The true value of Bitcoin lies in circulation, not in hoarding.

Michael Saylor turned his attention to the only asset without flaws after being forced to realize the shortcomings of all value storage assets. This does not mean he is immune to the situation of mediums of exchange. From one perspective, the real estate market is massive, but from another perspective, it is daunting. However, if you have experienced the pressure of maintaining billions of dollars in purchasing power, housing is indeed a good tool.

The obsession with value storage completely misses the point. The most important aspect of Bitcoin is its role as a medium of exchange. Although the fiat currency system increasingly separates the functions of money, that doesn't mean it should be that way. Viewing Bitcoin as a medium of exchange does indeed provoke controversy, and other monetary forces will try to hinder it. It would be even better if they chose to join rather than confront. This might lead billionaires to believe they can invest in it, but merely using Bitcoin as a value storage is an attack on it. This approach would turn it into digital gold 2.0, bound and restricted.

Without a medium of exchange, there is no store of value! The medium of exchange is paramount. You first receive the transaction, and then store Bitcoin. If the store of value is the focus, imagine the scenario of announcing that the Bitcoin key is lost - you can still perfectly store it, but without the functionality of a medium of exchange, the market will erase the top-level fictitious fiat value. This value exists precisely because it is liquid and can still be used as a medium of exchange.

Oxygen tanks are crucial for storage, but breathing is even more important. Value storage is secondary, relying on trading ability. Without trading ability, value storage is meaningless. Michael experienced this firsthand when his million-dollar assets in Argentina were diluted by 90%. He struggled to preserve value, not because he didn't foresee it, but because he couldn't use it as a medium of exchange. Indeed, poor value storage undermines the medium of exchange, but why is the latter more important? Because trading ability is key to your responsiveness.

So far, most people who have come into contact with Bitcoin know about the chart promoted by Michael. He claims that there is no better idea than a clean value store of 9 trillion dollars, and then immediately calls Bitcoin one of the most liquid markets in the world, operating around the clock. In fact, liquidity means a medium of exchange.

Let's analyze this chart, starting with the real estate market. Its value is $330 trillion, but it performs poorly as a medium of exchange, with an annual trading volume of only $1.3 trillion. Regulations and taxes make real estate transactions more difficult. Nevertheless, because it is over 100 times better as a store of value, billionaires favor it, increasingly dominating the market and excluding the younger generation.

The increase in the value of a house comes not only from itself but also from its connection to surrounding public facilities. Building roads, adding supermarkets or gas stations, and connecting to the power grid can all increase value. Networks create opportunities for energy inflow and enhance the possibility of converting energy into economic value. Therefore, transactions within the network are factors that increase property value. On the other hand, as a billionaire, you might not want to establish large networks around your house, but rather prioritize privacy. The house may depreciate, but the goal would shift to increasing the cost for others to access you, thereby reducing the chances of being attacked.

The bond market, as a means of value storage, is valued at 300 trillion USD, with an annual trading volume of 140 trillion USD and new bond issuances of 25 trillion USD. This means that the value as a medium of exchange accounts for about 50% of the total value each year. From this perspective, it is better than real estate, but the numbers still indicate that people mainly use it as a means of value storage.

The stock market has a value of 115 trillion dollars, with a trading volume of approximately 175 trillion dollars. This indicates that their advantages as a medium of exchange surpass their role as a store of value. Taking a company's stock as an example, how much value did it store last year, and how much value was transacted through it?

The annual trading volume in the art industry is very small, even not displayed on the chart. Meanwhile, the automotive and collectibles industries have an annual trading volume approaching $4 trillion. This highlights that they are primarily seen as a means of value storage, but also reveals how poorly the real estate market performs as a medium of exchange - even worse than the automotive market.

Gold enthusiasts fervently claim that gold has existed for over 5,000 years, calling it the ultimate store of value, yet it only accounts for 1.78% of the value storage market. This indicates that once its role as a medium of exchange is stripped away, it becomes susceptible to manipulation. Gold has a value of $16 trillion, and gold enthusiasts assert that it can store $120 trillion in funds. They are eager to make big money, but the market disagrees, believing that flawed fiat currencies are worth ten times more than shiny rocks. So, is gold a better medium of exchange? It has an annual trading volume of $54 trillion, and driven by derivatives, its usage as a medium of exchange is 3.5 times that of its role as a store of value.

While currency may not dominate in terms of asset value storage, it is, to date, the leading medium of exchange. Other value-storing assets cannot compare. What would happen if the US dollar became a purely value-storing means? It would destroy the dollar network, and with the intervention of non-US asset networks to meet demand, the value of non-US assets would rise. The total global currency amount is about $120 trillion, but look at the trading volume of the top central banks: one major payment system is about $118.2 trillion, another system is about $76.5 trillion, a third system is about $14.5 trillion, and the other ( part ) is about $50 trillion ( due to incomplete data, conservatively estimated ). Therefore, while the value storage is $120 trillion, the utility of these networks as a medium of exchange is over 20 times that, about $2.5 trillion. What would be the medium of exchange value if we include 2 billion unbanked people? How many transactions would this trigger? What would happen if microtransactions became possible?

Where does Bitcoin stand among all this? Mainstream narratives urge holders to never sell, positioning Bitcoin as a store of value. However, the market tells a different story. In 2024, the market cap of Bitcoin reaches $2 trillion, while the value transacted on its layer one blockchain hits $3.4 trillion. Considering the Lightning Network (, although exact numbers are elusive ), the total could be close to $4 trillion. This suggests that Bitcoin's role as a medium of exchange is twice that of its store of value function. So, what happens if the long-standing narrative of "HODL" begins to fade?

Due to the flaws of fiat currency, bonds and stocks are financial "instruments" disguised as money. This creates a market that prevents most people from protecting their wealth, further dividing the value storage function of currency. But how inclusive are these instruments? Or are they merely tools that siphon value from legal trading mediums, directing it into the hands of privileged individuals, billionaires, and others who need to hoard?

Globally, only 10-20% of people have access to bonds, mainly through pensions or investment funds indirectly, rather than directly. For stocks, 15-25% of the population can access them. This means that up to 80% of humanity does not have these tools to protect themselves, making them vulnerable to exploitation. Separating value storage from the medium of exchange creates a dynamic of exploiters and the exploited. This amplifies the "Cantillon Effect": those who can print the medium of exchange buy value storage assets, marginalizing 80% or more of the population. It is a feedback loop that weakens the system and widens the gap between the rich and the poor. The more money is printed, the weaker the value storage function of currency becomes.

Another important part of the system is fees. Sending funds through the banking system incurs costs, as it is a service, but when converting from a medium of exchange to a store of value, the fees are significantly higher. This creates tremendous friction throughout the system, making it difficult for the poor to store their value. At this point, mediums of exchange are increasingly becoming withdrawal mediums rather than mediums of exchange. This is also why the store of value cases are more attractive within the fiat system.

Bitcoin does not pretend to be money like other things; it is the first artificial currency that does not corrode like melting ice and is not discriminatory. It is the money of those who choose it. Since there is no printer, no one wants to exchange it for a "better" store of value - there is no second best. Even those without Bitcoin can use it to shape the lives they want. They no longer chase money to store something, but build anything that can enrich their lives on the basis of Bitcoin.

The most important idea is not to store value, but to transfer value. But to transfer value, you first need to store some. Once again, to store some, someone needs to transfer some in your way first. This is why the wealthy prefer assets that do not deplete like melting ice. Meanwhile, those just starting their careers focus more on acquiring value rather than storing what they do not yet have.

One reason the value storage case has attracted so much attention may be the effort involved. With value storage, you can buy and hold - no work is needed to improve your life. With a medium of exchange, you have to work hard to increase your savings and persuade others to pay for your goods or services with Bitcoin. Another factor: for most people, their fiat portfolio still outweighs their Bitcoin portfolio. They will only consider using it to improve their lives when Bitcoin surpasses their fiat holdings. This shift is not difficult for a large portion of the world's population that lacks savings or assets. This may explain why the current system refuses to let them exit, instead pushing dependency by offering Bitcoin custody - exchanging one dependency for another.

Even rigidity is related to the demand for more transaction mediums. Some strongly support rigidity, but if Bitcoin is not used to reach more people, it is just delaying it. In contrast, the United States knows that to make the dollar the world reserve currency, they must distribute it widely to lock in the network effect. They believe the network is key to rigidity, and due to the low cost of printing and sharing bills, it works easily. For Bitcoin, its absolute scarcity demands a balance between the amount of dissemination and storage. However, this does not mean you shouldn't spend a penny.

The metaphor of storing fat in the body is key to long-term survival. True, but it overlooks the need for a stable food income to sustain life before storing fat. Without income, there is nothing to store - so trading comes first. However, for someone not worried about hunger, the focus shifts to storing food to prevent spoilage. This point is repeatedly emphasized to highlight the bias towards value storage, which distorts judgment and misleads others.

Chasing money can corrupt a person. Bitcoin has changed that - it prevents you from endlessly pursuing money and allows you to live the life you want with it. What happens when you have enough of what you want? Then what? With Bitcoin, this is completely possible, and every Bitcoin user should be prepared with an answer to this situation. However, chasing money is a bottomless pit that you cannot fill. The Bible says that the love of money is the root of all evil. How does this work? What is the mechanism? Chasing money - making it the top priority while relegating other things to secondary status - is a mechanism.

Some people are not establishing a Bitcoin standard - they are stacking a deck. Just like in the past with gold, this time it is about hoarding Bitcoin from individuals and institutions, further consolidating the fiat standard. This is not, as some might think, an attack on the US dollar - rather, it supports it by enhancing stocks and their ecosystem. On the contrary, this practice speculatively harms those who fund the purchase of Bitcoin. Not only does it hurt them; by strengthening the dollar, it also exacerbates the suffering of other currency holders. Hoarding Bitcoin under the watchful eyes of the world? This is not a cyber city - but a closed manor funded by their own money.

Are people willing to invest Bitcoin in certain securities? How many would actually do so? True Bitcoin extremists would not exchange their perfect value storage asset.