Michael Saylor Says $1 BTC Price Wouldnt Liquidate MicroStrategy Just Make Them Buy More
Well, that's an exaggerated example of an almost impossible scenario. If bitcoin fell to $1, it would probably end up at $0. But what he wants to illustrate is that if bitcoin fell sharply in price, he and many other companies and investors would rush to buy en masse, which would soon cushion the fall. We are no longer in a retail era where people will sell out of panic, allowing declines of 80% or more. This is a mature asset, and institutional investors do not get carried away by panic.
I don't like the example. It is too unrealistic, and like you mentioned would pretty much be the scenario of bitcoin going to zero.
Even something like $5k per bitcoin is almost impossible (and almost like a scenario of bitcoin going to zero), but at least $5k or $10k or even $20k even though quite unlikely are more within grasp and dealing within somewhat realistic boundaries within unlikely scenarios
It seems that when Saylor talks about bitcoin going to $1 he is not really grappling with how dire that would be.. yet even the route down to $1 there would be several companies and individuals running out of money because they had been already buying on the way down.. which we see that so often when the BTC price goes down beyond expectations including that in 2021 and into early 2022, there were so many bitcoiners who were considering that the 200-WMA was the absolute bottom the absolute bottom that the BTC price could go
So when the Terra Luna thing blew up in May/June 2022, the 200-WMA was then at $22k, yet the BTC price was in the upper $30ks and quickly dropped to the lower $30ks, and that was such an outrageous event that it had become clear that $30k was likely not going to hold as support, so then going into the lower $20ks also became realistic and we were already seeing contagion and cascading reckening of folks.. and even when the price went below the 200-WMA, there continued to be more sellers than buyers including FTX selling whatever BTC they had whenever the BTC had any kind of bounce, so I recall all of the bigger players who had been talking about buying the dip at $30k no longer talking about buying the dip and also no longer actually buying the dip, which is part of the reason why we spent almost 10 weeks below $20k and got as low at $15,479. In late 2022, Saylor/MSTR was not buying and/or announcing any excitements about buying (not that he was ever a buy the dip guy, he was frequently criticized for his buying at any price kind of a guy).
A big game can be talked until we get there, and surely Saylor is not incorrect that the big players will be buying on the way down, yet they would long run out of money unless they sold on the way down and then bought back at a lower price, or some of the folks in other industries are the ones who would buy the bottom, if BTC were still to be viable at those kinds of lower prices.
I understand why Saylor is framing the matter as he is in order to largely avoid the topic, including that in 2022 Saylor was initially saying that he was going to need to recollateralize if the BTC price reached the lower $20ks, and then after he recollateralized, then he started saying that the BTC price would have to reach the lower $3ks before he would have to recollateralize again, yet of course, Saylor/MSTR moved away from the practice of having their BTC encumbered or in need of being collateralize, so many MSTR/Saylor critics do not even understand the way that Salyor/MSTR have largely put their assets in BTC and their liabilities in dollars/fiat.. so they pretty much own all of the assets without encumbrances, yet at the same time, if we were to visit the 200-WMA again (which is currently at about $51.7k) or if we were to go 35% below the 200-WMA like we did at the peak of the dip (that would bring us to $33.6k currently), yet perhaps $40k in the month or two that it could take to get there...
Those low numbers seem almost impossible absent some pretty major catastrophe shenanigans, such as Coinbase playing out like some variation of FTX.. or some other major issue with the bitcoin code or even coordinated governmental attacks... and we can imagine some kinds of events that would involve some players learning about the event(s) prior to other players, so the ones who find out early might end up selling earlier in order to buy back low if the matter were to be resolvable...
There have always been some presentation of outlier scenarios that could happen in bitcoin in which so far in bitcoin's history there have been guys who give those negative outlier scenarios way more probability than they deserve and those naysaying and/or bitcoin bashing guys end up as bitter no coiners, low coiners or perhaps previously owning coiners.. and so far in history, they have had fun staying poor.. yet, sure past performance does not guarantee future performance.
