#比特币机构配置与囤积 Seeing Saylor's actions, my mind flashes back to the crazy scenes of 2017. Back then, institutions were still on the sidelines, but now they have become the main force in accumulation—this shift took a full six years.

His logic is very clear: keep accumulating until the market stops complaining. This may sound arrogant, but it secretly contains a deep cyclical understanding. Think about it: from Grayscale Trust breaking into the mainstream in 2020 to now, institutional allocation of Bitcoin has moved from the fringe to the mainstream. This process is a history of market psychology evolution. When we, a group of early adopters, experienced the rollercoaster of 2013 and 2017, no one could have imagined that institutions would openly express their stance on holding coins.

Now, with the Nasdaq 100's status, this behavior has become compliant, and MSCI's doubts actually signal something—when traditional financial systems start to feel threatened by your presence, it often means you have become an unstoppable variable. History has shown me that the more people oppose a certain asset allocation behavior, the more it indicates that this behavior is changing the rules of the game.

From the geek currency of 2011, to corporate balance sheets in 2021, and now to index components—each step in Bitcoin's identity evolution has been accompanied by controversy. I have witnessed too many things that were "not supposed to happen" but ultimately did.