stopped buying bitcoin after 2024 and only continued to hold what he has bought already, he would not have this problem.

I agree with you. Recent months, he and his company over gambled on Bitcoin market and now they are facing with not comfortable consequences from that.

It appears that Michael Sellor was used as exit liquidity by the biggest bitcoin whales who have held bitcoin since before 2015. This will be a headshaking question and I will be jeered by many people in the forum for this heheheh, however, I will ask who will be the exit liquidity of Michael Sellor if he begins selling a bigger percentage of the bitcoin from Microstrategy's treasury?

[X-ray]

What the article does not mention is the latest source of liquid cash for Microstrategy was the dumpage of more MSTR stock and this dilutes the holders of this stock. It very much appears that presently, Michael Sellor has valuing dollars more than his company's stock heheheh. He would like to buy this stock if Sellor will continue to dump this?



Strategy pauses its Bitcoin buying spree to hoard a massive $3 billion cash cushion

On Monday, Strategy increased its U.S. dollar reserve to approximately $3 billion. Based on annualized preferred-stock dividends and debt interest of roughly $1.76 billion, the reserve now provides about 20.4 months of coverage.

However, if bitcoin were to fall further and reach new lows, the $3 billion reserve may prove insufficient, potentially forcing Strategy to raise additional funds or sell more bitcoin, which could place further pressure on both STRC and MSTR.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2026/07/13/strategy-pauses-its-bitcoin-buying-spree-to-hoard-a-massive-usd3-billion-cash-cushion

So basically saylor went from offering STRC with 11.5% dividend yield to holding big amount of cash while still paying 11.5% dividend yield.

How does that work and how it's going to be sustainable in the long run? Isn't the high dividend yield possible because large bitcoin holding ?

Now he's sitting on a large chunk of cash non productive capital and still pay 11.5% dividend.

[Dogedegen]

It appears that Michael Sellor was used as exit liquidity by the biggest bitcoin whales who have held bitcoin since before 2015. This will be a headshaking question and I will be jeered by many people in the forum for this heheheh, however, I will ask who will be the exit liquidity of Michael Sellor if he begins selling a bigger percentage of the bitcoin from Microstrategy's treasury?

There is nothing wrong with that, that is what happens always in a maturing market. Very large holders who were maybe even into the billions range would have had a huge trouble selling before, but in recent years they have managed to do that. This is a sign that the liquidity in the Bitcoin system has increased significantly, I think some people from some financial companies actually talked about this in the last year or so confirming that this is the case. There will always be another buyer, that is how a market works.

So basically saylor went from offering STRC with 11.5% dividend yield to holding big amount of cash while still paying 11.5% dividend yield.

How does that work and how it's going to be sustainable in the long run? Isn't the high dividend yield possible because large bitcoin holding ?

Now he's sitting on a large chunk of cash non productive capital and still pay 11.5% dividend.

You got it all wrong, the high dividend is not a good thing. The reason for which they have to offer a high dividend is because this is considered a junk financial investment that is risky, since the company does not generate enough profit to sustain the payouts and has to rely on future raises or selling of assets. The way that you wrote it implies that the dividend yield is something good and that is somehow enabled by Bitcoin, that is not true. Dividends are also paid in cash, so holding Bitcoin does not help with the payments. I don't think you understand what STRC is or the yields, it would be good to ask ChatGPT for more explanations to understand it better.

[bbc.reporter]

It appears that Michael Sellor was used as exit liquidity by the biggest bitcoin whales who have held bitcoin since before 2015. This will be a headshaking question and I will be jeered by many people in the forum for this heheheh, however, I will ask who will be the exit liquidity of Michael Sellor if he begins selling a bigger percentage of the bitcoin from Microstrategy's treasury?

There is nothing wrong with that, that is what happens always in a maturing market. Very large holders who were maybe even into the billions range would have had a huge trouble selling before, but in recent years they have managed to do that. This is a sign that the liquidity in the Bitcoin system has increased significantly, I think some people from some financial companies actually talked about this in the last year or so confirming that this is the case. There will always be another buyer, that is how a market works.

I did not declare that there was something wrong with being exit liquidity. This occurrence has been happening to retail investors similar to people like us who is always left holding the cryptocoins with a loss heheheh.

What I am asking is if the bitcoin whales of 2011-2015 will not come back to become Michael Sellor's exit liquidity, who will buy bitcoin from Sellor?

[UchihaSarada]

I did not declare that there was something wrong with being exit liquidity. This occurrence has been happening to retail investors similar to people like us who is always left holding the cryptocoins with a loss heheheh.

What I am asking is if the bitcoin whales of 2011-2015 will not come back to become Michael Sellor's exit liquidity, who will buy bitcoin from Sellor?

Liquidations if happen will be terrible and like nightmare for Strategy and Saylor but like what happened with Terra, Do Kwon, FTT and Sam Bankman-Fried, their coins will belong to someone else, other entities in this market who got benefit from such liquidations.

Who will buy or get bitcoins from Strategy and Saylor in the future when liquidations actually come, I really don't consider it as important thing. Do people from retail investors to institutional investors want and hope to have cheaper prices for accumulating bitcoin. Liquidations against Strategy will give them such time and good cheap prices.

[X-ray]

You got it all wrong, the high dividend is not a good thing. The reason for which they have to offer a high dividend is because this is considered a junk financial investment that is risky, since the company does not generate enough profit to sustain the payouts and has to rely on future raises or selling of assets. The way that you wrote it implies that the dividend yield is something good and that is somehow enabled by Bitcoin, that is not true.

Okay, I understand that STRC is junk financial investment that needs high dividend just to attract buyers and the fact that even with the current high dividend the stock still won't trade at par for some reason.

What I'm wondering is if the trend goes on, which is Saylor selling Bitcoin just for structural purpose and increase confidence because everybody keep talking about the cash buffer that Strategy need to have to calm down the panic, won't that cause their Bitcoin base asset to plummet which in turn requires them to have higher capital gain overtime to make up for the dividend they paid since their unproductive cash buffer has increased?

I understand that STRC need future raises and selling of assets to pay its dividend but the way Strategy structured STRC, from my understanding, Saylor is expecting Bitcoin capital gain profit to be able to make up for the dividend funding which is coming straight from the sale of Bitcoin from their reserves and with the sale of the Bitcoin for cash buffer, the potential future capital gain decreased.

It feels like this entire strategy of Saylor increasing cash buffer will eventually decrease their bitcoin holding little by little to pay for dividends overtime.

Recently Saylor himself said that he just needs 3.3% annual growth to fund the dividend indefinitely according to this news however that is assuming if he didn't keep selling the Bitcoin to fund the structural drag. Is it going to be sustainable? CMIIW.

[Dogedegen]

I did not declare that there was something wrong with being exit liquidity. This occurrence has been happening to retail investors similar to people like us who is always left holding the cryptocoins with a loss heheheh.

What I am asking is if the bitcoin whales of 2011-2015 will not come back to become Michael Sellor's exit liquidity, who will buy bitcoin from Sellor?

I do not understand the point of this question. Before Michael Sellor came to buy a lot of Bitcoin, we did not know that he would come and provide this exit liquidity that you speak of. So we do not know ahead of time who will buy, and how much so speculating like this does not really have much benefit. It could be big institutions, central banks, countries, many options there are but they will just stay speculations. It is like asking us what will happen in 5 years from now? Nobody knows the answer to that. 

You got it all wrong, the high dividend is not a good thing. The reason for which they have to offer a high dividend is because this is considered a junk financial investment that is risky, since the company does not generate enough profit to sustain the payouts and has to rely on future raises or selling of assets. The way that you wrote it implies that the dividend yield is something good and that is somehow enabled by Bitcoin, that is not true. Dividends are also paid in cash, so holding Bitcoin does not help with the payments. I don't think you understand what STRC is or the yields, it would be good to ask ChatGPT for more explanations to understand it better.

Okay, I understand that STRC is junk financial investment that needs high dividend just to attract buyers and the fact that even with the current high dividend the stock still won't trade at par for some reason.

What I'm wondering is if the trend goes on, which is Saylor selling Bitcoin just for structural purpose and increase confidence because everybody keep talking about the cash buffer that Strategy need to have to calm down the panic, won't that cause their Bitcoin base asset to plummet which in turn requires them to have higher capital gain overtime to make up for the dividend they paid since their unproductive cash buffer has increased?

I understand that STRC need future raises and selling of assets to pay its dividend but the way Strategy structured STRC, from my understanding, Saylor is expecting Bitcoin capital gain profit to be able to make up for the dividend funding which is coming straight from the sale of Bitcoin from their reserves and with the sale of the Bitcoin for cash buffer, the potential future capital gain decreased.

Good, I am glad that you understand it better now and that you are asking the right question. Well, think about it this way. What happens if Strategy is out of cash and can't pay the dividends? They have to either suspend the dividends which would be very bad or they have to declare bankruptcy which is illogical if you look at their balance sheet, and anyway in the case of bankruptcy proceedings Bitcoin would be sold anyway. Please remember that I am ignoring potential financing, loans and that and wanted to mention what happens when you run out of cash.

So they need to keep doing that, and the question is only if the amount of selling of BTC that is required to sustain it will be less than the buying moving forward. For that the main factor is the total dividend obligations per year. Overall we consider Bitcoin to have 4 year markets, so anything longer than that would be very strange. But imagine a 8 year bear market, this is still sustainable with the obligations if the recovery is at least in the normal range. The market and investors are reacting positively to their cash buffer because it shows that Strategy is able to wait longer for Bitcoin to completely recover and is not gambling everything on a specific date based on past cycles.

If we are going to repeat the 4 year cycle, we are 5 months away from the cycle bottom if we haven't hit it already. Having a 2 year cash buffer is a very big safety net for them, if Bitcoin does not recover by then that would be very bad for everyone because it would show that something is very wrong in the world maybe due to a war or recession or that something is very wrong with Bitcoin.

It feels like this entire strategy of Saylor increasing cash buffer will eventually decrease their bitcoin holding little by little to pay for dividends overtime.

Recently Saylor himself said that he just needs 3.3% annual growth to fund the dividend indefinitely according to this news however that is assuming if he didn't keep selling the Bitcoin to fund the structural drag. Is it going to be sustainable? CMIIW.

No, because that is not how this works. I mean moving forward they have many options, issue more, do not issue any, or even buy them back! Some people do not understand that these preferred shares can be bought back which reduces the dividend obligations. So let's assume a very mild recovery to $120k in the next bullish phase of the market. They could sell some Bitcoin, buy back all the preferred shares and have 0 dividends. They could dilute their stock again if it pumps and avoid selling Bitcoin and invest some of that money to buy back the preferred shares. They have many options! You underestimate how big their balance sheet is in billions, check it! Big factors that will go into decision making is their risk preference and the cost of capital, so if the financing is cheap enough compared to the returns that they are continuing the earn they may not decide to do this. They may even issue more shares when Bitcoin starts pumping again! I personally hope not because that will be a golden opportunity to remove all the risk from Strategy, but I am just giving you all the possibilities.

[bbc.reporter]

I did not declare that there was something wrong with being exit liquidity. This occurrence has been happening to retail investors similar to people like us who is always left holding the cryptocoins with a loss heheheh.

What I am asking is if the bitcoin whales of 2011-2015 will not come back to become Michael Sellor's exit liquidity, who will buy bitcoin from Sellor?

I do not understand the point of this question. Before Michael Sellor came to buy a lot of Bitcoin, we did not know that he would come and provide this exit liquidity that you speak of. So we do not know ahead of time who will buy, and how much so speculating like this does not really have much benefit. It could be big institutions, central banks, countries, many options there are but they will just stay speculations. It is like asking us what will happen in 5 years from now? Nobody knows the answer to that. 

You did not notice the weakness of the pump of the last bull market despite Michael Sellor's very big buy of bitcoin? There were also the other good news in the cryptospace from the Donald, the passage of the stablecoin bill, the inflows from the ETF and other good news! However, none of these good news pumped bitcoin strongly! If these good news occurred during 2017, we will certainly witness bitcoin pump more than $300k by 2021!

It very much appears that there were big whales who were dumping on Michael Sellor's large buys on bitcoin. This makes Sellor the exit liquidity that the whales needed to avoid causing a big dump on the price heheheheeh!

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

You did not notice the weakness of the pump of the last bull market despite Michael Sellor's very big buy of bitcoin? There were also the other good news in the cryptospace from the Donald, the passage of the stablecoin bill, the inflows from the ETF and other good news! However, none of these good news pumped bitcoin strongly! If these good news occurred during 2017, we will certainly witness bitcoin pump more than $300k by 2021!

It very much appears that there were big whales who were dumping on Michael Sellor's large buys on bitcoin. This makes Sellor the exit liquidity that the whales needed to avoid causing a big dump on the price heheheheeh!

Bitcoin actually under performed in the latest market cycle and bull run but there were many reasons for that. Firstly, before talking about other factors, with a same factor like Saylor, Strategy's purchases, their effects will become less with time. It's very similar with news about Bitcoin Futures applications, Bitcoin Spot ETF applications and refusals in the past. It's similar with news about bans from China, and other things.

It's can be very understandable with purchases from Saylor, Strategies having less impacts on the market with time. Same with news about Elon Musk, Tesla, posts from Elon Musk about this market all have less impacts with time.

The market basically needs to have something new to create big effects on market movements and price.

Then other factors like political problems globally, wars and more.

[Dogedegen]

You did not notice the weakness of the pump of the last bull market despite Michael Sellor's very big buy of bitcoin? There were also the other good news in the cryptospace from the Donald, the passage of the stablecoin bill, the inflows from the ETF and other good news! However, none of these good news pumped bitcoin strongly! If these good news occurred during 2017, we will certainly witness bitcoin pump more than $300k by 2021!

It very much appears that there were big whales who were dumping on Michael Sellor's large buys on bitcoin. This makes Sellor the exit liquidity that the whales needed to avoid causing a big dump on the price heheheheeh!

Simply, sorry but that is a big no on this speculative reasoning. You are trying to explain very complicated events that have many variables that can't even be objectively quantified with statistics because of their complexity with very simple reasons and explanations. There are many reasons for which the last bull market did not reach the full expectations, but you are also framing that the target was missed by a lot when it wasn't. By different estimations it should have maybe reached around $150k but it stopped at around $125k which means that the weakness was a mere 20% from the peak of the estimate. There is always going to be buyers and there are always going to be sellers, you are not saying anything new or surprising.

The market basically needs to have something new to create big effects on market movements and price.

This is false, markets are not equal. They have very diverse and different characteristics depending on what is happening with them and at what stage they are. When a market is maturing, news has less and less impact on it. It has nothing to do with needing something new. The constant need for new and hype or trendy things is found in immature markets like shitcoins, don't confuse Bitcoin with a shitcoin.

[bbc.reporter]

You did not notice the weakness of the pump of the last bull market despite Michael Sellor's very big buy of bitcoin? There were also the other good news in the cryptospace from the Donald, the passage of the stablecoin bill, the inflows from the ETF and other good news! However, none of these good news pumped bitcoin strongly! If these good news occurred during 2017, we will certainly witness bitcoin pump more than $300k by 2021!

It very much appears that there were big whales who were dumping on Michael Sellor's large buys on bitcoin. This makes Sellor the exit liquidity that the whales needed to avoid causing a big dump on the price heheheheeh!

Simply, sorry but that is a big no on this speculative reasoning. You are trying to explain very complicated events that have many variables that can't even be objectively quantified with statistics because of their complexity with very simple reasons and explanations. There are many reasons for which the last bull market did not reach the full expectations, but you are also framing that the target was missed by a lot when it wasn't. By different estimations it should have maybe reached around $150k but it stopped at around $125k which means that the weakness was a mere 20% from the peak of the estimate. There is always going to be buyers and there are always going to be sellers, you are not saying anything new or surprising.

I am also very much sorry if you are not reading the news and a man who is very much not aware on the occurrences in the cryptospace.

These news updates on the movement of bitcoin of the whales have been shared for 2 or more years already. Michael Sellor was pumping bitcoin, the whales were dumping bitcoin. Who will Sellor dump his bitcoin on?



This was the year the Bitcoin whales woke up. As the price of the leading cryptocurrency soared to new heights, longtime holders started making moves to the tune of billions of dollars.

Selling from O.G. "HODLers" began after the leading cryptocurrency finally hit the mythical $100,000 mark for the first time in December 2024. Whales then briefly slowed their sales before, but started shifting coins again in the summer and in October, according to blockchain data, helping contribute to declining prices.

"This year, Bitcoin has seen an unprecedented amount of coins change hands," CryptoQuant analyst J.A. Maartun told Decrypt. "I call this the 'great redistribution,' during which Bitcoin held by long-term holders has been transferred to new owners in several waves."

Strictly speaking, a whale is usually defined by an entity that holds 1,000 BTC—worth $86 million as of December 15—or more.

Source https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bitcoin-whales-woke-2025-moved-170138795.html