Major Split! Goldman Sachs ran away, Strategy went crazy, BitMine is earning passively: who is treating you like a fool?

One quarter, three institutions, three paths.
Some liquidated and ran, some went all-in to bottom fish, some quietly collect rent.
This is not a disagreement over investment strategies—it's a war over the “qualification” of crypto assets.
And if you follow the wrong people, you might lose the next four years.
Guess, who is secretly selling off?
Goldman Sachs, liquidated XRP and Solana ETFs in Q1.
Not reducing positions, but clearing out completely.
They also cut their holdings of BlackRock’s ETHA (Ethereum ETF) by 70%, and Bitcoin ETFs by 10%.
You think they’re bearish?
No. They turned around and bought Coinbase stock, MicroStrategy stock.
Get it now?
They’re not buying coins anymore, they’re switching to buy the shovels.
Same sky, three ways to live.
While Goldman Sachs is running away—
Strategy, in a single week, poured $2.01 billion, buying 24,869 Bitcoin.
One week, $2 billion.
Not joking, they keep adding to their position, infinitely.
What about BitMine?
They neither buy nor sell; they hold 5.27 million ETH, accounting for 4.37% of the entire network, with 89% staked.
Doing nothing, earning rent of $289 million a year.
Three institutions, facing the same market, taking three completely different paths.
This is not a strategy disagreement.
It’s a fundamental split over “what exactly is Bitcoin.”
Three paths, only one can survive the next cycle.
Path 1: Goldman Sachs—Bitcoin as “a trading asset”
Goldman’s approach is very “Wall Street”:
Buy low, sell high, swing trading, clearing out junk coins, reducing mainstream coins, switching to compliant concept stocks.
They treat crypto assets like stocks—if liquidity is good, they buy; if not, they run.
No faith, only quarterly reports.
If you follow Goldman Sachs’s swing trading, how do you feel now after liquidating in Q1?
Bitcoin rose from $50k to $70k, did you miss out?
Path 2: Strategy—Bitcoin as “a store of value”
Michael Saylor’s logic is extremely simple:
Fiat currency will depreciate, Bitcoin will not.
So he doesn’t look at price, quarterly reports, or market sentiment.
Buy weekly, buy monthly, buy yearly.
Becoming the largest holder of coins in the world.
You think he’s crazy? He sees you as poor.
You think he’s gambling? He’s already bought the gambling table.
Path 3: BitMine—Bitcoin/Ethereum as “income-generating infrastructure”
BitMine is the most aggressive—
They don’t speculate or hoard coins; they turn coins into production tools.
5.27 million ETH, 89% staked, generating $289 million annually.
This is not speculation; it’s rent collection.
Their goal: hold 5% of the entire network by 2026.
You stay up late watching K-line charts, they sleep and collect interest.
Who do you think is the real “leek” (retail investor)?
Which path will be proven correct?
Let me tell you the answer first: it’s not about which one is right, but which one suits you.
But if you ask me who will laugh last in the next cycle—
My judgment:
Goldman Sachs will survive but won’t make big money. Because the logic of trading assets guarantees they won’t catch the main upward wave.
Strategy will be revered, but will experience several 80% drawdowns, less than 1% can hold on.
BitMine is the most stable, but the slowest. Income mode takes time to accumulate, its explosive power is less than the first two.
The most likely to outperform: a combination of Strategy + BitMine.
Why?
Because the narrative of the next cycle is not “buy or not,” but “how to use what you bought.”
Just hoarding is not enough, just trading is not enough.
Hoarding + income + compliance—three-in-one—is the ultimate answer for institutions.