Bitcoin's price action for the past seven days hasn't looked great. It hit a low of around $92,000 last Friday, recovered a bit to about $96K, trended back down to $92K, bounced and now is heading back towards $92K. Support at $92,000 is critical for bulls, while a break below could accelerate declines. There are many potential factors at play: tax harvesting, pre-inauguration profit taking, short-term market uncertainty, and maybe a Microstrategy blackout period.
Many thought that Microstrategy joining the Nasdaq-100 would cause bitcoin to pump. The idea being that this inclusion would mechanically cause Microstrategy price appreciation, enabling Saylor to issue more debt to buy more bitcoin. This hasn't happened, and the reason could be a blackout period.
In this post by TheGiver, he outlines his belief that Michael Saylor, as the Executive Chairman of Microstrategy, would be subject to a blackout period during which he cannot issue new convertible debt or shares to purchase bitcoin. The blackout period could last all of January, with some speculation it might have started in late December. Let's see if Saylor starts buying in January.
In other news, the outgoing Biden and Dems continue to use their waning powers to stymy the incoming administration. The U.S. Treasury and IRS have finalized new regulations expanding the definition of "brokers" in the crypto industry, requiring platforms, including defi services, custodial wallet providers, and decentralized exchanges, to track and report user transactions, including those involving NFTs and stablecoins, starting in 2027. These last minute rule changes are likely overreaches that will require legal battles and potential Congressional review. Just more obstacles the new admin will have to deal with to initiate their agenda.
The biggest, most engaging news event over the Christmas holiday has seemingly engulfed the whole of X (Twitter), not just crypto's corner. The H1B visa debate, or what some are dramatically calling, "The Great Christmas H1B War." I encourage everyone to read a little bit about it because it's a fascinating new wrinkle of the U.S. immigration debate that has been in focus during this presidential election. Balaji, Vivek, and Sagar's response to Vivke is not a bad place to start.
It started with tech CEOs, including Elon, promoting the H1B visa program, saying that the program is essential for securing "elite human capital." This was met with public backlash for many reasons including, a misrepresentation of how H1B's are actually used, disagreement that the U.S. has a dearth of homegrown qualified candidates, and cultural and identity concerns about immigration. This was in turn labeled anti-immigrant, nationalistic, and racist by others. Things got more heated from there.
LIke any good debate there isn't a clear-cut answer for any of the sides. Like any good controversy, there are many third-rail issues (race, immigration, preserving culture, and IQ just to name a few) that are connected to this debate, and which some people (on all sides) have used in bad faith to inflame their opposition. It's been great Christmas fodder.
Ryan Selkis, the founder of Messari, perhaps summed it up best:
"America was built by disagreeable men, so let debate rage on."
-David Sencil
0 Comments