Bitcoin trading below $110K now feels surprisingly inexpensive, given how rapidly bullish sentiment is accelerating. Optimism is so intense it borders on euphoria, raising the question: are investors and market infrastructure truly prepared for the turbulence that would accompany a move to $150K?

Alchemy flips the natural order: it turns something cheap (lead) into something expensive (gold).  Fiat money does the exact same  in a single keystroke…​it turns nothing into billions. That’s worse, because the new money silently steals buying power from everyone who already earned theirs. Gold suffers under this “replication.” We can dig up more, mint more coins, or promise paper claims on gold that don’t exist. Bitcoin, by design, can’t be cloned or inflated: 21 million coins, full stop. Anyone with a node can count every bitcoin in existence. You can’t do that with gold bars in vaults you’ll never see. Bitcoin moves across the globe in minutes and settles finally.​ Gold needs armored trucks, or a trusted ledger that brings us back to paper promises. Software eats the world; energy and computation secure the network. Productive people building tomorrow’s economy naturally prefer a money that lives natively in that same digital realm. If alchemy shows how easy it is to debase gold, fiat shows how easily value can be stolen outright. Bitcoin closes that loophole once and for all. In 2025, for anyone creating real value with their work, stacking sats is no longer a speculation; it’s self defense for your time, talent, and future.

Unlike gold, which reflects physical scarcity and industrial demand, or stock indices that price in corporate earnings, Bitcoin represents something fundamentally different. Its price is shaped by a unique fusion of ideology, economics, and technology. It isn’t just digital gold; it’s a decentralized barometer of trust, scarcity, and friction in the global financial system. Bitcoin’s volatility reveals a market still discovering how to value this new form of asset. It’s not unstable because it’s broken, but because it’s early: still calibrating itself as a pricing mechanism in a world that’s never seen anything like it. What makes Bitcoin compelling is its asymmetric upside. Its fixed supply, increasing adoption, and utility as a hedge against fiat debasement give it a long term edge few assets can match. Current sentiment is cautiously optimistic. Bullish narratives around scarcity and long horizon conviction are stronger than the caution about potential cycle tops. Demand flows from institutions through ETFs, from individuals through self-custody, and from macro pressures that expose the fragility of traditional systems. Risks remain: geopolitical shocks, regulatory clampdowns, and environmental debates…but they no longer define the story. Bitcoin’s price is not just about what it’s worth, but about what the world is becoming. As legacy systems strain under the weight of their own contradictions, Bitcoin isn’t just surviving, it’s revealing. It exposes trust gaps, misaligned incentives, and the cracks in monetary foundations. In that mirror, we don’t just see a number…we see a choice, an alternative to doom: hope.

The Wisconsin Investment Board has liquidated all of its Bitcoin exposure. Calling them paper hands would be generous…they never actually held Bitcoin itself, only indirect exposure through ETFs. What’s puzzling is that they sold their Bitcoin linked stocks but chose to keep their shares in MicroStrategy. That decision is hard to square. The seeming opposite of Jim Chanos, are they trying to pump the premium? Nah, too much of a big brain move for someone selling sats. Still, every time someone sells, it creates an opportunity for stronger hands to step in. The churn is part of what makes this market exciting. What doesn’t kill Bitcoin only hardens its resilience. It’s a strange chain of accumulation we are seeing: they buy Bitcoin for MSTR and BlackRock, MSTR and BlackRock buy BTC for Coinbase, Coinbase supplies whoever’s on the other end: institutions, black markets, or hackers. And here I am, stuck in the middle with you.

Whales move, and the herd follows. I find Bitcoin whale activity interesting, but it’s clear that many of their moves, especially large sell offs, are designed to manipulate the market. I choose not to play that game. I don’t have the capital to move markets, and reacting to those who do rarely works out well. Still, people fall for it all the time. I don’t follow others; I follow my own plan. That plan is simple: take profits into Bitcoin through any productive and sustainable means available. I don’t try to time the market; I focus on time in the market. So far, that approach has brought more than just financial growth…it’s been a personal transformation. And that growth seems to be compounding, regardless of Bitcoin’s short term price.

An empty Bitcoin mempool at high prices is uncommon but not unprecedented. It usually signals low onchain activity due to market consolidation, improved scaling, or increased offchain usage. It’s not inherently good or bad, but in this case, I see it as bullish: Bitcoin is near all time highs, transactions are cheap, and confirmations are fast. A major driver is institutional adoption and the rise of Bitcoin ETFs, which have absorbed demand offchain. This keeps the network uncongested and integrates Bitcoin into traditional finance. However, this scaling comes with tradeoffs. ETFs reduce the emphasis on self custody, increase centralization risks, and drift from Bitcoin’s decentralized ethos. While they’ve broadened exposure, they haven’t fully unlocked institutional capital, and retail holders still play a key role in supply distribution. The challenge now is balance. Exposure is scaling rapidly, but true ownership, especially self custody, is lagging. Growth potential remains on both fronts: more institutional and global adoption, and better tools, education, and Layer 2 solutions to empower individual holders. Bitcoin’s future depends on managing this tradeoff: scaling access while preserving its core principles of decentralization and self sovereignty

Companies operating on some form of a Bitcoin standard seem to be growing in number faster than I can keep track of, and there’s no sign of that slowing down. It’s likely this trend continues until the number becomes too large to count. Investing in a company that holds Bitcoin is essentially a dual bet: on Bitcoin itself and on the company’s ability to execute its strategy well. This approach can offer diversification, leverage, and access through traditional markets, but it also comes with added risks, fees, and less control. Buying Bitcoin directly is simpler, cheaper, and gives you full ownership, but it lacks the potential upside that a well managed Bitcoin focused company could deliver, and you’re fully responsible for your own custody and security. Strategy is likely the strongest option for corporate Bitcoin exposure. It has the largest holdings, strong market liquidity, and a consistent, high conviction strategy, making it a good fit for someone already committed to a Bitcoin heavy approach. Other companies with smaller Bitcoin positions can be less efficient or riskier ways to gain exposure. They may still offer value if you’re looking for diversification, a bargain, or a bet on a unique business model or region, but in many cases, these firms are simply imitating the strategy without the same level of conviction or execution, making them less compelling; unless you’re chasing early momentum or non Bitcoin growth potential.

Some advocate for increasing or removing the OP_RETURN size limit to support current data storage use cases, Layer 2 solutions, and reduce dependence on less efficient methods like Taproot outputs. They argue it’s a practical response to growing demand and aligns with Bitcoin’s design, since OP_RETURN data is prunable and doesn’t add to the UTXO set. Others worry about blockchain bloat, potential security concerns, and a drift away from Bitcoin’s core use as a monetary ledger. The debate is ongoing, with no consensus yet among Bitcoin developers. It’s a bit of a catch 22: nobody wants more spam or mission creep, but people are already using Bitcoin for other purposes. Ignoring that use either leads to UTXO bloat or forces developers to find more prunable alternatives; each with trade-offs and unknown consequences. Bitcoin can run efficiently on multiple clients as long as they follow the same consensus rules and are well maintained. This supports decentralization and resilience. However, the risk of forks increases when clients diverge or aren’t well tested. Historical forks like Bitcoin Cash were mainly ideological, but poor coordination between clients can make technical disagreements worse. Bitcoin’s slow upgrade cycle and the dominance of Bitcoin Core reduce these risks, but they also limit diversity. To me, Bitcoin has always been about coordination over conflict. It encourages building rather than destroying. The debate between Knots and Core isn’t a threat…it’s innovation. Both sides have valid points. Bitcoin has always improved through trial and error. If either side spots and fixes a problem, Bitcoin benefits in the long run.

Strategy alone is acquiring Bitcoin at a rate that exceeds the pace of new issuance, effectively offsetting supply inflation and then some. Plenty of companies are now attempting similar strategies, some claiming theirs is superior. Regardless of those claims, if even a few come close to MicroStrategy’s level of success, it not only validates their approach it creates a dramatic supply demand imbalance that can only be resolved through upward price action. The success of other firms doesn’t undermine MicroStrategy; it reinforces the thesis. With over 555,000 BTC, their position isn’t just a statement…it’s a roar. In the end, capital deployed speaks louder than potential plans. Proof of work beats proof of intent. The only way to surpass Strategy is to outstack or outhodl them, but anyone who tries only drives demand higher benefiting Strategy in the process. The name of the game is bitcoin accumulation, so the same logic applies to any individual or institution holding Bitcoin.

So thankful for this woman right here, and for all the conspiracy theorist moms out there, who have raised or are raising unapologetically toxic Bitcoin maximalists. She made me a Bitcoiner before Bitcoin even existed. Finding Bitcoin felt like finding a missing piece of who I’ve always been. And guess what she wanted for Mother’s Day? Gear to start her own conspiracy podcast. Needless to say…I’m hyped. (Excuse the hair I’m like a smooth brains mad skintest👨🏻‍🔬)