A couple of thoughts. Saylor certainly would have good ideas on this and if it's enough wealth it would probably need to be handled in that manner.

I appreciate the rest of your input, but respectfully i will disagree with a lot of it. Please allow me to explain.

1). I have heard the stat about three generations. It's probably true on average but that doesn't mean it's true for everyone. It could be argued it's not true for many because of poor planning or other factors. Certainly worth looking into further.

2). Generational wealth to me means really long term money..as in hundreds of years. I have a 6th generation grandfather who was born around the time of the American Revolution. I take my name from hime actually. He lived during a pivotal time of American history. During the war of 1812 he sided with the winners (ie..the colonist fighting against the British). Because of his military accomplishments and chance (he was half European and half Creek Indian (by his mother) and became chief of his tribe at a young age -- -as a complete side notes the Creek indians trace lineage through the maternal side -- he was always considered a tribal member) he accumulated a great deal of land and other other assets. He owned a trading post at a busy crossroads and prospered until his very untimely death in his early 40's if I remember correctly because of a tribal dispute. In today's language he was wealthy - he lived in the best neighborhood, had a large piece of land and a booming business. He was a multi-millionaire in today's dollars.

Despite this great fortune it was all gone by the time his children where dead. At the time there where no real way to maintain wealth other than through raw power -- being the baddest/biggest whatever. Hope that makes sense. So it's not suprising that what he spent his entire adult life accumulating was gone within a few years.

For five generations between him and me the generations have been composed of families "just getting by". No real wealth accumulation. Sharecroppers and loggers, one great grandmother who was prostitute on a Mississippi riverboat. My parents have honestly done pretty well -- better than any of the recent previous generations -- during their lifetime. They where both first in their families to go to university. They have saved and not overspent for many years. And yet, by the "normal" example, anything they transfer to their children after death will be gone quickly.

We see many examples of families loosing very valuable assets (typically land/real estate) with a generation or so because the children have very different ideas about life -- ie they want to move to "the city" and away from the country. The land is divided up and sold and poof..it's all gone.

And yes..people can become consumed with gaining wealth to make them look good or whatever. But I know far more people who are just barely making it. Who live paycheck to paycheck with no emergency fund , no savings and such. People who can never afford to do anything nice with their children because it would push them over the edge of the financial cliff.

My wife and i discuss this issue a lot. We don't want to just "hand over everything" to our children. Let me give an example:

Wife and I die with a net worth in todays' dollars (after death taxes ..sigh) of 10 million dollars.

Let's say we have three kids so each gets 3.33 million dollars.

if we did that most likely that money would be gone within a decade.

But what if we took the concept of the trust and put the bitcoin asset in it. Then instead of dividing up the bitcoin into one-thirds the children each receive what amounts to a monthly or quarterly UBI (universal basic income) but instead of being paid by the government it comes from the trust. and it's never enough to make them so comfortable that they would not want to do anything but be lazy and fool around.

I have told my kids for about the last five years that it will take about $100,000 income to live reasonably comfortably by the time they get to the workforce in the next four for five year. Doesn't' mean they have a country club membership and drive a jaguar but they are doing ok. Not having to worry about buying food and gas and having a place to live. Looks like i'm going to be pretty accurate in that assessment. So REGARDLESS of how much money is in the trust I'm not going to be giving them even 100k a year (in todays dollars.... would have to be adjusted for inflation of course). But I would give them enough that if times where hard and they worked they would be ok and not impoverished. If they worked reasonably hard they could have a pretty good lifestyle.

That's pretty easy to understand I think..going forward from there it's more complicated. It would depend on how many children they have and so on and so forth. The idea would be that no matter the amount of BTC in the trust I'm not going to just blow it all at once on a generation.

Now I have no idea how much BTC i can accumulate before I die. That remains to be seen. I might not have enough that this works beyond a first first generation. The goal would be that it would be large enough that for many generations it could provide regardless of the current conditions.

Hope that helps at least making sense of what i'm trying to accomplish when I say generational wealth.

thanks!

McIntosh