pull down to refresh
As far as my silly little data experiment goes here, there isn't a correlation between negative or positive price swings and Strategy's buys of bitcoin.
Saylor persistently buying coins is priced in so the price doesn't' move on the news
I agree, although I wonder how this can be the case. In a month like December, there were two weeks with tiny buys and two weeks with monster buys. In a month like October there were really only rather small buys, announced on a weekly basis.
How do you figure people interested in trading Strategy's buys manage to know which kind of week it will be ahead of time? (I assume that people in the business hear about these things and so I assume that the effects of the trade do show up in exchange prices).
Derivatives set the interim price of Bitcoin. Saylor persistently buying coins is priced in so the price doesn't move on the news and in fact it probably reacts negatively after his purchases because traders know there is whale demand that won't be back in the market in the near term so they can happily sell or short.
Most crypto traders are morons but there is probably a smart trading outfit out there that has figured this out and knows when to sell during Saylor's buying window and when to buy back after the price has dropped post his buys. Rinse and repeat.
Even though it doesn't look like it, my guess is they are probably pretty strategic with buys and do them with as little interference to the market price as possible. the real market impact would probably only be seen if they exhausted OTC desks of their supply and they had to go into the spot market to buy to satisfy demand.
This also gets into the paper bitcoin question. If an OTC desk was running out of Bitcoin could they call up Coinbase to borrow some. Which depending on Coinbase Prime customers agreements may or not be Saylor's own coins. Haha