I think that’s an interesting point but i think strike frame it as don’t sell bitcoin for expenses which is slightly different in my mind.
Strategy seem to be doing a full tilt pivot into “I like bitcoin, buy my ….” territory though.
strike offers users of real bitcoin the ability to take loans
strike also makes it easy and cheap for people to self custody real bitcoin
this is strictly different than mstr and clones
loans are risky, i have been clear on this risk, they are most useful as a way to legally avoid taxes in my opinion
many don’t understand the system they’re in or how taxes work. they don’t understand the benefits of taking out a loan on your bitcoin to build a house then paying off the loan with the bitcoin vs cashing out to build the house. they don’t know how much gets siphoned off with the latter.
I think that’s also fair in isolation, from what I understand but the “strategy” has been to pitch MSTR products as money like, and Saylor is pretty strong on his “it’s not currency” (for goods) it’s an asset.
That seems like a narrative that intentionally or unintentionally turns down the volume on the censorship resistant P2P payments property. That’s why this post is called out - same theme.