That's what I've been wondering. Strategy doesn't disclose public addresses,
but they do announce all their purchases. So if the purchases are indeed legit, shouldn't it
produce corresponding activity on the blockchain that could be easily tracked and verified?

Bitwise discloses public addresses of its bitcoin holdings for its ETF, so why can't Strategy?
If you want a bitcoin custodial product without holding bitcoin yourself I would go with Bitwise.
Even Tether discloses its bitcoin public addresses, so Saylor is full of shit on this one.

If you want aStrategy should be pressured into doing the same by the bitcoin custodial product without holding bitcoin yourself I would go with Bitwisecommunity.
If I was a shareholder I would start a pressure campaign up to and including a class action lawsuit
if they don't comply. A public company should not be concealing such critical information from their
shareholders.

That's what I've been wondering. Strategy doesn't disclose public addresses,
but they do announce all their purchases. So if the purchases are indeed legit, shouldn't it
produce corresponding activity on the blockchain that could be easily tracked and verified?

Bitwise discloses public addresses of its bitcoin holdings for its ETF, so why can't Strategy?
Even Tether discloses its bitcoin public addresses, so Saylor is full of shit on this one.

If you want a bitcoin custodial product without holding bitcoin yourself I would go with Bitwise.

That's what I've been wondering. Strategy doesn't disclose public addresses,
but they do announce all their purchases. So if the purchases are indeed legit, shouldn't it
produce corresponding activity on the blockchain that could be tracked and verified?

Bitwise discloses public addresses of its bitcoin holdings for its ETF, so why can't Strategy?
Even Tether discloses its public addresses, so Saylor is full of shit on this one.

If you want a bitcoin custodial product I would go with Bitwise.