modern corporate treasury is typically focused on cash management and managing the opportunity cost of capital
holding cash is *not* a strategy
1/ @Square buys $50M of #Bitcoin w/ its balance sheet 🚀
let's untangle what corporate treasurers do and why this matters...
the role of corp treasurer didn’t exist until the 1970s, when co's faced high inflation and financial uncertainty
modern corporate treasury is typically focused on cash management and managing the opportunity cost of capital
holding cash is *not* a strategy
we could earn a nice 3-5% return in these very low-risk assets w/ time preference
treasurers today are living in a radically different world!
RATES ARE 0
TARGET INFLATION IS >2%
#Bitcoin is a highly liquid asset that trades 24/7 in an increasingly regulated and structured global market - and its an effective portfolio diversifier!
(1) the changing landscape that treasurers must navigate, and;
(2) their ability to manage the operational, risk, and compliance requirements of holding bitcoin directly
our team @CoinSharesCo is well-equipped to provide execution, lending, and custody services, feel free to DM for an intro to our capital markets team 😁
capital allocators have the challenge of keeping pace with inflation and delivering returns while managing risk in an environment where traditional assets have been gutted.
More from Bitcoin
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
