I think the obvious answer is yes you should. I think maybe explaining to shareholders step by step what the options are if the bull market doesn’t materialize. Step 1 is obviously to protect the credit. I think doing so without selling a good chunk of BTC is ideal. The reason I stress the larger cash buffer is to focus on protecting the stack you have and the credit. Cash is a melting ice cube yes, but in certain situations, the ice cube is preferable capital to use compared to Bitcoin. I fully support it. I think there’s much opportunity to where extra cash can be beneficial for the business in many ways simply from an optionality perspective as we see from Strategy. Even without convertible debt, 75% amplification and a 24-36 month reserve is great from a standout of seeing where you can assign capital to (SATA vs BTC vs buying shares). There’s also many situations where delevering via ATM even at 1mNAV is beneficial if it helps the credit maintain par (balance between which vehicle is more accretive). When the mNAV is high, that lever is much more efficient that issuing TONS of SATA. But when the mNAV is low or 1, buying shares with cash to lever up if amp if low or selling shares to delever when high to support credit of SATA is simply optionality. I think what I’ve seen is a LACK of optionality kills the model. When you’re stuck, you’re stuck for a while. You don’t want to be at the whim of the market to give you that liquidity back. You have to earn it and provide it yourself. Overall: 1. There’s room to amplify 2. There’s room for more cash without drag (BTC and SATA printing offsets it and if they don’t print you have the tools to manage it now with more cash) 3. The MOST important thing is WHAT can keep the flywheel greased NO MATTER the price action of BTC or market conditions. Get as close to that as you can and you’re unstoppable.

IMPORTANT POST Our industry became too focused on protecting downside risk and inadequately focused on maximizing Total Returns to the upside. In my view, the entire purpose of our structured finance business model must be to maximize Total Returns for common equity shareholders. Our industry needs more amplification. Even at Strive, where we have the highest Amplification Ratio among Digital Credit issuers, when I look at the risk embedded in our capital structure relative to our amplification, I believe we have room to take it up another notch or two. Building a rocket ship is extraordinarily difficult and requires underwriting and taking real risk. The mission requires not blowing up, but you need an engine powerful enough to reach the moon. Based on Amplification Ratio alone, I view the risk of true issuer failure from over-amplification as very low across our industry today. Amplification Ratio obviously cannot capture every risk, including debt terms, covenants, maturity walls, liquidity constraints, and other structural risks. But controlling for those risks should give issuers significant confidence to take amplification materially higher. That is exactly what we have done at Strive, and I hope others increasingly copy it. I’ve written extensively about why Amplification Ratio will be the single most important driver of outright and relative Total Returns in a Bitcoin bull market. However, I believe incentives naturally push toward under-amplification, modest Bitcoin outperformance, and the safest possible path. My goal with this post is to light a fire and push our industry to think bigger, focus more aggressively on growth and Total Returns, and push the frontier of what our business models can achieve. We have a shared mission across the industry to grow Digital Credit from a nascent asset class into a massive global capital market. That requires trusted issuers, deep liquidity, disciplined execution, and investor confidence. That is where we all should work together, but make no mistake about what will crown the fastest horse in a Bitcoin bull market: the engine. Our mandate at Strive is to build the thing we actually want to own and recruit and retain exceptionally talented people who desire that risk and return opportunity and understand the business model that needs to be built. That mindset drove our execution in building a high Amplification Ratio, helped create strong liquidity, and is also why we are not satisfied with where we are. With Bitcoin under $100,000, our desire is to take Amplification Ratio higher from here. If the Bitcoin bull thesis is right, amplification will be the most important thing. If the Bitcoin thesis is wrong, a few hundred basis points of cost of capital won’t be the difference between success and failure. The model itself will have failed. I love capitalism. I love competition. I want more competition for the fastest horse. The next 10–15 years will be the Digital Gold Rush for Bitcoin. Let’s act like it.

This is wild 🤣

He’s doing this all wrong. What he should do if only send to those who vote for Republican candidates in the midterms. 1. This ensures more turnout 2. This ensures more people that turnout actually vote for his party

A milestone for Digital Credit: $STRC’s 30-day historical volatility is now 9%, below $SPY. We’re harnessing the power of Bitcoin while reducing price volatility for income investors. This is what financial engineering should do.

I very very very strongly disagree and think that AI adoption in the enterprise beyond coding is basically at the starting line

BREAKING: President Trump says higher US inflation will "pay off" US debt "very rapidly" in response to total US debt rising above $40 trillion. "I know I'm the best in the world... you can pay off the debt through other means. But the one thing that you can do is pay it off through growth, and we've never had growth like this," Trump said. US Treasury yields hit a new high of the day after the statement.

Luke’s been on the money lately

RT @DrJStrategy: Where are all the Phillips Curve advocates? Trimmed Mean PCE 1.92% Average Hourly Earnings 3% Now compare back to 2024?…

💯

In a Bitcoin bull market, the engine driving Total Returns is Amplification Ratio. Fastest horse requirements: 1. High current Amplification Ratio 2. Ability to replenish Amplification Ratio as BTC rises (liquidity) 3. Zero BTC upside sold for Amplification That's the game.

Messed up system we have…

Policy mistake strikes again!

The World Isn’t Ready to Wean Itself Off QE. The global debt problem, and rising rates across the West, reflect a simple fact: the world cannot wean itself off quantitative easing right now. Ending QE may be the goal, but central bankers seem to be missing the nuance: withdrawing support from bond markets while debt and borrowing needs remain so high can push yields up sharply. Yes, Central Bankers are the problem once again. Before the Federal Reserve claims that America’s AI investment boom has lifted the neutral rate of interest, it should answer a more basic question: why are long-term borrowing costs rising across economies with no comparable AI capex boom? For more than a decade, central banks suppressed bond yields by buying trillions of dollars of government debt and removing duration risk from private markets. Now they are shrinking their balance sheets, allowing bonds to mature and, in some cases, actively selling holdings. Private investors must absorb a vastly larger supply of duration just as governments are issuing more debt. That growing supply puts downward pressure on bond prices and because bond prices and yields move in opposite directions, upward pressure on yields. This is a global term-premium shock. Japan, Britain, Germany, France, Canada and Australia are all dealing with the same forces: persistent fiscal deficits, expanding sovereign-debt supply, quantitative tightening, defence spending, energy security, industrial policy and reduced central-bank demand for long bonds. They do not share America’s hyperscaler-driven data-centre boom. Yet their yields are rising too. AI may add marginally to demand for capital. It does not explain a broad global repricing of sovereign debt. History offers a warning against confusing capex with a durable increase in the neutral rate. Japan’s 1980s investment boom produced immense corporate expansion, property development and industrial capacity. The ultimate result was not a permanently higher r*, but excess capital, falling returns, deflation and decades of near-zero rates. China repeated the lesson at greater scale. It built cities, ports, factories, power systems and housing on an unprecedented scale. Debt surged. But as the return on incremental property and infrastructure investment declined, so did the country’s neutral rate. The lesson is elementary: investment spending is not synonymous with productive investment. A data-centre arms race can raise demand for chips, electricity, construction labour and financing while it lasts. It can also create duplicated capacity, rapid depreciation and weak returns. The neutral rate rises only when the marginal product of capital rises sustainably across the whole economy. Until that is demonstrated, AI capex is an observable boom. A higher neutral rate is an assumption. Sometimes an apple is just an apple: with global debt already excessive, the world needs quantitative easing. I’m sorry. The more immediate explanation for higher global yields is simpler: governments are borrowing heavily while central banks collectively retreat from the bond market. Sometimes an Apple is just an Apple.

Instagram is for girls

On 31 July, Strive held 20,000 Bitcoin. By 25 September, it held 27,462. That's 37% more Bitcoin in eight weeks, with no debt. This is what a Bitcoin accumulation machine looks like when the credit product works. Big Q4 is coming for $ASST.

Stupidity. I said right after he said it. He better size up as much as he can or yields will run up.

Remember when everyone bought tons of Mac minis and now you don’t need them…

I do not like the way this looks! A solution is essential

If you like bonds here, the good news is there's going to be A LOT more USTs for sale soon as the entire US government debt stack reprices from <4% to 5% or more in coming quarters. This will also send US deficits from $2T toward $3T in a hurry (sending US inflation higher.)