That’s precisely why the system’s core philosophy prioritizes Bitcoin and other assets designed to retain or appreciate in value over time.

The inclusion of fiat is less about relying on it as a foundational component and more about offering participants flexibility for their individual financial goals. Think of it as an optional “output converter” for those who may need liquidity in traditional currencies, similar to the retirement income products you mentioned.

That said, the primary engine of our model is entirely built around Bitcoin and crypto-based tools that align with value preservation and growth. We ensure that fiat integration doesn’t interfere with the system’s core purpose—it’s simply an optional add-on for participants who require it. I’d love to hear your thoughts on how to further refine this balance or explore alternatives to enhance value preservation.


To clarify, the goal is indeed to create a system that increases the amount of Bitcoin held by participants. The project focuses on leveraging a combination of automated tools and diversified crypto assets to generate stable, consistent returns in BTC, while offering flexibility for those who may prioritize fiat-based outputs.

Regarding your question about the team, I currently lead the project and handle the majority of its development, but there is a small group of collaborators who assist with specific components, such as regulatory insights and operational scalability. This hybrid approach ensures that the system benefits from diverse expertise while maintaining a unified vision.