Published 19 Jun 2026, 14:33 UTC · fetched 3 Nov 2026, 10:57 UTC
Chase
@Crypto_Chase
In reply to · 19 Jun 2026, 13:53 UTC · context given to the AI
I’ll be the first to admit I was way later than I should have been Respect anyone who saw it earlier and was vocal Unfortunately even though I was never a Saylor maxi seeing Strategy press the buy button over and over on my favorite asset with billions of dollars seemed like a net positive for the industry. It fit my bullish bias which also believed crypto had to eventually catch up with other commodities + the AI run in semis and tech. It wasn’t until the end of May when he started overtly breaking promises that it forced me to challenge my bias and do better due diligence that I finally woke up to the greed and mess that they’ve put themselves in. I realized how many people were ignorant in the same way I was, and have made it my goal the last several weeks to be vocal about the structural risk. And hopefully destroy the idolatry that has become so conflated with this one man and company instead of Bitcoin itself. If people are bullish on Bitcoin, they should just buy more BTC rather than being exit liquidity in a massive Ponzi scheme.well said, although I do believe it’s hard to be bullish on bitcoin with him as an overarching figure. I’d much rather see him be forced to sell a couple billion to maintain dividend payments which would give us much lower prices on bitcoin, and then we can revisit this situation again in a few years once he runs out of runway once againView original on X ↗
Deterministic: the same prices and policy always give the same result
r = 63881.94 / 63145.39 − 1 = +1.2%d × r = -1.2% (neutral only if the price is unchanged) → incorrectOnly the end-of-horizon price counts. A brief move followed by a reversal is not a success. Read the methodology
Uses only text available at publication time
Think the interpretation or outcome is wrong? Sign in with X to request a correction, so reviewers know who is asking.
Sign in to request a correction