GuShiio.com Michael Saylor said that even if Bitcoin plunged 98%, the company would not face liquidation risks.
Interview and Compilation: Wu said blockchain
In this interview, Wu said that Colin and MicroStrategy founder Michael Saylor discussed the following issues: Will MicroStrategy keep acquiring Bitcoin; Will MicroStrategy risk being liquidated; how to view the cyclical nature of cryptocurrencies and possible bear markets; Will MicroStrategy lend or pledge Bitcoin in the future to earn interest; how to view Asian companies imitating MicroStrategy; Will MicroStrategy develop its own Bitcoin secondary network; How much Bitcoin Michael personally owns and why he announced that he would destroy the private key after death; Does he still support the view that “bank custody is safer than self-custody”; how to view Trump’s New Deal and Bitcoin National Reserves; whether Bitcoin has the risk of centralization in the United States; whether Bitcoin is too expensive, only the rich and institutions can buy it, and how to treat it when young people prefer memecoin; Is Bitcoin a religion; and what advice do you have for China investors?
As of February 9, 2025, Strategy holds 478,740 BTC, with a total acquisition cost of US$31.1 billion and an average price of US$65,033. It is the entity with the largest number of Bitcoin holders in the world.
Audio transcription is done by GPT and there may be errors. Listen to the full podcast.
Can you introduce yourself and MicroStrategy?
Michael Saylor: I founded MicroStrategy in late 1989. We started out as a business intelligence software company and went public in 1998. I have also founded about a dozen other businesses, including one listed company. I have always been interested in the history of science and how science affects economics. He studied at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), majoring in aerospace engineering and history of science. I wrote a book,”Mobile Wave”, which discusses how software can migrate to mobile devices and bring change. I explored what happens when software runs on mobile devices. In 2020, I discovered Bitcoin, and our company became the first company to include Bitcoin on its balance sheet. Today, we are the world’s largest holder of Bitcoin.
Will MicroStrategy keep buying Bitcoin? How much can you buy at most?
Michael Saylor: Yes, we will keep buying Bitcoin. Think of us as a real estate development company. Suppose if you were the first company to go public in Manhattan and you kept buying and developing real estate in Manhattan, and that was 1750, you would continue to do so for hundreds of years. So you are not selling, you are constantly buying. We will continue to develop Bitcoin as “Digital Manhattan”-a digital asset. We will continue to acquire Bitcoin and then use it as collateral to start other businesses. For example, we are now the largest issuer of convertible bonds in the U.S. market and have just launched our first convertible preferred stock. These two securities backed by Bitcoin are unique in the market. As the price of Bitcoin rises, we will continue to do similar things while also seeing new opportunities.
Some people say that if MicroStrategy’s average bitcoin purchase price exceeds US$150,000 in the future, this may be at risk. Do you agree with this view?
Michael Saylor: No, I disagree. Most of the company’s Bitcoin was acquired through equity. For example, we currently have US$45 billion to US$50 billion worth of Bitcoin, but our debt is only US$3 billion, and these debts are already guaranteed by assets. So in effect, we have 15 times more Bitcoin as collateral than our debt. And our debt is non-recoverable and has a maturity of more than four years. Therefore, there will be no problem for Bitcoin to fall to $1 tomorrow. I mean, even if Bitcoin plummets 98%, the company will not face liquidation risks. The company has permanent capital.
What do you think of Bitcoin’s price cycle? Do you think there will be a bear market this year?
Michael Saylor: I don’t pay much attention to cycles. I don’t believe in cycles. I think the concept of cycles comes from the first 10 to 15 years of the crypto world. Now, we have entered the era of institutional investment. Most of the capital in the market comes from large institutions and enters in the form of equity. For example, BlackRock and ETFs have purchased more than $100 billion in bitcoins in the past year, and they have purchased more bitcoins than miners have mined. So, when we went through the last round of halving, the amount of bitcoins mined and sold became secondary, and what really dominated the market was the demand for bitcoin, which has entered a different stage.
I think focusing too much on cycles is a bit distracting. People try to timing the market accurately, but they always fail. If you have tried to seize the best time to buy Manhattan real estate over the past 300 years, you may end up telling yourself not to buy it. But in fact, you have been right to buy at any price for the past 300 years. The same applies to Tokyo Real Estate. If you’ve tried to seize the best time to buy Apple stock over the past 40 years, your biggest mistake is not buying. What you have is a dominant digital currency network that will only keep rising. I think Bitcoin will rise by an average of 29% a year over the next 21 years. Based on this benchmark, by 2045, the price of each Bitcoin will reach $13 million. The price you can buy now is 1/100 of it. So whether you buy for $95,000,$105,000,$92,000 or $108,000, does it really make a difference? Traders don’t get rich, they just participate in the market. Global billionaires like Bernard Arnault, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk became rich because they bought a dominant digital monopoly asset and held it all the time, rather than trading it frequently in the market.
Will MicroStrategy lend or pledge Bitcoin to earn interest in the future?
Michael Saylor: I don’t think that’s going to happen. I think the smartest thing to do is to issue securities backed by Bitcoin. When you lend Bitcoin to someone, you take a risk because they may not give it back to you. But if you issue securities to the market, you still hold Bitcoin. There are correct risk management methods and wrong risk management methods.
Better yet, use $10 billion in Bitcoin as collateral, issue $1 billion in securities, pay 8% interest, and invest at a 60% yield. Wouldn’t this be better? You can hold your assets and earn a 52% spread. If you can make 60% of the proceeds through the Bitcoin network and borrow money at an interest rate of 8%, 10%, 12%, or whatever, why not? That’s much better than lending you $10 billion in Bitcoin for 4% interest. Why would I risk $10 billion for a 4% gain instead of earning 40% with zero risk?
What do you think of some mining companies and listed companies in Asia imitating microstrategies?
Michael Saylor: I think the more participants join the Bitcoin network, the higher the price of Bitcoin will be and the stronger the entire network will be, so everyone will benefit. I predict that we will grow from only a few companies adopting the Bitcoin standard to dozens, hundreds, and eventually thousands of companies will join.
You can choose to invest your capital in bonds, with a post-tax return of only 2%-3%; or you can invest your capital in Bitcoin and get a return of 30%-60%, which is a 10 times higher return. I believe that in the long run, companies will make rational choices, and I think they will eventually start thinking about this issue. The more companies that join the Bitcoin standard, the better it will be for everyone who owns Bitcoin and all companies that adopt the Bitcoin standard. This is a virtuous cycle.
Will MicroStrategy develop its own Bitcoin Layer 2 network, or will it support existing Bitcoin Layer 2 solutions?
Michael Saylor: I think we will watch the market first. You can think of MicroStrategy as already running on three layers of Bitcoin. Layer two is open protocols like Lightning, and layer three is platforms like Binance, Coinbase or MSTR, which are proprietary protocols. So, we already have a three-tier structure with billions of dollars in daily transactions. We also recently launched Strike, another three-tier protocol, with daily transaction volumes reaching tens of millions, even more than $50 million. These are the security layers, or three-layer agreements, that are already very powerful and attract certain types of investors.
In the future, second-tier solutions like Lightning may be successful, but I think the real billion-dollar opportunities currently lie in the third tier.
How much Bitcoin do you personally hold? What is the average buying price? Do you own other cryptocurrencies?
Michael Saylor: I don’t own any other cryptocurrencies. About four years ago, I publicly disclosed that I owned 17,732 bitcoins at a purchase price of just under $10,000 each. I don’t remember the exact number, but this information can be found in my public tweet. I have bought some more since then, but I have never sold them. As a result, I now hold more Bitcoin than I did then, but I have not publicly disclosed how much more I have increased.
You mentioned that after you passed away, the Bitcoin private key would be destroyed. Why not leave it to your family or donate it?
Michael Saylor: I am single and have no children. Regarding charity, I think if you have a lot of resources, you have to make sure those resources end up being used for the right things. If you destroy the private key directly, that would effectively be the equivalent of donating those bitcoins on a pro rata basis to everyone in the entire Bitcoin network. Isn’t this fair? This is the fairest way.
If you believe in Bitcoin and have invested a certain amount, then anyone who destroys the private key is actually supporting someone who shares your beliefs. This is an immediate, irrevocable and ever-valid donation. But if I donate the money to a charity, 100 years later, when I’m gone, the managers of the institution may spend it on things I don’t recognize. For example, people criticize Rockefeller because some of his charitable foundations now support projects that not everyone agrees with. But the problem is, Rockefeller has been dead long ago, and he may not even approve of these uses himself. So, a man who has been dead 100 years has been criticized for his money being used for controversial matters. This is the risk of leaving wealth to foundations or trusts.
Of course, there are other ways. You can spend this wealth before you die, or set very strict rules for its use. If you have family and want to leave Bitcoin to them, that may also be a reasonable choice.
But I think Satoshi Nakamoto has set a very admirable example. Satoshi Nakamoto owns 1 million bitcoins, but these bitcoins have never been used. In fact, he destroyed the private key and disappeared forever. This is equivalent to permanently contributing 5% of the value of the Bitcoin network to everyone. I think this is a very meaningful thing.
You mentioned that banks may be safer than personal self-custody. Do you still think so?
Michael Saylor: I think different people should use different methods to hold Bitcoin. Some people are very good at self-hosting, and they should manage it themselves. But some people don’t have this ability. For example, would you let a 3-year-old manage Bitcoin by himself? Or what about an 80-year-old man who can’t even be proficient in typing or reading a keyboard? If they are blind, can they safely hold Bitcoin?
The answer is obvious, right? If you set up a trust fund for unborn children, can they own Bitcoin? Who should be responsible for hosting? There are also some companies that are not legally allowed to self-custody Bitcoin. Which raises another question-do you really want your mayor to manage all bitcoins on behalf of the city’s citizens? What if the mayor steals himself? What if he was kidnapped or murdered?
In the early days of Bitcoin, many people realized the importance of self-custody because the market was filled with “crypto cowboys”-style speculators and short-term platforms. But Mt. The difference between Gox and JP Morgan is huge. A large bank has tens of thousands of cybersecurity and compliance experts and very strict operating procedures, while many crypto exchanges may be managed by only a few people.
I don’t think there’s the only right answer here. If you live in a war-torn area, like Iraq or North Korea, and you don’t manage Bitcoin yourself, you’re likely to lose it. But for many institutions and organizations, they cannot legally purchase Bitcoin without a custodian. So, the rational view is that some people should self-manage, some people can manage by memorizing mnemonic words, some people can carve mnemonic words on a metal plate, some people use hardware wallets, and still others need to rely on institutional trusteeship, whether it is a domestic institution or an overseas custodian.
So the key is what kind of entity do you belong to-a city, charity, family, trust, or individual? The real question is, how long is your investment cycle? 100 years? 1000 years? Or one year, five years? Will you die in 3 years? It ultimately depends on how uncertain your environment is. Do you live in Manhattan, or do you live in Ukraine or Afghanistan? Do you live in Africa? If so, which country in Africa is it? All of these factors will affect your choices.
It also depends on your physical and mental condition. Some people can’t even type, some can’t even read the words on their mobile phones, and some don’t have mobile phones at all. In the encrypted world, people often default to everyone as a male in their 20s. If you are between the ages of 20 and 40, your view of the world may be very similar. But in reality, there are still many people in the world who don’t belong to this group-some are cancer patients, some are 85-year-old people, and some live in completely different environments. Therefore, everyone needs to make decisions based on their own situation.
If you are too dogmatic or stubborn about hosting Bitcoin, it will limit the growth of the network. I think the wisest thing to do is to accommodate all types of subjects from all over the world, no matter what environment they are in. Anyone who purchases Bitcoin-backed assets in any way is actually driving the development of the Bitcoin network. The ultimate goal is to allow the Bitcoin network to continue to expand.
What impact do you think Trump’s election as president will have on the crypto industry? Do you think he will build a national bitcoin reserve?
Michael Saylor: I think Trump’s election will be good news for the entire industry, both Bitcoin and the crypto industries. It remains to be seen what impact it will have. But if the White House, cabinet members, regulators, the Senate and the House all support the crypto industry, then the political consensus will tend to promote technological progress, business development, freedom, sovereignty and capitalism.
I think this political consensus means that the government may introduce many constructive and positive policies to help the industry grow. As for the specific measures, we need to wait and see.
Do you agree with another view that Bitcoin or the entire cryptocurrency industry may become more centralized in the United States?
Michael Saylor: No, I think it’s clear that Bitcoin is the most decentralized crypto asset in the world. Miners are scattered around the world, as are holders. Bitcoin has the most dispersed group of developers, the most dispersed group of holders, the most dispersed group of miners, the most dispersed group of corporate participants, and the most diverse group of regulators and policymakers. At the same time, it is also the most well-known brand in the encryption field.
Bitcoin is also the most stable, with little change in its protocols. For example, Ethereum also has a 10-year roadmap with more than 40 update plans, while Bitcoin has no so-called “roadmap” at all.
Bitcoin is complete, and it was basically finalized more than a decade ago. It can be said that Bitcoin was basically completed more than 10 years ago, even when it was born on January 3, 2009. An ideal agreement should be widely distributed, mathematically complete, logically complete, and gain global consensus. Currently, the only asset globally recognized as logically complete is Bitcoin. So, I don’t think Bitcoin is becoming more centralized, but I think it is constantly decentralizing and becoming more and more decentralized.
Hundreds of millions of people around the world already hold Bitcoin, and no other crypto asset is as widely held, recognized and supported as Bitcoin.
Are other cryptocurrencies worth considering? What do you think of memecoin now?
Michael Saylor: I think if you look at digital assets, you can classify them: digital goods, digital securities, digital tokens, digital NFT, digital ABT (asset-backed tokens) and digital currencies.
Technically speaking, digital goods are assets that have no issuer and are supported by digital computing power. Bitcoin is the most powerful digital commodity. There may be a few similar digital goods around the world-assets backed by computing power without an issuer, but 99% of the market share belongs to Bitcoin. Digital goods are best suited as money, stores of value, or digital capital. In this case, the strongest assets will eventually be monetized, while other assets will be de-monetized.
For example, if you decide to make gold a monetized asset, silver, copper, palladium and paper money will eventually go to zero. Now, Bitcoin is being monetized throughout the crypto ecosystem. All other assets that attempt to become digital goods will eventually go to zero relative to Bitcoin and should go to zero. Because, why hold the next best thing? You just need the best one, and Bitcoin is the best one.
If we talk about other types of assets, such as stablecoins, they do have market demand. However, at present, the regulatory environment remains unstable. If the United States establishes a clear regulatory framework for stablecoins that allows U.S. companies or banks to issue digital currencies backed by dollar equivalents, then this market may grow 10 times or even 100 times, and may eventually reach a size of US$10 trillion.
But even so, the US dollar is still the strongest legal tender in the world. So, what is the second best currency? It’s euros. But what is the future of the euro? Return to zero. No one really wants another currency. No one wants the yen, no one wants the euro, and no one wants any fiat currency in Africa, Asia or South America. If you talk to Europeans, you will find that 99% of the demand for digital currencies in the European market is for digital dollars, not digital euros. The euro is already the second strongest currency in the world, but even so, the market still prefers the dollar.
As for memecoin, they are digital tokens. There is currently no regulatory framework for digital tokens on the market, so there is no path to legalization for them. But if a complete digital asset regulatory framework is established in the future, such as the United States clearly stipulates that tokens are an issuer backed asset with digital use but no physical use, memecoin may be included.
If the regulatory framework can be further refined, such as defining digital securities (backed by the issuer and backed by securities assets), ABT (backed by the issuer and backed by physical assets such as an ounce of silver, a barrel of oil, or a bar of gold), and NFT (non-homogeneous assets with digital uses, backed by the issuer), then the market can issue millions of assets in a standardized manner and ensure their compliance. The problem is that such a complete digital asset framework has not yet been established globally.
Currently, the only digital asset with clear regulatory status is Bitcoin, which is defined as a digital commodity applicable to the digital capital field. If you want to invest $1 billion,$10 billion, or even $100 billion, you need regulatory clarity, and Bitcoin already has a clear positioning in this regard. But we still lack regulatory clarity when it comes to digital currencies, tokens, NFTs, ABTs, and securities, despite the real demand for them.
At present, in Washington, DC, there is basically a consensus that a digital asset regulatory framework should be established. But the problem is that Congress has not yet legislated or passed relevant bills. As a result, we are now in a “grey area”-there is demand in the market and regulators agree that rules need to be made, but the law has not yet been introduced. In this case, there is no path to legalization, so as an institutional investor, I cannot make a clear judgment on it. If you are a listed company or institutional investor and use other people’s money, it may not be appropriate to invest huge amounts of money (say,$1 billion) to bet on these uncertain assets. You can only wait for the final decision of the law, and now we have no answer.
Some people think Bitcoin is now too expensive and only wealthy people or institutions can afford it. What do you think?
Michael Saylor: I think this is just a cognitive misunderstanding. Bitcoin is actually cheaper than houses, and people will still buy houses, right? It’s cheaper than a yacht, but people still buy yachts. It’s cheaper than an expensive piece of art. What’s more, you don’t need to buy an entire Bitcoin, you can buy one billionth of a hundred million bitcoin-Satoshi, for less than a penny. You can buy Bitcoin for $20, or you can buy Bitcoin for $200,$2000,$200,000,$2 million, or even $2 billion. The way to obtain Bitcoin is actually much fairer than buying real estate in Tokyo, Hong Kong or New York. You can’t buy 1/100 million of a building, but you can buy a small Bitcoin.
Therefore, this idea is wrong. People just lack understanding, they make cognitive mistakes, sometimes because they are misled by other projects or investment concepts. But if your goal is to make money or become rich, you must overcome these cognitive biases. Buying $100 in Bitcoin is a smarter choice than spending $100 on stocks, because Bitcoin is a digital asset and stocks and real estate investment trusts (REITs) are just securities.
From the perspective of asset attributes, the ownership of stocks is far less than that of Bitcoin. If you invest $100 in a real estate development company, you are just a limited partner, a minority shareholder, and have no ownership of the real estate itself. But if you buy Bitcoin for $100, you are the complete owner. You can trust it yourself, you can lend it to earn income, you can use it as a mortgage, and you can transfer it freely. So if you have to choose between real estate and Bitcoin, let’s give you an example. For example, is there a building in Hong Kong that you can buy for $50? Impossible, right? Therefore, Bitcoin is a better way to invest and is much fairer than buying real estate in Hong Kong.
Also, if you buy a building in Hong Kong, you can’t take it out of Hong Kong, right? But Bitcoin is different. You can buy a little every week for a lifetime. You can move Bitcoin outside Hong Kong or take custody of it yourself and separate it completely from Hong Kong’s banking system. This is a truly powerful asset, far more advantageous than any other asset.
Therefore, I think people should respect Satoshi Nakamoto’s vision. Thank you.
Many people have seen the PowerPoint you made for Microsoft. Will you continue to do this and communicate with large companies in the future?
Michael Saylor: Of course, I’ve been communicating with various companies. As long as anyone is really interested, I will communicate in depth with the CEO or board member. In most cases, I communicate privately with them through MicroStrategy videos. The reason why I publish that content publicly is because I want all listed companies to see it. For any listed company, the analytical logic is the same-they rely on bond financing for 99.9% of their capital structure, and they should turn to Bitcoin as an asset reserve.
I will communicate with different companies from time to time and continue to advocate the Bitcoin standard. Just this weekend, I posted a wonderful video from Jet King CFO. Jet King, the first Indian company to be listed on the Bombay Stock Exchange and adopt the Bitcoin standard, has begun converting cash flow into Bitcoin. I think there are at least 100 companies in India that will follow the same path, so I shared this video.
At MicroStrategy, we publish a lot of bitcoin-related data, such as BTC yields, BTC appreciation, and BTC dollar appreciation, and have established a dedicated website to help companies understand financial management under the Bitcoin standard. Nowadays, many companies are imitating our approach, and their lawyers study our financial reports and legal documents to find a method that suits them.
I view this as an ongoing promotion campaign. There are 400 million companies around the world-400 million! They should all allocate assets based on Bitcoin standards. Of course, you can’t convince them one by one, so you have to make videos, publish content, and let the information spread itself.
It was precisely because many people around the world saw my podcast or MicroStrategy’s public documents that they began to understand and be inspired by the Bitcoin standard. I’ve never met them, but that doesn’t prevent them from knowing us. I hope that in the future, someone in Hong Kong will see our podcast and start thinking about the Bitcoin standard, thereby benefiting from it.
We are spreading a new economic concept, new technology, and a new awareness of the Internet. I believe that this will give people greater power.
You say that Bitcoin has matured, so will the Bitcoin protocol continue to develop? What do you think of the development of the Bitcoin ecosystem?
Michael Saylor: I think some improvements make sense. For example, miner nodes will continue to be optimized, ledger nodes will improve, and hardware wallets and signature devices will get better.
There has been a heated discussion in the community about whether changes to the Bitcoin protocol need to be made. I personally tend to be relatively conservative. I believe we should be extremely cautious and thoughtful when we move forward with any changes. Most agreement adjustments or proposals may be “iatrogenic”-that is, they may cause more harm than good. This situation is similar to legal formulation. People always try to regulate the economy through regulations, so thousands of pages of laws have been enacted in the hope of making markets more efficient. But it turns out that if you implement millions of rent control regulations, the real estate market will be destroyed and renting will become more difficult.
Politicians and regulators always come up with new ideas, but 99.9999% of proposals end up bad. Therefore, we should be highly skeptical of these changes. Of course, necessary new ideas may indeed emerge occasionally, and we can consider them carefully at that time. If there is a broad consensus across the community, I will support it. But in most cases, we don’t need massive protocol upgrades.
Many new proposals are usually just intended to benefit a certain layer-2 solution or a certain layer-3 protocol, but harm the entire Bitcoin community. Therefore, I believe that we should remain extremely conservative, cautious and skeptical about changes to the agreement. Frankly speaking, most of the proposals are more like a “cancer” that will do more harm than good to the Bitcoin ecosystem.
Do you think Bitcoin is a religion?
Michael Saylor: I think Bitcoin is more like an ideology. It is an agreement that allows you to tie your financial energy closely to your personal life. For the first time in human history, a mathematical and technical agreement has emerged that binds capital (economic energy) to companies, individuals, and even countries. We had never had anything like this before. This change is like someone invented language for the first time.
Imagine what would happen if I first introduced the numbers 0 to 9 into the language system? What if I took these numbers away and didn’t allow you to use numbers or even express the concept of “14”? You feel extremely restricted, right? If I deprive you of fire, electricity, mathematics, or prevent you from speaking, expressing complete sentences, or even removing all nouns from the language, your ability to express will be completely destroyed.
So, I see Bitcoin as an economic protocol that promotes prosperity. It is the first economic agreement in human history that is based on science, conforms to thermodynamic principles, is physically reliable, and is mathematically rigorous. So Bitcoin is an ideology, but is it a religion? I’m not sure. It may lean more towards a secular ideology.
However, many people believe that elements such as mathematics, electricity and fire are crucial to human development. If you try to deprive them of these things, people may rise up and fight back. I think the reason why Bitcoin inspires so much enthusiasm is because it is an agreement that drives economic prosperity.
Do you have anything you want to say to China investors?
Michael Saylor: I think Bitcoin is becoming an emerging global capital network. This digital energy network is expanding at a rate of hundreds of millions of dollars every day and becoming increasingly powerful. It is backed by the most powerful computing power in the world and relies on a decentralized network of millions of computers. Anyone in the world can access this energy network.
You can access this network by buying Bitcoin, holding Bitcoin, developing Bitcoin-based applications, and building homes, companies, cities and even countries based on Bitcoin. There are many ways to participate. When I joined the Bitcoin network, its market value was only US$200 billion. Today it has exceeded US$2 trillion, and it will reach US$20 trillion, US$200 trillion, or even US$400 trillion in the future. This network will continue to grow throughout our lifetime.
Smart money will eventually flow to Bitcoin. People will gradually abandon their assets of the 20th century-real estate, stocks, collectibles, fiat currencies and bonds-and will trade past assets for future assets. They will shift from physical assets to digital assets, from imperfect currencies to sound currencies, and from weak assets to stronger assets.
Someone will ask: “What if Bitcoin no longer rises?” But the question is like asking,”What if the water no longer flows downward?”
What if time no longer moves forward? What if you dropped something off a mountain and it stopped falling? What if gravity suddenly fails? These things will not happen. If you understand the physics of the Bitcoin network, you will understand that this is not random.
This conforms to the principles of thermodynamics. Why does fire burn? Why does it produce heat? This is not random. Why can electricity be used? Why can water wheels work? Why does ice melt? Why does water boil? These are not random phenomena, but many people don’t understand the principles. If you understand the physics of economic systems, you can build a machine.
You can build hydropower stations, aircraft, ships. Henry Ford looked at the flames, and someone might ask,”What if the fire goes out?” But the fire will not go out. The essence of an internal combustion engine is to ignite a flame in the machine and let it burn forever.
If you light a flame in a jet engine and let it take you across the Pacific for 15 hours by constantly injecting kerosene, someone might ask,”What if the fire goes out?” If the fire goes out, your plane will crash. But the key is that it will not go out. Why? Because engineers designed the machine to ensure that the flames would not go out.
So, I want to say to everyone, you can design a better financial system. You can build an economic machine fueled by Bitcoin. MicroStrategy is like a “crypto reactor”, and Bitcoin is its fuel. This is not random. If you think this is just speculation, you don’t really understand it at all.
Just like in ancient times, some people believed that the fire was created by the gods and worried that if they angered the Fire God, the fire would go out. But Henry Ford didn’t think so. He created the entire automobile industry so that everyone could own a car. Today, there are more than 1 billion cars in the world.
You need to see the world like physicists, scientists, and mathematicians. When you truly understand how things work, you will see that Bitcoin is a digital energy network. For the first time in human history, there is such a global digital energy network that you can access at any time. This is the path to prosperity.
You can run away from it or complain about it, but if you want to create a better world, if you want to become rich, if you want to change the future of 10 billion people, you need to become an engineer. You can’t just be afraid of being electrocuted, being burned, or being afraid of the thunder of the gods. You have to control it, use it, and move the world forward.
