OverviewExploreTrending
Nostr Archives
OverviewExploreTrending
Danny Knowles61d ago
Michael Saylor | The Bitcoin Treasury Debate Gets Heated We discuss: - Bitcoin in 2026 - Are There Too Many Treasury Companies? - The Future of mNAVs - Building on Digital Credit Watch it here: https://youtu.be/J85O-ckNxCw
💬 114 replies

Replies (50)

BlueDuckBTC60d ago
This is awesome and #bitcoin needed this. Reminds me of the old days when we didn’t give a flying shit about the rich and how they play their games. We chose Bitcoin not only to opt out but as revolution, a protest against money printing. Hell yes some have increased their wealth substantially, but don’t let that change you! Turn back on some Rage Against The Machine and “Fuck you I won’t do what you tell me!”
0000 sats
James Smith60d ago
Listening to Saylor go on and on about being insulted was tough. I couldn’t finish it. Still, hats off to Danny — you did well.
0000 sats
Auveki - Ecology of Bitcoin60d ago
After reading the comments, I fear that many Bitcoiner's may have missed that this is a celebration for what makes Bitcoin great - my deeper learning after this is - it is not a zero-sum game. heat + friction > pomp-pomps
0000 sats
protozoan numbness60d ago
Saylor was being a dumb bitch. He completely stopped listening. Never liked him.
0000 sats
Gunson60d ago
Saylor seems to be intentionally missing your point Danny. He's saying, all else equal, it's better for a company to have vs. not have Bitcoin (fine, agreed). But your challenge was whether it makes sense that there are so many companies who's only business model is to buy bitcoin when people could just be acquiring actual Bitcoin themselves, and those companies can't get the same leverage/liquidity as MSTR. Totally fair question he could have just tried to answer since, if anything, it could be interpreted as a compliment to Strategy.
0000 sats
Bud60d ago
Who cares? If a company has taken Bitcoin off the market, it helps everyone else who owns Bitcoin.
0000 sats
LO₿ONODE60d ago
I really don't care what he has to say. #Bitcoin doesn't care.
0000 sats
MrTea60d ago
I can strive to be an Olympic sprinter but it won’t happen. However I don’t go around trying to (fraudulently) get people to invest in my future as a sprinter
0000 sats
Iihsotas60d ago
How is it fraud? They lay out their thesis pretty clearly. Once a company has a stack of bitcoin they have different operating models they can move to. Strategy moved to the preferred market because they think they can offer higher yield while being way more collateralized than the standard offerings and therefore out compete the market. So far this thesis is playing out. I don’t own anything besides bitcoin and some stupid shit in my limited 401k for my fiat job, but I don’t begrudge companies from trying to build a treasury of bitcoin.
0000 sats
MrTea60d ago
I dont think he does. He calls it digital credit. And he wants somebody else to use that product to create digital money which would be a stable coin built on top of it. That’s how I understand his terminology anyway
0000 sats
21bydesign60d ago
You rock Danny!
0000 sats
KD 🦘60d ago
One of your best eps, for the conflict.. not the smug, long-winded explanations from the leverage lord. @Danny Knowles should have let him have it. Need to worry less about being polite to your guests. @a341f45f…cffc7a98 is pioneering pure play, and he knows it. Couldn’t care less about his software company anymore.
0000 sats
Bud60d ago
I listened. I like your show, but you started the debate by saying, “I’ve been critical of Bitcoin treasury companies,” and then spent the rest of the show on your heels saying, “I’m not being critical of Bitcoin treasury companies.” Saylor is exactly right on every point he makes. Anyone and any entity who buys Bitcoin helps everyone else who owns Bitcoin, and is to be celebrated. This episode will be a service if it ends this particular form of Bitcoin FUD, because Michael Saylor demolished it. Thanks for your show.
0000 sats
⚡₿it₿y₿it⚡60d ago
0000 sats
Little Johnny58d ago
When I saw the What Bitcoin Did interview and saw Mike upset (to put it mildly), I got strong Greta Thurnberg vibes. And now, thanks to this pic, I can't get Brigitte Macron out of my head.
0000 sats
ben60d ago
FAFO
0000 sats
Liberty Farmer60d ago
No. Without chrony capitalism and goverenycentral banks wouldn't have been able to have been created. Banks, possibly. But there is nothing wrong with a bank in its purest form.
0000 sats
BlueDuckBTC60d ago
The problem with this argument is that it relies on a No True Scotsman fallacy. Every time capitalism’s outcomes are criticized, the response is that we do not live under true capitalism. The system that actually exists is always treated as an aberration rather than the logical result of capitalist incentives operating over time. The bureaucratic monopolistic society you describe is not a corruption external to capitalism. It is capitalism doing exactly what it is structurally incentivized to do. Capitalism’s defining objective is not serving people. It is profit maximization. Selling something for more than it costs to produce. That incentive does not stop at the market boundary. Firms rationally seek to reduce competition, shape rules in their favor, raise barriers to entry, and externalize costs such as healthcare, labor, education and environmental damage. When capital accumulates, the most efficient way to protect profit is no longer innovation. It is political influence.This is not socialism. It is regulatory capture, a phenomenon extensively documented in mainstream economics. Industries systematically capture regulators to serve profit and shareholder interests rather than the public. Public Choice Theory explains how private actors use the state to entrench economic advantage. Peer reviewed research has repeatedly linked market concentration to lobbying power and weakened competition and demonstrates that capital concentration naturally converts into political power unless it is actively countered. The regulations you are pointing to are not anti capitalist constraints imposed from outside the system. They are capitalist behaviors expressed through the state. Capital does not invade government accidentally. It does so because it is profitable. This is why food insecurity and healthcare failures exist inside wealthy capitalist nations. Healthcare markets optimize for revenue rather than outcomes as documented by the World Health Organization and the Commonwealth Fund. Food systems prioritize shareholder value resulting in both massive waste and widespread hunger. Market choice disappears when industries consolidate, something the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice openly acknowledge has accelerated. Saying real capitalism would wipe out big business ignores history. Unregulated capitalism has never remained competitive for long. It tends toward monopoly because scale, capital accumulation, and political leverage are competitive advantages. If capitalism were self correcting, it would not require perpetual bailouts, repeated antitrust interventions, or constant state support to prevent collapse. The fact that it does is evidence that the outcomes being criticized are not a deviation from capitalism but its mature form. Capitalism concentrated wealth beyond our imaginations. We live in a post scarcity environment where victims of capitalism and socio economic factors alike keep hundreds of millions unhoused, hungry and sick while the capitalist owners, that by nature produce nothing (proof of work) and only extract value through rent seeking behaviors, enjoy socialist benefits provided by and extracted from the workers that produce all of the things of value that we use. It’s become very common for the capitalist to rage against socialism while they enjoy all of our socialist benefits and initiatives while insisting that the rest of society must stick to raw unfettered capitalism. It’s also very common now for uneducated and ill informed workers to defend capitalism and vote against their own self interest as well. Capitalism only favors those who have breached a certain threshold of accumulation which is only achieved and made possible through extortion of the worker.
Liberty Farmer59d ago
I ain't reading all tha, sorry.
0000 sats
Ff8db32…52e86059d ago
Hey Danny, please bro can I bring attention to the way in which transnational organizations have exploited the people and government of Fiji to exploit people’s acquifers, I mean it’s not widely known but Fiji Water is a fucking cancer on Polynesia
0000 sats
Soap2159d ago
How dare you Danny 😂. It was painful to watch how he talked down on you 💔 You deserve all the zaps in the world
0000 sats
Earthmum59d ago
It was difficult to sit through that. Always struggled with his arrogance.
0000 sats
LeviJohnson.net57d ago
How was Michael arrogant?
0000 sats
Jjick59d ago
You did well Danny, definitely sone cringe moments - I got the impression he was in a bad mood and was exercising some frustrations. He really could have controlled his temper and been a more humble guest on your podcast... Even if he disagrees with the framing of your questions he didn't need to be quite so scathing, he just came off like a irritable twat at moments. Good on you for keeping your cool
0000 sats
geekboy58d ago
0000 sats
Mark57d ago
Good work Danny, well handled. You were gracious and respectful.
0000 sats
Gil₿ert56d ago
0000 sats
Dale55d ago
He spoke down to Danny for no reason. You can push back and not be a total dick at the same time. When someone shows you who they are, believe them.
0000 sats
Iihsotas55d ago
The obsession of the podcasters over the treasury companies has been going on for like a year. It’s worth a little chastisement. Obsess over the no coiners and the shitty politicians who continue to lie and shitcoin for their own profit.
0000 sats
🔴 I Am Muslim ✋🏼53d ago
🔴 What Is Islam? 🔴 Islam is not just another religion. 🔵 It is the same message preached by Moses, Jesus and Abraham... 👇🏼 pic.twitter.com/BJBPLamw24 https://jesusen1.blogspot.com/2017/12/what-is-islam.html  🔴 What Is Islam? 🔴 Islam is not just another religion. 🔵 It is the same message preached by Moses, Jesus and Abraham. 🔴 Islam literally means ‘submission to God’ and it teaches us to have a direct relationship with God. 🔵 It reminds us that since God created us, no one should be worshipped except God alone. 🔴 It also teaches that God is nothing like a human being or like anything that we can imagine. 🌍 The concept of God is summarized in the Quran as: 📖 { “Say, He is God, the One. God, the Absolute. He does not give birth, nor was He born, and there is nothing like Him.”} (Quran 112:1-4) 📚 🔴 Becoming a Muslim is not turning your back to Jesus. 🔵 Rather it’s going back to the original teachings of Jesus and obeying him. More .....👇 🔴 THE RETURN OF JESUS https://jesusen1.blogspot.com/2017/12/what-is-islam.html
0000 sats
hiroswife53d ago
This was really good! I am sure Danny can take the heat and he handled it so well. He was asking exactly what most people think and Saylor did his usual thing. Talks like these provoke thoughts and introduce new perspectives. I wish there were more episodes like this on all podcasts. Bravo.
0000 sats
Liberty Farmer60d ago
Except they will likely have to sell it back, and some already have to buyback stocks and payoff debt. This can actually cause more downward price pressure. It takes a company say 2 years to buy 5,000 Bitcoin. Positive price pressure for 2 years, but barely noticed in markets. Then boom, suddenly their stock tanks, no positive cash flow, no more equity investors, done. Must sell the Bitcoin,mostly all at once or at least rapidly to cover. Much larger downward price pressure than ever hallened upwards. It's stupid to just buy Bitcoin and keep it on your balance sheet with no cash flow. It's worse for people to invest in this crap.
0000 sats
Artisan Regenerative Traditions57d ago
In the long run all this noise is totally irrelevant. So price goes down, nbd. Those who understand BTC just keep accumulating. These are just nonsense arguments along the path. Keep helping to educate those close to you and help them avoid the real problems of the existing system.
0000 sats
Gunson59d ago
1. If they become forced sellers because they're not true hodlers but just grifters trying to get a management fee while the going is good. It's fiat behaviour that gets associated with Bitcoin. 2. All these companies are probably storing their Bitcoin with the same custodian, and they're all much more vulnerable to regulatory risk than an individual. This is added centralisation risk. You can't stop it, but these are fair criticisms. Danny wasn't pushing back on businesses using Bitcoin as a tool - i.e. better cash vehicle while they create value in their chosen markets. He was pushing back against companies doing this as their only activity. Saylor was being a dick - he's smart enought to know the nuanced difference.
0000 sats
MrTea60d ago
It probably isn’t fraud by the legal definition. It’s more like a shitcoin. I’m of the belief that companies should do something productive. Eventually they have to or will fail. My issue with most treasury companies is I don’t believe they actually are trying to do anything productive. I suppose they could so I can’t disagree with you on that. I think they’re all engaged in this ledge Ponzi scheme where they want you to buy equity in their company that does nothing and never will. Since they disclose that it’s not legal fraud. But it’s still a misallocation of capital which I can’t support. They should strive to do something productive with their time as we all should. Hodling bitcoin isn’t productive. Saylor knows this because he could use one of his own absurd analogies to deduce it
0000 sats
Iihsotas60d ago
Saylor views most of the S&P and misallocated capital and fraudulent. His point is that most companies are shit, so why not at least be shit with Bitcoin on your balance sheet? I’m a self custody maximalist, but I find the STRC product helpful in that I can keep some funds in essentially a stable coin earning yield. This product wouldn’t exist without a company deciding to accrue Bitcoin. Strategies initial plan was to try to beat stacking sats by accessing deeper credit markets and that worked out pretty well but had a limited shelf life. I think offering a high yield savings account is going to drive a lot of profit and will put strategy into a new class of company over the next 5 years. There is of course going to be the pure grifters looking to take your bitcoin, but I think in general there are ideas being generated that will only be possible for companies with a large stack of bitcoin. Now is the time to get that large stack.
000
0000 sats
BlueDuckBTC59d ago
No problem, main point is “No True Scotsman Fallacy”. Anytime you criticize a consequence of capitalism, it gets thrown out because “that’s crony capitalism” instead of just a natural destination/ instrument of capitalism itself. Good day to you!
0000 sats
Liberty Farmer59d ago
Ah. Thanks! I'm not arguing that, I'm saying by it's very dificlnituon, it isn't capitalism if the state is mandating said cartels products to be used.
0000 sats
BlueDuckBTC59d ago
I understand your argument completely. However, capitalism will always seek consolidation of power, wealth, and the reduction in competition. The State turns into a tool for what capitalism does naturally.
0000 sats
0 sats
Liberty Farmer59d ago
Of course it seems wealth and reduction in competition..duh. that's a great thing. However, today's largest company Nvidia did not even exist 50 years ago, nor Tesla, Google, meta. Nor openai or anthropic or Bitcoin miners for that matter. The point being, they can seek power and no competition, however they cannot ever achieve this in free market capitalism. There is absolutely no downside to capitalism nor consequences of capitalism as you out it without the state having a say.
0000 sats
BlueDuckBTC59d ago
You think consolidation of wealth and reduction in competition is a good thing?
0000 sats
Liberty Farmer59d ago
Sounds like your argument is with the state, not capitalism. We agree completely!
0000 sats
BlueDuckBTC59d ago
Please explain.
0000 sats
BlueDuckBTC59d ago
This is also No True Scotsman Fallacy
0000 sats
Liberty Farmer59d ago
Of course. That's quite literally the goal of a business. To win and make money.
0000 sats
BlueDuckBTC59d ago
There it is.
0000 sats
BlueDuckBTC59d ago
No True Scotsman fallacy again
0000 sats
Liberty Farmer59d ago
Ummm, no. It's quite literally just a statement that we agree. I'm out, this is nuts, have a good day.
0000 sats