enur72 on Nostr: I'm struggling with understanding Michael Saylor's base case of 14 million USD per ...
I'm struggling with understanding Michael Saylor's base case of 14 million USD per bitcoin in 2045.
He says that Bitcoin's market cap represents 0.1% of total global wealth today (relative market cap), while his base case scenario assumes that this goes to 7%, which is a 70-fold increase.
If we look at the historical annual average increase of the money supply USD, we know that it's about 7%.
If the money supply continues to increase at this rate, it means that in 21 years the amount of money has more than quadruppeled (≈ 4.3).
Today the price of one bitcoin is 63,000 USD.
4.3 x 63,000 USD ≈ 270.000, which represents the M2 adjusted (monetary inflation adjusted) price over a 21 year period.
Saylor's base case of 14 mill USD represents 52 x today's price, adjusted for the increase of the monetary supply.
I don't understand how a base case of 70-fold increase of Bitcoin's relative market cap translates into just a 52-fold increase in the real, M2-adjusted price.
Wouldn't it be logical that the real, M2-adjusted bitcoin price increased more than Bitcoin's relative market cap?
After all, we're talking about an asset with absolute scarcity, while global wealth, on the other hand, normally would grow.
What am I missing here?
He says that Bitcoin's market cap represents 0.1% of total global wealth today (relative market cap), while his base case scenario assumes that this goes to 7%, which is a 70-fold increase.
If we look at the historical annual average increase of the money supply USD, we know that it's about 7%.
If the money supply continues to increase at this rate, it means that in 21 years the amount of money has more than quadruppeled (≈ 4.3).
Today the price of one bitcoin is 63,000 USD.
4.3 x 63,000 USD ≈ 270.000, which represents the M2 adjusted (monetary inflation adjusted) price over a 21 year period.
Saylor's base case of 14 mill USD represents 52 x today's price, adjusted for the increase of the monetary supply.
I don't understand how a base case of 70-fold increase of Bitcoin's relative market cap translates into just a 52-fold increase in the real, M2-adjusted price.
Wouldn't it be logical that the real, M2-adjusted bitcoin price increased more than Bitcoin's relative market cap?
After all, we're talking about an asset with absolute scarcity, while global wealth, on the other hand, normally would grow.
What am I missing here?