When It Comes to Strategy, Size Matters: MicroStrategy Is Not Micro Any Longer

MicroStrategy has decided that its business strategy is not ‘micro’ any longer, so it dropped half of its name and rebranded as Strategy. After all, how can a company with ever-expanding Bitcoin holdings continue to call itself ‘micro’? With 471,107 Bitcoins in its possession, worth approximately $45 billion, it’s hard to argue that ‘micro’ fits. That’s quite a decent reserve of the first crypto!

Its Role is not Micro

In an industry now overseen by ‘Crypto Tsar’ David Sacks, Michael Saylor likely felt his company deserved a name worthy of a growing crypto empire, rather than a ‘micro’ presence. Your branding should match the scale of your ambitions, especially, when you’re making waves with $45 billion worth of Bitcoin. ‘Micro’ just doesn’t fit then. 

The Not-So-Micro Losses

Also, if we look at the company from the other side, the firm’s losses have also been anything but micro. In fact, they’ve reached a staggering $670M. Yes, you read that right—close to three-quarters of a billion dollars in the red. But hey, big swings are simply part of the game in the wild world of crypto! The path to greatness isn’t always a smooth ride. 

Investor confidence? Definitely not ‘micro’. Grayscale recently announced plans to double down on its bet and boost its stake in Michael Saylor’s company to 5%.

And let’s not forget the Trump era has arrived! We all know he’s a person who gravitates toward the big, the bold, and the grand—certainly not anything ‘micro’. I think ‘micro’ is the last thing he settles for. It’s no wonder Saylor decided to ditch the ‘micro.’ As it turned out, when it comes to strategy, size matters. 

By the way, about four months ago, I wrote right here that MicroStrategy's approach was far from ‘micro’—it was closer to ‘macro.’ And look where we are now. Michael Saylor, I have to ask—are you reading my blog? Because it’s making me think... if there’s ‘macro’ now on the horizon.

#Strategy