pull down to refresh

Yes23.8%
No26.2%
Mixed45.2%
Don't Know4.8%
42 votes \ poll ended
Voted "mixed" because I have quite a lot to say about them — some 5,500 words to be exact.
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @Juhwang 21 Sep
It's just inevitable, right?
reply
That's a good point. When something is inevitable, it doesn't quite make sense to ask whether it's good or not.
It's kind of like asking "Is it good for us that we have to eat?"
reply
I think it’s good. Grows the overall network effect for better or for worse.
Plus it’s better capital. Companies that are able to wait can improve their capital structure and really focus on delivering high quality products and services and pay their expenses without having to go bankrupt to chase growth
reply
No BTCTC I'm aware of is interested in delivering products other than their own common and preferred stocks.
Holding BTC on your balance sheet doesn't make you a BTCTC.
reply
Tesla? Cash App? Figma? Just to name a few
reply
Those are not BTCTCs. They're normal companies that happen to stack sats.
BTCTCs are companies like Strategy, Metaplanet, Capital B, SWC etc.
reply
They are necessary because the system of capital allocation is broken, ideally pension funds and insurance companies wouldn't need them... they're a sour medicine for a sick fiat system.
They're ultimately good because it's a manifestation of the game theory and how Bitcoin finds a way.
reply
IF are really holding real bitcoin and not IOUs. Just bragging online that X company added x BTC into their reserves (in fact IOUs from x exchange), it means only virtue signaling to pump their bags, nothing else.
Instead... all these companies could just announce that they accept BTC as payment (and keep it as reserves) and everything will be mush better for everybody.
reply
It has a function on balance sheet so that they can issue debt against it, debt that gets bought by insurance companies and pension funds as does the equity... like an ETF but with a different legal structure
It's basically a loophole for some institutions, stupid but necessary for large amounts of stranded capital
Everything comes with grift of course, but Saylor did legitimately exploit a capital market loophole
Most of the other ones are different markets/countries
reply
Mixed.
Profitable enterprises sweeping excess cash into Bitcoin is good.
Raising a bunch of money to be a Saylor copycat is bad.
reply
Why Business Owners Are Putting 22% of Profits Into Bitcoin Sam Baker in Research on 2 September 2025
reply
HBDGAF
reply
Oh it's so confusing!
reply
stackers have outlawed this. turn on wild west mode in your /settings to see outlawed content.