<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>Rune Østgård wrote</title><author_name>Rune Østgård (npub1sv…tsrw4)</author_name><author_url>https://yabu.me/npub1sv4zk080fvt4f3982u5kffzdkex3nm0kylky29um2xws5h4wsxvswtsrw4</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://yabu.me</provider_url><html>I&#39;m struggling with understanding Michael Saylor&#39;s base case of 14 million USD per bitcoin in 2045.&#xA;&#xA;He says that Bitcoin&#39;s market cap represents 0.1% of total global wealth today (relative market cap), while his base case scenario assumes that this goes to 7%, which is a 70-fold increase.&#xA;&#xA;If we look at the historical annual average increase of the money supply USD, we know that it&#39;s about 7%.&#xA;&#xA;If the money supply continues to increase at this rate, it means that in 21 years the amount of money has more than quadruppeled (≈ 4.3).&#xA;&#xA;Today the price of one bitcoin is 63,000 USD.&#xA;&#xA;4.3 x 63,000 USD ≈ 270.000, which represents the M2 adjusted (monetary inflation adjusted) price over a 21 year period.&#xA;&#xA;Saylor&#39;s base case of 14 mill USD represents 52 x today&#39;s price, adjusted for the increase of the monetary supply.&#xA;&#xA;I don&#39;t understand how a base case of 70-fold increase of Bitcoin&#39;s relative market cap translates into just a 52-fold increase in the real, M2-adjusted price.&#xA;&#xA;Wouldn&#39;t it be logical that the real, M2-adjusted bitcoin price increased more than Bitcoin&#39;s relative market cap?&#xA;&#xA;After all, we&#39;re talking about an asset with absolute scarcity, while global wealth, on the other hand, normally would grow.&#xA;&#xA;What am I missing here?</html></oembed>