It’s easier to challenge an idea, than to change a belief. GoS, 2026
San Francisco, CA
- Tweets 23,333
- Following 1,310
- Followers 27,867
- Likes 184,908
The game changes with the primary source of capital. The new benchmark is total return on the common shares. Amplification is the metric that will drive it. Plan accordingly. BULLISH
@Strive ASST SATA
@Strategy MSTR STRC
Once a Bitcoin treasury company has a pref to buy Bitcoin with, the HIGHER the common stock price gets - the less risky the preferred is perceived and therefore more liquidity it attracts.
ATM on common equity makes sense when source of capital to buy Bitcoin is primarily converts and the common stock ATM.
When source of capital changes - and it's the preferred equities - aggressive common stock ATM becomes less advantageous.
Better to let the common run hot - and suck up the Bitcoin through the increased perceived confidence in the Pref as a result of the higher stock price.
Did I get that right?
@saylor
@phongle
@CJ_Bitcoin
@PunterJeff
@Werkman
@ColeMacro
@GrainofSaltSF
11
12
105
5,691
Grain of Salt retweeted
Optimising - EXPLICITLY - Bitcoin backed Digital Credit company for TOTAL RETURN instead of BITCOIN PER SHARE is @ColeMacro’s greatest value add to the psychology and philosophy of the Bitcoin Treasury Space thus far - stemming from his background at PIMCO.
I predict this is the next phase shift that @saylor, @phongle @CJ_Bitcoin and team MSTR will make in communication post daily div adjustment.
Any treasury company suggesting their goal is to buy up good businesses and sweep cash flows into Bitcoin will be left in the dust in the coming 24 months.
The market has decided what’s important - that’s TOTAL RETURNS.
16
13
188
14,459
This video by @BritishHodl is excellent. Watch over again if you don’t get it. Currently it’s two companies that have a working Digital Credit model which requires a common stock paired to it.
@Strive ASST SATA
@Strategy MSTR STRC
13
18
242
22,376
I will not post Bitcoin price screenshots till 6 figures. Us Gen X era people don’t want to “jinx it.”
Plan accordingly! @JoshMandell6
15
2
214
12,889
Use AI, follow @AngryBuhda, Do whatever it takes learn as much about options, EVEN IF YOU NEVER BUY THEM. Learning this helps you to feel confident in spot a position.
I've been putting my agents to work on the data but there's a lot priced in and ASST options chain is still relatively thin in general so proper fills are a battle field.
Oct 13th Warrants expo and Oct 16th Options expo is creating an interesting dynamic.
Anything calls sold short harvesting premium against warrants needs to come off by the 13th or the position becomes a naked short for 3 days.
I've picked a few slides to share out of the decks my agents put together for me.
I understand this is a big event and people want to trade it but the real trade was Already being in position and enjoying the fireworks 😉
$BTC $ASST $SATA $MSTR $STRC
@GrainofSaltSF @BritishHodl @Micro2Macr0
9
6
141
13,703
If a financial instrument grows at 2% a day, it doubles in 36 days.
If you know, you know-> 72
Hit the like if you know.
18
3
328
14,183
Grain of Salt retweeted
Aside from limiting liability, the primary purpose of incorporation is access to credit because it amplifies total return. Matt gets it.
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.
11
16
275
26,853
Grain of Salt retweeted
Adobe $ADBE is a $94 Billion market cap company. ($32 Billion larger than $MSTR, and $91 Billion larger than $ASST)
96% of Adobe total revenue comes from cloud based software subscriptions.
Adobe has ~ $6.8B in debt
Trades at a 13x P/E ratio and 8x P/B ratio.
$14 Billion of the $29 Billion on Adobe Balance sheet is Goodwill.
Net of Goodwill, $ADBE has $15.9B in assets, and $18.2 Billion in liabilities.
-$2.3 Billion in net assets.
Net of Goodwill, Adobe is trading at a -40x P/B ratio…
AI risk is percolating.
HAN RECREADO PHOTOSHOP 100% GRATIS
Se llama Photon Studio y permite editar fotos, retocar imágenes y crear diseños directamente en tu ordenador.
Sin subir tus archivos a la nube y sin crear una cuenta para empezar a editar.
Y viene con herramientas que reconocerás si has usado Photoshop:
→ Capas, grupos y máscaras
→ Capas de ajuste y objetos inteligentes
→ Soporte nativo para archivos PSD
→ Selección de sujetos y eliminación de fondos
→ Curvas para ajustar brillo y contraste
→ Licuar para deformar y retocar imágenes
→ Efectos de sombras, brillos y contornos
Lo más interesante:
Incluso la selección de sujetos y la eliminación de fondos se ejecutan EN TU ORDENADOR.
Tus archivos se quedan contigo.
Está disponible para macOS, Windows 11 y Linux.
Cómo conseguirlo:
→ Entra en su web
→ Selecciona tu sistema operativo
→ Deja tu email para recibir el enlace de descarga
→ Instala y empieza a editar
Si buscabas una alternativa gratuita a Photoshop, esta merece una prueba.
Enlace abajo👇
20
31
349
37,102
Grain of Salt retweeted
Would Hal Finney have seen the positive benefits of Bitcoin Treasury Companies?
84%
Of Course!
16%
No
299 votes • Final results
10
1
14
3,715
$ASST: Is warrant-related hedging contributing to resistance around $30?
Strive’s $27 warrants have a reported exercise deadline of October 13. As of September 25, 25.35 million shares remained available through exercise—potentially bringing $684 million into the company.
$30 is 11.1% above that exercise price.
Here’s the near-dated $30 CALL open interest from the latest public snapshots retrieved October 1:
Oct 2: 23,314 contracts
Oct 9: 15,379
Oct 16: 6,653
Oct 23: 456
Oct 30: 1,771
Nov 6: 24
Nov 20: 231
But $27 is even more concentrated around the warrant deadline:
• Oct 9: 32,398 calls
• Oct 16: 58,643 calls
There’s also a substantial legacy position: 391,523 October 16 ASST2 calls at the old $1.50 strike. Following the reverse split, each delivers FIVE shares at an effective $30/share exercise price.
Combined with standard contracts, October 16’s $30-equivalent calls cover approximately 2.62 million shares.
My hypothesis: some warrant holders may be selling $30 calls against shares obtainable at $27. Dealers buying those calls could hedge by selling stock, potentially adding resistance as ASST approaches $30.
The concentration is real. The connection to warrant holders is an inference: open interest doesn’t identify the holders or tell us which side dealers own.
A $27–$30 positioning cluster worth watching as we approach October 13. @AngryBuhda @JoshMandell6 @Strive
7
6
148
11,827
If you believe in Bitcoin, then Read, Learn, and Instill this phenomenal article by @saylor. It was inevitable that Bitcoin would become the base layer of Digital Equity and Digital Credit, since ₿ is Digital Capital. @Strategy and @Strive are complementary companies with different valuations, and “compete for an individual investment while strengthening one another’s long-term opportunity.” BULLISH on the industry.
6
21
219
10,883
Grain of Salt retweeted
SATA traded at par during every second of trading today.
1 penny of volatility.
$78 Million in volume (57% greater than the 30 day average trading volume)
Hummmmmmming
40
85
1,394
52,995
THIS IS WHAT ALMOST EVERYONE GETS WRONG ABOUT US TREASURIES.
Treasuries are usually discussed through YIELD:
The continuously updated 10-year benchmark.
The yield to maturity on a specific note.
The prevailing yield available today.
But that is NOT what these charts tracks.
These charts follow the MARKET PRICE of three specific 10-year Treasury-note CUSIPs, each with a different fixed coupon:
2016: 2.00%
2020: 0.625%
2024: 4.00%
The coupons never changed.
The prices did.
STRC and SATA are judged in PRICE:
Above par, Below par.
How close are they to $100?
So I applied the same measuring stick to the Treasuries:
What happened to the market price of each specific note per $100 of face value?
That mismatch exposes the economic reality.
I charted three actual 10-year Treasury notes the same way we judge STRC:
PRICE PER $100 OF FACE VALUE.
The result is FUCKING astonishing.
2016 vintage -> 2.00% coupon
Worst annual high-to-low drawdown: 12.7%
2020 vintage -> 0.625% coupon
Worst annual high-to-low drawdown: 18.6%
Deepest annual low: 24.4% below par
2024 vintage -> 4.00% coupon
Worst annual high-to-low drawdown: 8.7%
Vintage, coupon and duration determine how UGLY the path gets.
The 2020 note paid a fixed coupon of just 0.625% while its market price fell into the mid-$70s per $100 of face value.
“Full faith and credit” did not keep it at $100.
“Risk-free” did not keep it at $100.
“Hold to maturity” did not keep it at $100.
Holding to maturity means Treasury eventually repays $100.
It does not mean your asset remains worth $100 along the way.
$100 is the endpoint → not the path.
That distinction disappears beneath yield quotations, basis points, duration jargon and the soothing incantation that Treasuries are “risk-free.”
Risk-free is a CREDIT claim.
It is not a PRICE claim.
No, a 10-year Treasury and STRC are not identical instruments. They have different credit, duration and maturity structures.
That is not the point.
The point is that we keep changing the measuring stick.
If STRC and SATA are judged every day against $100, show me the Treasury against $100.
If STRC’s market-price decline matters, the Treasury’s market-price decline matters.
If “you eventually get par back” excuses the Treasury’s interim volatility, stop pretending interim volatility is uniquely disqualifying everywhere else.
A Treasury can pay every coupon, repay every dollar at maturity and still force its owner through a BRUTAL mark-to-market drawdown.
That is not an opinion.
The candle sheet is the receipt.
Verify the three specific CUSIPs on TradingView:
OTCB:912828U24
OTCB:912828ZQ6
OTCB:91282CJZ5
@Strategy @Strive
Expert level, but probably should be the most important terms to understand in Digital Credit; STRC and SATA. @Strategy @Strive
“Pull to par” is not one thing.
There are three different state machines:
Individual bond -> terminal redemption
Buy a $100 bond and hold it to maturity: the issuer pays the $100 face value, assuming no default.
Before maturity, it can trade at $80 or $120. Sell early and you receive the market price—not face value.
TLT -> perpetual duration
TLT owns 20+ year Treasuries, but your ETF shares never mature. The fund continually sells aging bonds and buys new long bonds.
Duration never dies. There is no terminal date when your TLT shares redeem for $100. You always own the mark.
STRC/SATA -> managed perpetual
These securities are also perpetual. There is no maturity date or guaranteed $100 redemption.
The difference is ACTIVE PAR MANAGEMENT : variable dividend rates, repurchases, reserve policies, issuance discipline and frequent distributions are intended to keep the market price near $100 throughout the security’s life.
That target is not a guarantee. But it is a fundamentally different design.
Individual bond: par promised on the last day.
TLT: no last day and no par mechanism for your shares.
STRC/SATA: no last day, but continuously managed toward par.
A coupon can be paid exactly as promised while your market value gets destroyed.
Rate ≠ price.
Redemption pull ≠ no pull ≠ managed pull.
Most people understand the coupon or dividend.
Almost nobody understands which state machine they actually bought for mark to market.
11
17
108
16,604
I have reversed engineered the formulas in @ColeMacro table, which I will not be providing, and graphed the resulting convexity.
It reveals three very different regimes:
LOW AMPLIFICATION -> 0–35%
Returns rise, but the curve remains relatively flat. Amplification adds value, but it has not yet become the dominant driver of common-shareholder returns. Conservative
CONVEXITY ZONE ->35–70%
The curve begins bending upward rapidly. Each additional unit of amplification produces progressively greater incremental return. This is where amplification starts overwhelming relatively small differences in cost of capital. SWEET SPOT
ASYMPTOTIC ZONE ->70–100%
This is not merely “parabolic.” Mathematically, it is asymptotic.
As amplification approaches 100%, the remaining denominator approaches zero and modeled returns accelerate dramatically. The curve approaches a vertical asymptote at 100% amplification but never reaches it. RISKY
That distinction matters.
A parabola simply gets steeper.
An asymptotic function is approaching a mathematical boundary.
And that matches @PunterJeff risk observation: 100% amplification is effectively unattainable because the denominator cannot practically be driven to zero.
So the objective is not simply:
maximize amplification.
It is: Operate as far up the convexity curve as the capital structure can sustainably support and return to ASST shareholders.
That is where the mathematics and the risk management meet.
@Strive is working on a different level. Plan accordingly. BULLISH
This matrix explains one of the most important concepts in Bitcoin treasury strategy: amplification ratio is what drives total returns. Over 99% of the variation in modeled total returns shown here is driven by amplification ratio. Cost of capital matters far less than investors realize.
Strive’s objective is to outperform Bitcoin by maximizing total returns for common shareholders. Our base case is that Bitcoin compounds at roughly 50% annually through 2030, but the principle applies more broadly. If any Bitcoin bull thesis plays out, building and sustaining a high amplification ratio will be the most important determinant of success. That is why we spent the bear market intentionally building liquidity, earning investor trust in SATA and Strive, deepening our access to capital, and building the foundation required to support a high amplification ratio at scale.
Maintaining amplification as Bitcoin compounds will require increasingly large amounts of capital and sustained investor trust, and will be extraordinarily difficult to achieve. If possible, I would like to bring Strive’s amplification ratio above 60% later this year. If our warrants exercise over the next few weeks, getting there will require elite execution from our team. It becomes even more difficult if Bitcoin rallies further. I believe our team can achieve that goal, and that Strive is uniquely positioned to sustain a high amplification ratio at scale. The math tells you what matters, and our strategy follows the math.
If I were analyzing Strive as a Bitcoin bull seeking to amplify Bitcoin returns, these are the questions I would be asking: What is Strive’s current amplification ratio? What are our goals for amplification? And to achieve those goals, do we have the capital access, liquidity and investor trust required to maintain a high amplification ratio throughout a bull market? There is real alpha in understanding the answers to those questions. Study the matrix carefully.
16
24
206
18,937
Grain of Salt retweeted
👀 Lots of topics to cover since my last monthly update on @CandyDigital. Please join me and bring your questions👇
We're already looking forward to Friday's convo with @tadtweets 👀
We'll be chatting about the biggest topics that have come up over the last few weeks, what lies ahead and another chance for fans to ask questions 🤝
Friday, Oct. 2 at 4 PM ET on the Candy X feed and YouTube, see you then↴
YT: piped.video/live/__2IdBn-ntY…
2
17
67
4,606