Source: WEB3 101

Compiled by: Lyric, ChainCatcher

Editor's Note: In this interview, Jane, the host of the Silicon Valley 101 podcast, and researcher Liu Yiming discuss the following questions with guests Zheng Di and Liu Feng: Analyzing the speculative stock MicroStrategy; Why is MicroStrategy popular? Does MicroStrategy face liquidation risk? How to view MicroStrategy's strategy, is it worth imitating? How did Michael J. Saylor go from notorious to Bitcoin guru? When will the Bitcoin guru buy BTC? The mystery of Bitcoin price decline; How to view the U.S. intention to use the dollar stablecoin to siphon global liquidity; Secrets of the gold market; How to choose between Bitcoin and gold; The possibility of imitating MicroStrategy to accumulate non-Bitcoin assets; How to use AI tools for industry research.

Audio transcription may contain errors. Please listen to the complete podcast:

WEB3 101:

https://web3101.fireside.fm/49

1. How to view MicroStrategy as a stock?

Zheng Di's view: MicroStrategy is essentially a speculative stock, and its selling point is not the stock value but the volatility. The company uses a combination of stock and bond financing; in the previous cycle, it mainly relied on bond issuance and cash reserves, with software business cash flow being decent enough to support bond interest payments. In this cycle, due to poor cash flow, it has turned to issuing a large amount of convertible bonds with very low interest rates, and it has also utilized a special mechanism in the U.S. stock market—ATM (At-The-Market) to issue stocks, selling directly in the secondary market at market price without needing to find specific investors. Its capital market operation logic is: when leverage is low, the premium is low; by borrowing to buy Bitcoin and increasing leverage, it attracts two types of investors: those who cannot buy Bitcoin ETFs and hedge funds seeking volatility and expecting greater gains. After leveraging, during a Bitcoin bull market, the company's valuation premium rises, reaching up to 300% in the last bull market and exceeding 100% in this round. However, as the market discovers its large stock issuance, the stock price gradually declines, running inversely to the coin price, and the premium narrows, leading to a decrease in leverage.

2. How does MicroStrategy finance itself? What is the underlying mechanism?

Zheng Di's view: MicroStrategy finances itself through a combination of stock and bond issuance. In the last cycle, it mainly relied on bond issuance and cash reserves, also issuing some ordinary bonds and convertible bonds. At that time, its software business had good cash flow, sufficient to pay bond interest. Analysts valued its software business at between $500 million and $1 billion, with an overall valuation of about $1.2 billion in the last cycle. MicroStrategy used its own cash flow to pay bond interest.

However, the situation has changed dramatically in this cycle, with cash flow being poor or even negative, and cash reserves depleted. Therefore, this round does not issue ordinary bonds but instead issues a large amount of convertible bonds with very low interest rates. At the same time, MicroStrategy extensively uses the ATM mechanism to sell stocks. The U.S. stock market allows listed companies to directly issue stocks in the secondary market at market price after obtaining approval, with investment banks or brokers assisting in sales. At the end of October last year, MicroStrategy was approved to issue $21 billion in new shares under the ATM, with its 420 plan including $21 billion in bonds (mainly convertible bonds and perpetual preferred stock) and $21 billion in stocks (mainly ATM).

MicroStrategy's capital market operation logic is: when leverage is low, the premium is relatively low because investors buy MicroStrategy stock for its leverage. Before a bull market, it must aggressively increase leverage, i.e., borrowing to buy Bitcoin. After leveraging, if Bitcoin enters a bull market, its valuation premium will rise. In the last bull market, its premium reached as high as 300%, and in this round, it exceeded 100%. The rise in premium is due to two types of investors: those who cannot buy ETFs and those seeking volatility, especially hedge funds. However, when the leverage ratio reaches a certain level, the sustainability of debt becomes a concern, and the market will worry about its ability to continue issuing debt.

In this round, MicroStrategy smartly uses ATM; during Bitcoin's upward cycle, stocks are easy to sell, allowing for a quick sale of a large number of stocks to buy Bitcoin. However, this leads to a gradual decline in stock prices, running inversely to coin prices, causing the premium to decrease and leverage to lower.

3. Why is MicroStrategy's stock popular? What is its selling point?

Zheng Di's view: First, although Bitcoin ETFs have been approved, many institutions and individuals still cannot purchase them. For example, domestic RMB funds cannot buy Bitcoin ETFs through total return swaps (TRS) but can purchase stocks like MicroStrategy. The same applies to institutions like Korean pension funds. Therefore, MicroStrategy provides an indirect way for these investors who cannot directly buy Bitcoin ETFs to participate in the Bitcoin market, which is one reason for its premium formation.

Secondly, another major selling point of MicroStrategy is its leverage effect. Its stock price increases far exceed that of Bitcoin itself, attracting investors seeking higher returns. Michael J. Saylor pointed out that even if investors can buy Bitcoin ETFs, they should choose MicroStrategy because MicroStrategy essentially acts as an asset with an implied option. The higher its volatility, the higher the value of the implied option. In the U.S. stock market, it is difficult to find an asset like MicroStrategy that has high liquidity and high volatility. Therefore, it is viewed as a high-quality Bitcoin call option.

MicroStrategy's success also lies in its strong financing ability. The company can continuously finance and purchase Bitcoin, and this model is not simply about Bitcoin investment but relies on strong financing capabilities, which stem from the sales ability of its leader. Michael J. Saylor, as the company leader, can spread his ideas like a missionary and sell stocks. This unique business model and leadership make MicroStrategy difficult to imitate globally, forming the core of its unique advantage.

4. Does MicroStrategy face liquidation risk?

Liu Feng's view: MicroStrategy began purchasing Bitcoin in 2020, using several hundred million dollars of free cash from its commercial software business. In February 2021, the company issued $1 billion in zero-coupon convertible bonds with a six-year term to continue purchasing Bitcoin. At that time, the market had entered a bull phase, and MicroStrategy's move sparked controversy, but the company acted boldly. By the end of 2022, Bitcoin's price fell from $70,000 to less than $20,000, putting the company under immense pressure. Nevertheless, the company financed itself by issuing stocks to buy Bitcoin at low prices, indicating their strong confidence in Bitcoin.

MicroStrategy's liquidation risk mainly depends on its debt structure and Bitcoin prices. The company's rigid debt maturity dates are in 2028 and 2029, with debts of $1 billion and $3 billion, respectively. As long as the company can repay these two debts, there is no liquidation issue. Although Bitcoin prices are highly volatile, considering its cyclicality, the company still has time to respond. Even if Bitcoin prices drop below $60,000 or lower in the future, the company still has a chance to recover in the next bull market. Therefore, at present, MicroStrategy's debt risk is not significant, and its long debt maturity provides the company with room for dynamic adjustment.

The decline in MicroStrategy's stock price may affect its financing ability, but traders do not price stocks solely based on net assets. If the market suddenly discovers that Bitcoin prices are extremely low when debts are due in 2028 and 2029, it could have a significant impact on stock prices. However, currently, a significant drop in Bitcoin prices will not fundamentally affect the company's operating model. Creditors typically do not demand liquidation due to a drop in Bitcoin prices, as this would lead to losses for both parties.

Zheng Di's view: In the last bear market, MicroStrategy faced more severe problems than now, with negative net assets and extreme market panic. However, initiating liquidation procedures is not easy; negative net assets are not a rigid condition. The company's rigid debt maturity dates are far off, and no creditor can force the company into immediate liquidation. Additionally, Michael J. Saylor holds nearly 48% of the voting rights in the company, making it difficult for any liquidation proposal to pass. Although shareholders may have incentives to propose liquidation in certain cases, Saylor's voting power advantage makes such situations unlikely.

Market confidence in MicroStrategy also stems from the trend of Bitcoin as a reserve asset. Although some U.S. states have rejected Bitcoin reserve proposals, sovereign funds globally have begun entering the Bitcoin market. For example, Abu Dhabi purchased hundreds of millions of dollars in Bitcoin ETFs. This trend has just begun, and more institutions and sovereign funds may consider Bitcoin as a reserve asset in the future. Therefore, MicroStrategy is unlikely to face forced liquidation or forced sale of Bitcoin, as its main debt maturity dates are far off, and the market still has confidence in its future.

5. How to view MicroStrategy's strategy, is it worth imitating?

Zheng Di's view: MicroStrategy's strategy is unique and difficult to replicate. Although Japan's MetaPlanet and some companies in the Hong Kong stock market have attempted to imitate it, none have reached MicroStrategy's premium level, and many are even at a discount. One main reason is that MicroStrategy is located in the U.S. stock market, enjoying the largest liquidity globally, which allows its premium to be pushed up by the market. In contrast, the Japanese and Hong Kong stock markets are regional markets with limited liquidity, making it difficult to replicate such high premiums. The second most important reason is that MicroStrategy has Saylor as its leader, who actively spreads his ideas through roadshows, broadcasts, and long YouTube videos, attracting a large number of investors and possessing a high personal brand influence. He can be considered an IP, a guru-level sales leader. Other imitators lack such a powerful leader with significant influence.

Compared to general marketing strategies, MicroStrategy's strategy is very unique; it does not emphasize value investing but highlights its volatility and speculative nature. It emphasizes that even if investors can buy Bitcoin ETFs, they should choose MicroStrategy because it has leveraged and implied options, with trading volumes far exceeding other related markets. This strategy attracts a large number of speculators and hedge funds rather than traditional value investors.

6. How did Michael J. Saylor go from notorious to Bitcoin guru?

Zheng Di's view: Michael J. Saylor had a poor market image over the past 20 years; in 2001, he became notorious due to an accounting scandal, and MicroStrategy fell into trouble as a result. However, he successfully transformed his image into a leading figure in the Bitcoin space by heavily marketing the Bitcoin business.

Saylor became one of the major buyers in the market by purchasing a large amount of Bitcoin through MicroStrategy, even more influential than Bitcoin ETFs. MicroStrategy's strategy of only buying and not selling has positioned it significantly in the Bitcoin market. Saylor has also stated that he will destroy the private keys of his personally held Bitcoin after his death, an act seen as a contribution to the Bitcoin industry, even though the Bitcoin he personally holds was purchased at an average price of about $10,000 in the last cycle.

In terms of regulation, the Bitcoin held by MicroStrategy is mainly custodied with Fidelity Investments and Coinbase, complying with regulatory requirements for listed companies and ensuring compliance. Before Bitcoin ETFs appeared, Saylor had already positioned MicroStrategy as a product similar to an ETF, establishing its industry status. He actively promoted the value of Bitcoin, accepted interviews everywhere, and advocated for accumulating Bitcoin, making significant contributions to the Bitcoin bull market and industry development.

Despite Saylor's controversial past, his contributions to the Bitcoin space cannot be overlooked. He once persuaded Musk to invest Tesla and SpaceX's cash in Bitcoin, leading Tesla to ultimately purchase $1.5 billion in Bitcoin. Additionally, Saylor met with the SEC's crypto action team to discuss Bitcoin's status in the U.S. national reserve, demonstrating his influence at the policy level. Although he is known as a Bitcoin maximalist, recent talking points indicate that he is open to cryptocurrencies beyond Bitcoin.

7. What are Michael J. Saylor's future plans?

Zheng Di's view: Michael J. Saylor is not only focused on Bitcoin; he also advocates for the U.S. to become the global leader in the digital economy. He believes that in the future, almost everything can be put on-chain and tokenized, including assets in various fields such as cultural entertainment, which can be transformed into real-world assets (RWA) and put on-chain. The market potential is enormous, potentially reaching trillions of dollars. To achieve this goal, Saylor argues that the U.S. should lower the barriers for putting everything on-chain and tokenizing RWAs to promote the development of related markets, thereby allowing the U.S. to occupy a global leadership position in the next phase of the digital economy.

From Saylor's statements, it is clear that his vision has transcended Bitcoin itself, beginning to focus on the broad application of blockchain technology and its profound impact on the global economic landscape. He emphasizes that the U.S. should actively promote the development of blockchain technology, leveraging its advantages to recreate a chain-based version of the U.S. stock market or Nasdaq, siphoning global liquidity on-chain and further consolidating the U.S.'s dominant position in the global economy.

8. When will Bitcoin guru Michael J. Saylor buy BTC?

Zheng Di's view: Michael J. Saylor's strategy is to profit through premium arbitrage. He buys Bitcoin by selling MicroStrategy's stock, utilizing the high premium of the stock to achieve arbitrage. The key to this strategy is that only Saylor knows when he will sell a large amount of stock, making him the biggest potential "short" for MicroStrategy. Other investors looking to short MicroStrategy's premium should wait for the company to act before following suit; otherwise, they may incur losses.

Saylor typically sells stocks when the premium exceeds 100%, using the proceeds to buy Bitcoin. While it may seem that he buys Bitcoin when prices are high, he is also selling stocks when prices are high. Therefore, he is not buying at peaks but selling stocks at peaks to raise funds. In terms of asset enrichment, Saylor has generated a significant amount of funds for the company. For example, when the premium reached 150%, he raised funds by selling stocks, while the current premium may be less than 50%, indicating that he has profited from the premium at its peak.

Liu Feng's view: Saylor's business model involves selling high-premium assets to purchase undervalued assets. He raises funds through various means, including issuing bonds, selling stocks, or mortgaging Bitcoin. He needs to compare the cost of raising funds with the price of buying Bitcoin to determine the most cost-effective method. Although he may buy Bitcoin when prices are high, he could be selling assets worth three times their value to purchase Bitcoin worth one time, thus achieving asset appreciation.

9. How to view the recent decline in Bitcoin prices in relation to MicroStrategy?

Zheng Di's view: In mid-November last year, I noticed unusual movements in MicroStrategy's stock, as the company received authorization for $42 billion and began to significantly issue stocks through the ATM mechanism for financing. This strategy was used by Michael J. Saylor to maintain the high premium of the stock and sell large amounts of it at prices above asset value. From November to December, the company sold approximately $15 billion in stock, averaging a net sale of $300 million per trading day. This large-scale stock sale made it difficult for the market to absorb, inevitably leading to a decline in stock prices. Despite the rise in Bitcoin prices, MicroStrategy's stock price fell because the company shifted to financing through stock sales rather than bond issuance, resulting in a decrease in its valuation premium and making it difficult for the stock price to sustain.

From another perspective, the significant rise in Bitcoin prices was due to MicroStrategy's daily net purchase of $300 million in Bitcoin, which had a substantial impact on the market. However, by January, although MicroStrategy continued to buy Bitcoin, the pace of purchases noticeably slowed. Starting January 4, the company entered a quiet period for financial reporting and could not continue large-scale purchases. By February 4, after releasing its financial report, the company clearly stated that it would reduce the intensity of stock financing and shift to bond financing. This change was due to the significant decline in MicroStrategy's valuation premium after two months of stock sales and Bitcoin purchases, with leverage dropping to 15%, far below its long-term target of 20% to 30%. Therefore, the company needed to issue bonds to increase leverage.

On February 5, when the company returned to the market, it began financing through bond issuance, which meant that its pace of Bitcoin purchases would slow down. Unlike issuing stocks through ATM, bond financing requires more time to arrange and execute. This led the market to expect a slowdown in MicroStrategy's buying pace, negatively impacting Bitcoin prices. While MicroStrategy's shift to bond financing may be a positive signal for the company's stock price, it is a negative factor for Bitcoin prices, as the buying pace of one of the largest marginal buyers in the market has slowed, limiting the upward potential for Bitcoin.

10. How to view the U.S. intention to siphon global liquidity using dollar stablecoins?

Zheng Di's view: The U.S. is attempting to siphon global liquidity through dollar stablecoins, aiming to recreate a market similar to the U.S. stock market or Nasdaq on-chain. South Korean regulators have expressed concerns about dollar stablecoins, believing that their large-scale promotion essentially amounts to lending money to the U.S. government. The funds received by dollar stablecoins are typically used to purchase U.S. Treasury bonds. Currently, the scale of dollar stablecoins has reached $200 billion, which, while relatively small, has made USDT the 18th largest holder of U.S. Treasury bonds. If the scale expands to trillions of dollars in the future, it will have a significant impact on the U.S. Treasury bond market, filling funding gaps and lowering financing costs.

The promotion of dollar stablecoins effectively allows the world to lend money to the U.S. government, reducing the U.S.'s reliance on traditional financing channels, such as no longer needing the Treasury Secretary to frequently lobby other countries to purchase U.S. Treasury bonds. This is also the reason why the European Union is promoting euro stablecoins. The South Korean government is also aware of and concerned about dollar stablecoins.

From the perspective of capital controls, traditional methods such as restricting brokerage account openings can effectively control capital outflows. However, in an on-chain market, especially with the emergence of a U.S.-led on-chain stock market, capital controls become extremely difficult. Individuals can freely trade U.S. assets through wallets, making regulation challenging. The proliferation of self-custody wallets makes capital controls nearly impossible, allowing funds to flow easily across borders.

Combined with the Trump administration's disruptive global coordination and protectionist policies, there is a welcoming attitude towards the arrival of the on-chain economy. If the U.S. leads the on-chain economy and the digital economy era, it will siphon global liquidity, consolidating its financial hegemony and posing challenges to the financial stability and capital controls of other countries.

11. What might the future financial landscape look like?

Zheng Di's view: From history and the current situation, the probability of a global cyberspace emerging is low as long as companies or giants are not powerful enough to ignore sovereign governments. Although U.S. tech companies are strong, this trend has not yet formed. For example, while Musk has strong resource control capabilities, he still needs to collaborate with the establishment to achieve technological acceleration. Therefore, the importance of sovereign governments remains significant, especially regarding the leadership of the U.S.

The development of cyberspace relies on the support of powerful nations. If supported by strong countries like the U.S., cyberspace may thrive; without the support of major powers, its development will be limited. Currently, the U.S. is in a chaotic period, inclined to use cyberspace to siphon global liquidity. Historically, there have been proposals for the G8 to jointly strangle Bitcoin, but in the context of increasing global conflict and a lack of international coordination, such proposals are difficult to realize. On the contrary, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin have become new mediums to bypass traditional financial systems amid escalating confrontations. The recognition of Bitcoin by countries like the U.S. and Russia indicates that, in the face of intensifying conflicts, all parties need new financial mediums.

The U.S. hopes to dominate the new financial system, while other countries should compete for leadership within it rather than starting anew. Establishing a new global consensus system is extremely challenging, and grassroots support is also difficult to guarantee.

Liu Feng's view: The concept of network states has been popular for two years, proposed by Balaji Srinivasan, who was the CTO of Coinbase. This concept can be seen as an upgraded version of anarchism, advocating for large internet companies to combine with new technologies, potentially giving rise to new forms of states based on networks. This theory is based on technological advancements and the rise of cryptocurrencies, especially stablecoins, which empower more community and technology-driven financial applications. In recent years, many groups have attempted to establish non-sovereign territories.

However, the background of cryptocurrencies and the concept of network states is that they have been rejected by the government and regulatory agencies in the U.S. But after the new U.S. government took office, the regulatory and policy framework underwent dramatic changes, shifting from rejection to embrace. This reflects a compromise between ideals and reality: cryptocurrencies, originally anti-establishment and departing from sovereign states, now hope to develop with the help of U.S. policies.

12. What secrets does the gold market hold?

Zheng Di's view: One of them is its partial reserve system. Many investors buy and sell gold that is not physical gold but paper gold. In the London gold market, about 90% of accounts use non-segregated storage, while only 10% use segregated storage. Non-segregated storage means that investors' gold is mixed with others', resulting in lower management fees but posing a moral hazard, as it is impossible to verify whether the gold truly exists. This partial reserve system is common in traditional financial markets, but in the cryptocurrency field, due to the transparency of blockchain technology, such operations are much more difficult.

Therefore, the fluctuations in gold prices are also influenced by tacit agreements among central banks and governments. Gold prices cannot rise too high, or it will undermine trust in the global fiat currency system, leading to capital withdrawal from the fiat currency system. Thus, gold prices need to maintain a balance at certain times, allowing for increases but not too rapidly. This balance partly stems from the gold leasing and swapping operations of custodians and central banks, which do not require public reporting, making it difficult to verify the true state of gold reserves.

During liquidity crises, gold prices typically experience significant declines. For example, at the end of February 2020, gold prices suddenly dropped by 7% when they should have risen, indicating that a large amount of gold was being borrowed and sold in the market. A similar situation occurred after the collapse of Lehman Brothers in November 2008, when gold leasing rates rose abnormally to 2.5%, far above the normal level of 0.1%. This indicates that a large amount of gold was borrowed from central banks and sold in the market, causing prices to plummet. However, whether the borrowed gold is returned is unknown. The global gold reporting system only reports nominal reserve amounts, lacking transparency, making it nearly impossible to verify all gold reserve warehouses.

13. How to choose between Bitcoin and gold?

Zheng Di's view: From a delivery perspective, gold delivery is complex and inconvenient. For example, when the UK delivers gold to France, it is not transported directly but completed through internal transfers at the New York Federal Reserve vault. This sharply contrasts with Bitcoin, which can be delivered instantly on-chain, offering higher traceability, transparency, and payment capabilities, making it a superior "digital gold."

The authenticity of gold is difficult to verify, and adulteration is hard to detect with the naked eye, whereas Bitcoin does not have this issue. As long as Bitcoin can be transferred to a wallet or on-chain, it is guaranteed to be real. Additionally, while gold is scarce on Earth, it is not scarce in the solar system, as there is a vast amount of gold in the asteroid belt. If humanity were to colonize Mars in the future, Mars could develop heavy industry using resources from the asteroid belt, which would change the scarcity of gold.

Although Bitcoin excels in many aspects compared to gold, it also faces risks from quantum computing. Quantum computers capable of breaking existing encryption algorithms may emerge in the next 10 to 15 years. Upgrading Bitcoin to resist quantum algorithms requires a decision from a miners' conference, but miners may delay the upgrade due to sunk costs and interest group obstruction, which is a unique risk for Bitcoin. However, in the short term, Bitcoin still outperforms gold.

During liquidity crises, the true safe-haven tools are short-term U.S. Treasury bonds and the yen, rather than gold or Bitcoin. The yen is often borrowed in large amounts, and during a crisis, it needs to be repaid, leading to price increases. Short-term U.S. Treasury bonds also rise during crises; for instance, during the pandemic, the yield on one-year U.S. Treasury bonds rose to 0.8%. In contrast, gold and Bitcoin are typically sold during liquidity crises, as they effectively act as ATMs.

14. How to view the imitation of MicroStrategy's large accumulation of non-Bitcoin assets?

Liu Feng's view: The issue can be broken down into two parts: first, whether other companies might adopt MicroStrategy's strategy to purchase cryptocurrencies other than Bitcoin; second, why there are no companies similar to MicroStrategy in the gold sector. Recently, the gold market experienced a rush due to rumors that Trump might impose import taxes on gold, leading to delays in deliveries in the London gold market, highlighting its partial reserve system characteristics. Historically, the Hunt brothers hoarded silver, even accounting for about 60% of the entire silver market's trading volume at the time, which prompted government intervention and the creation of a large position reporting mechanism. If someone attempts to hoard gold and silver to replicate MicroStrategy's model, they may face government regulation. Even if someone successfully hoarded a significant portion of the market's trading volume in gold, global central banks hold 33,000 tons of gold reserves, which can be lent out at any time to calm market panic. The cryptocurrency market is currently more transparent, and the interests of the traditional financial system within it are still small, not yet reaching the scale of the gold market. If the prices of Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies rise significantly, until they are comparable to the entire volume of gold, the traditional financial system may adopt operations similar to those in the gold market, such as creating fake Bitcoins or paper Bitcoins to suppress prices.

Zheng Di's view: While other cryptocurrencies may be hoarded in large quantities, achieving the widespread consensus that Bitcoin has is quite challenging. Bitcoin is regarded as digital gold and does not require excessive consideration of cash flow issues, whereas other cryptocurrencies must consider factors such as use cases, transaction fees, and revenue. For example, Ethereum faces competition from Solana and is currently affected by the meme market, limiting its growth. The success of MicroStrategy relies on the strong consensus around Bitcoin, which is difficult for other cryptocurrencies to replicate. If latecomers want to imitate MicroStrategy, they need to choose the right target, which must have sustained growth potential. The consensus around Bitcoin has already formed, making it difficult for other cryptocurrencies to surpass it. Of course, there are successful examples, such as Litecoin, which at one time promoted the slogan "Bitcoin is gold, Litecoin is silver." The main reason Litecoin has achieved its current status is that it defined itself as a follower. Imitating MicroStrategy's approach may succeed to some extent, but reaching its level is challenging.

15. How to use AI tools for industry research?

Zheng Di's view: There are many research tools available now, and I recommend that everyone make use of AI tools like GPT, Grok, and Deeppseek. Many research tasks do not require deep personal involvement; I often complete them on my phone, whereas I used to need a computer for dedicated research. Due to frequent movement, I push myself to learn new tools so that I can conduct research anytime and anywhere. For example, I can ask GPT to generate diagrams and provide insights, such as information on how MicroStrategy manages Bitcoin; large models can find this information. Although constant calibration is necessary, I require them to provide data sources and conduct cross-lingual searches to obtain answers. In addition to large models, Polymarket is an excellent tool, but it is banned in several countries, such as Singapore and France. Polymarket operates with real money, allowing people to predict event probabilities. A week before the Microsoft shareholder vote, Polymarket opened a betting market, with bets already reaching one to two million dollars, predicting only a 12% probability of the Bitcoin reserve proposal passing, which continued to decline. I knew a week in advance that this proposal would likely not pass. My research method is to first conduct preliminary research using large models, then calibrate using my own framework, training the model to significantly improve research efficiency. Secondly, I check the Polymarket betting markets, where the important aspect is the trend of probability changes rather than specific values. For instance, if the probability of the U.S. passing the national reserve continues to decline on Polymarket, it indicates that the market is pessimistic.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。