Buying a company trying to replicate microstrategy? I do not think here the risk is asymmetric, many failed companies are trying to replicate that model.
I agree when it comes to criticizing those who simply copy another company’s approach or claim to be “the next XYZ.” In most cases, the original is far more powerful than the copy. But in this case, I see a different situation. MetaPlanet operates in a unique regional context compared to MicroStrategy.
Asia—especially Japan—follows different market forces. One concrete example is taxation: Japanese investors pay up to 55% tax on direct Bitcoin gains, while stock gains are taxed at a flat 20%. This creates a meaningful incentive to gain Bitcoin exposure through equities.
Now you might ask, why don’t Japanese investors just buy MicroStrategy? The answer lies in cultural proximity. For many investors in Asia, MetaPlanet feels more familiar and accessible. It offers a local, culturally aligned way to participate in the Bitcoin treasury trend.
As far as I can tell, MetaPlanet has now reached a critical scale—enough to begin serving institutional clients, especially across the broader Asian region. In other words, it has grown to a point where it can play in the same institutional arena as MicroStrategy, but in a different geography.
In my report, I mentioned the example of Allianz, the insurance giant, which gained Bitcoin exposure through MicroStrategy by investing in their convertible bonds. Just as MicroStrategy has become an accepted vehicle for Bitcoin exposure among Western institutions, I believe MetaPlanet is becoming the equivalent for institutions in Asia.
The geographic focus matters. MetaPlanet is positioned to serve the same function in the East that MicroStrategy serves in the West.
Buying a company trying to replicate microstrategy? I do not think here the risk is asymmetric, many failed companies are trying to replicate that model.
I agree when it comes to criticizing those who simply copy another company’s approach or claim to be “the next XYZ.” In most cases, the original is far more powerful than the copy. But in this case, I see a different situation. MetaPlanet operates in a unique regional context compared to MicroStrategy.
Asia—especially Japan—follows different market forces. One concrete example is taxation: Japanese investors pay up to 55% tax on direct Bitcoin gains, while stock gains are taxed at a flat 20%. This creates a meaningful incentive to gain Bitcoin exposure through equities.
Now you might ask, why don’t Japanese investors just buy MicroStrategy? The answer lies in cultural proximity. For many investors in Asia, MetaPlanet feels more familiar and accessible. It offers a local, culturally aligned way to participate in the Bitcoin treasury trend.
But why will other companies not copy metaplanet? Do they have acces to institutions to get the bond structure of micros strategy?
As far as I can tell, MetaPlanet has now reached a critical scale—enough to begin serving institutional clients, especially across the broader Asian region. In other words, it has grown to a point where it can play in the same institutional arena as MicroStrategy, but in a different geography.
In my report, I mentioned the example of Allianz, the insurance giant, which gained Bitcoin exposure through MicroStrategy by investing in their convertible bonds. Just as MicroStrategy has become an accepted vehicle for Bitcoin exposure among Western institutions, I believe MetaPlanet is becoming the equivalent for institutions in Asia.
The geographic focus matters. MetaPlanet is positioned to serve the same function in the East that MicroStrategy serves in the West.