Strategy returns to Bitcoin

[SatsPH]

The $370M buy is the interesting one. Rather than what it means for the buy. The fact that they have sold at a much lower price in the past and purchased 4,603 BTC indicates that they are not necessarily attempting to time the market. They appear more interested in holding the BTC on a significantly longer term basis. I wouldn't necessarily think of one company's acquisition as a positive sign that the market will perform well at the end of the year. But it's positive news for the market in the long term. I would prefer to see if other institutions continue to build up too. If it was Strategy buying and also institutional demand. That would be a very strong indication.

They've solved because they need to pay the dividends to their investors. So yes, they don't need to time the market, although they could have done it when the price is just about $80k to take more profit.

But I guess they are not after that, their priority is to pay those people who have invested on their company. So in an sense, it's not that bad decision after all. They have a obligation and that is their priority. They can make a comeback later which they did. So still a win win for us and they will continue what they are doing since then, to accumulate more BTC in their balance sheet.

[obuoma]

Strategy thrive on this sentiment, they got nonstop exposure by simply buying bitcoin over the counter, something that shouldn't even move the market by one bit but the community took it as some kind of signal. Strategy's decision to buy has never been a sign of anything, instead their decision to buy not based on price but periodical has been subject of scrutinize because it raises their mNAV exponentially, a potential for a disaster considering how they structured their company around leverage.

I stopped paying attention to the Bitcoin purchase of Michael Saylor and Microstrategy a long time ago because their purchase have zero impact on the market. Before when I hear news about their purchase, I usually expect serious buy pressure in the market but time has shown that their buy has no net effect on the market because they are buying through OTC. Unfortunately, when they sell, the news carry it in such way that it lead to some panic in the market. This is my problem with news about Microstrategy.  

[Die_empty]

Whether Strategy will return or not, it won't change the fact that bitcoin price is heading to its bullish market, especially if the current price continue to increase in the coming days and months.

However, the return of Strategy may definitely increase bitcoin demand, and develop more positive market sentiments that could attract bigger institutional investors to buy and accumulate bitcoin. As a result, it will strengthen market confidence and encourage more big companies to set bitcoin as their corporate reserve asset. The higher bitcoin price gets into, the more tempting for institutional investors to enter bitcoin.

Long-term Bitcoin investors shouldn't be influenced by the decisions of these big institutions like Strategy. Maybe traders should, since news such as Strategy's accumulating or dumping Bitcoin. Michael Saylor came up with the idea that Bitcoin shouldn't be sold. So many people who copied his investment pattern were disappointed when Strategy dumped a few coins. So the company's decision to accumulate would change the perception of investors. This is because they are now assured that Strategy has a feasible Bitcoin investment plan and is not leaving the industry.

[BALIK]

Strategy thrive on this sentiment, they got nonstop exposure by simply buying bitcoin over the counter, something that shouldn't even move the market by one bit but the community took it as some kind of signal. Strategy's decision to buy has never been a sign of anything, instead their decision to buy not based on price but periodical has been subject of scrutinize because it raises their mNAV exponentially, a potential for a disaster considering how they structured their company around leverage.

I stopped paying attention to the Bitcoin purchase of Michael Saylor and Microstrategy a long time ago because their purchase have zero impact on the market. Before when I hear news about their purchase, I usually expect serious buy pressure in the market but time has shown that their buy has no net effect on the market because they are buying through OTC. Unfortunately, when they sell, the news carry it in such way that it lead to some panic in the market. This is my problem with news about Microstrategy.  

The problem isn't just that they are buying Bitcoin through OTC. Their buying power is simply too small compared to the overall liquidity of the market to have any meaningful impact.

ETF inflows are much bigger, but as we have seen, even large positive ETF flow doesnt mean Bitcoin is going up, let alone a purchase from Strategy.
Instead of getting excited because they're buying, ask who is selling. If nobody is selling, where are they getting the Bitcoin from?

Price depends on many other factors, not just a few institutions buying. The community is making way too big a deal out of Strategy buying Bitcoin, IMO.