Like ITMSF - Intermap - geo spatial imaging. Becoming larger and larger. Still a microcap. PS. I first got in at .4, is near $1.60 now. My avg price is .71, own 55,000 shrs

Frisco86 said:

---

Like ITMSF - Intermap - geo spatial imaging. Becoming larger and larger. Still a microcap. PS. I first got in at .4, is near $1.60 now. My avg price is .71, own 55,000 shrs

---

i have this as a full position as well; modeling a FV of about $3/share right now. That could go up if they can land another rumored deal. Stay tuned.

2wealfth Man said:

---

Frisco86 said:

---

Like ITMSF - Intermap - geo spatial imaging. Becoming larger and larger. Still a microcap. PS. I first got in at .4, is near $1.60 now. My avg price is .71, own 55,000 shrs

---

i have this as a full position as well; modeling a FV of about $3/share right now. That could go up if they can land another rumored deal. Stay tuned.

---

That is about my FV. If Indonesia hits in full, Malaysia, etc then by big Bull case is closer to $10 in a couple years.

YOLOed into some AUR March 21 calls, let's roll!

This came faster than I thought for Intermap (ITMSF)

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/INTERMAP-TECHNOLOGIES-COR-42378448/news/NGA-Selects-Intermap-s-Team-as-a-Vendor-for-200-Million-Luno-B-IDIQ-Contract-48823222/

ITMSF up 11.8% today. Let's round to 12% for any of the 12th man in on this one. Up 166% total with initial buy last Jul 19 up 372%.

2wealfth Man said:

---

This came faster than I thought for Intermap (ITMSF)

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/INTERMAP-TECHNOLOGIES-COR-42378448/news/NGA-Selects-Intermap-s-Team-as-a-Vendor-for-200-Million-Luno-B-IDIQ-Contract-48823222/

---

There are 13 vendors in that contract and ITMSF is partnered with CACI on it.

2wealfth Man said:

---

Frisco86 said:

---

2wealfth Man said:

---

This came faster than I thought for Intermap (ITMSF)

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/INTERMAP-TECHNOLOGIES-COR-42378448/news/NGA-Selects-Intermap-s-Team-as-a-Vendor-for-200-Million-Luno-B-IDIQ-Contract-48823222/

---

There are 13 vendors in that contract and ITMSF is partnered with CACI on it.

---

saw that, keep eyes open for a deal with Malaysia. Funny tidbit about the Indonesia work; they have discovered 13 new islands over the course of the mapping there.

I feel like we need a dedicated microcap thread on here.

---

ITMSF - quite a run since April 9.

Logos Stick said:

---

My pick is Walmart. They still have room for more digitization and on-line sales. They are up 70% the last year.

They are also "recession proof" and I think we are in the beginning of one.

---

wrong about the recession, right about walmart

25% YTD

I've had a large position in WMT for a while now. Been very happy with it this year!

MSTR was mentioned twice in this thread. If you'd had bought at beginning of yr and sold at peak you'd have made 50% but right now from beginning of yr it's down 37%. I can sure see some logic in buying the stock as they should be experts on when to buy and sell BTC. the fact that it's down makes it interesting to me for 2026.

halfastros81 said:

---

MSTR was mentioned twice in this thread. If you'd had bought at beginning of yr and sold at peak you'd have made 50% but right now from beginning of yr it's down 37%. I can sure see some logic in buying the stock as they should be experts on when to buy and sell BTC. the fact that it's down makes it interesting to me for 2026.

---

Totally agree. It's still a strong buy for me. Their business model is on the surface complex but actually very simple. The more seasoned their preferred equity offerings, the more interesting they get by the day.

APP.

I have also been in Intermap for several months but only at around 5000 shares.

Yes their business model is simply speculative grifting

Just curious, would you feel the same way about their strategy if it was based on gold rather than BTC?

CDE, SILJ

Yes, unless they were an actual business that was mining it, since gold has industrial value

But just as a holding company that leverages gold and speculates that it will compound at 20% per annum for decades, it's a fantasy that will not end well

Good luck! It'll fail or succeed and we'll circle back in a few years. I'm betting it'll succeed.

People make (and lose )money on currency trades and derivatives of same since forever . Those are also speculative. Isn't BTC a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing their currency and in that sense it seems like a high probability bet… to me anyway. If we ever were to see a change in that trend then that changes the equation. I don't. I wouldn't bet the farm on it but maybe the small pasture out by the creek.

Granted the level of currency devaluation has a huge impact on the prospects and MSTR is selling perhaps more of a best case scenario for BTC prices.

AST Spacemobile been on a run this year. This has been an options play dream with the volatility.

halfastros81 said:

---

People make (and lose )money on currency trades and derivatives of same since forever . Those are also speculative. Isn't BTC a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing their currency and in that sense it seems like a high probability bet… to me anyway. If we ever were to see a change in that trend then that changes the equation. I don't. I wouldn't bet the farm on it but maybe the small pasture out by the creek.

Granted the level of currency devaluation has a huge impact on the prospects and MSTR is selling perhaps more of a best case scenario for BTC prices.

---

Instead of BTC, replace it with anything that has finite supply but no value.

Are Beanie Babies a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing currency? No, of course not, and that sounds ridiculous.

BTC is not a debasement trade, it's a speculative social media infused/spread pyramid/ponzi scheme trade. It's not a currency. It's not a store of value. And it's not an inflation hedge.

AggiEE said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

People make (and lose )money on currency trades and derivatives of same since forever . Those are also speculative. Isn't BTC a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing their currency and in that sense it seems like a high probability bet… to me anyway. If we ever were to see a change in that trend then that changes the equation. I don't. I wouldn't bet the farm on it but maybe the small pasture out by the creek.

Granted the level of currency devaluation has a huge impact on the prospects and MSTR is selling perhaps more of a best case scenario for BTC prices.

---

Instead of BTC, replace it with anything that has finite supply but no value.

Are Beanie Babies a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing currency? No, of course not, and that sounds ridiculous.

BTC is not a debasement trade, it's a speculative social media infused/spread pyramid/ponzi scheme trade. It's not a currency. It's not a store of value. And it's not an inflation hedge.

---

Are we still doing the beanie baby comparison in 2025? Embarrassing.

Is a ledger that cannot be hacked valuable? Is final settlement valuable? Is absolute scarcity valuable? Is instant verification valuable? Is the ability to send value to someone in any jurisdiction without the government's permission and that government having no ability to stop you valuable?

Actually, yes, turns out that a network that checks all of those boxes does have value. In fact, that network's value is currently $1.892 trillion. Whether or not YOU see it as valuable or don't understand WHY it is valuable is irrelevant.

Your last post shows your complete ignorance on this topic.

TxAG#2011 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

People make (and lose )money on currency trades and derivatives of same since forever . Those are also speculative. Isn't BTC a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing their currency and in that sense it seems like a high probability bet… to me anyway. If we ever were to see a change in that trend then that changes the equation. I don't. I wouldn't bet the farm on it but maybe the small pasture out by the creek.

Granted the level of currency devaluation has a huge impact on the prospects and MSTR is selling perhaps more of a best case scenario for BTC prices.

---

Instead of BTC, replace it with anything that has finite supply but no value.

Are Beanie Babies a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing currency? No, of course not, and that sounds ridiculous.

BTC is not a debasement trade, it's a speculative social media infused/spread pyramid/ponzi scheme trade. It's not a currency. It's not a store of value. And it's not an inflation hedge.

---

Are we still doing the beanie baby comparison in 2025? Embarrassing.

---

Yes we are, and the comparison is still appropriate no matter how many influencers and shills have taken on leverage to buy more of this fictional fiat crypto.

p-townag said:

---

Is a ledger that cannot be hacked valuable? Is final settlement valuable? Is absolute scarcity valuable? Is instant verification valuable? Is the ability to send value to someone in any jurisdiction without the government's permission and that government having no ability to stop you valuable?

Actually, yes, turns out that a network that checks all of those boxes does have value. In fact, that network's value is currently $1.892 trillion. Whether or not YOU see it as valuable or don't understand WHY it is valuable is irrelevant.

Your last post shows your complete ignorance on this topic.

---

Of course it can be hacked through quantum computing. And being decentralized, has no protocols in place for containment. That's the biggest asymmetrical risk of Bitcoin actually going to effectively zero.

Even assuming it can NEVER be hacked. Why is a transactional (but highly speculative) technology something that should compound greater than inflation? Especially when you can create as many fiat crypto currencies as you like. The technology isn't special.

Should my water utility bill or electricity bill be tokenized and then speculated on as "teh future" that people can gamble with?

The only ignorance are those that delude themselves into believing there's any value here other than expecting a cult like mentality to continue to grow and adopt something that is not even great as a means of what you are claiming it's supposed to accomplish.

AggiEE said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

People make (and lose )money on currency trades and derivatives of same since forever . Those are also speculative. Isn't BTC a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing their currency and in that sense it seems like a high probability bet… to me anyway. If we ever were to see a change in that trend then that changes the equation. I don't. I wouldn't bet the farm on it but maybe the small pasture out by the creek.

Granted the level of currency devaluation has a huge impact on the prospects and MSTR is selling perhaps more of a best case scenario for BTC prices.

---

Instead of BTC, replace it with anything that has finite supply but no value.

Are Beanie Babies a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing currency? No, of course not, and that sounds ridiculous.

BTC is not a debasement trade, it's a speculative social media infused/spread pyramid/ponzi scheme trade. It's not a currency. It's not a store of value. And it's not an inflation hedge.

---

Are we still doing the beanie baby comparison in 2025? Embarrassing.

---

Yes we are, and the comparison is still appropriate no matter how many influencers and shills have taken on leverage to buy more of this fictional fiat crypto.

---

You mean like the Harvard Endowment fund?

Dude, you missed the trade. That's alright. But you have some weird fixation of proving yourself right when you clearly are not capable of mentally understanding it.

Smart people have already shut up and just accepted they were wrong.

TxAG#2011 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

People make (and lose )money on currency trades and derivatives of same since forever . Those are also speculative. Isn't BTC a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing their currency and in that sense it seems like a high probability bet… to me anyway. If we ever were to see a change in that trend then that changes the equation. I don't. I wouldn't bet the farm on it but maybe the small pasture out by the creek.

Granted the level of currency devaluation has a huge impact on the prospects and MSTR is selling perhaps more of a best case scenario for BTC prices.

---

Instead of BTC, replace it with anything that has finite supply but no value.

Are Beanie Babies a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing currency? No, of course not, and that sounds ridiculous.

BTC is not a debasement trade, it's a speculative social media infused/spread pyramid/ponzi scheme trade. It's not a currency. It's not a store of value. And it's not an inflation hedge.

---

Are we still doing the beanie baby comparison in 2025? Embarrassing.

---

Yes we are, and the comparison is still appropriate no matter how many influencers and shills have taken on leverage to buy more of this fictional fiat crypto.

---

You mean like the Harvard Endowment fund?

Dude, you missed the trade. That's alright. But you have some weird fixation of proving yourself right when you clearly are not capable of mentally understanding it.

Smart people have already shut up and just accepted they were wrong.

---

Harvard adopting something doesn't disprove my point.

AggiEE said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

People make (and lose )money on currency trades and derivatives of same since forever . Those are also speculative. Isn't BTC a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing their currency and in that sense it seems like a high probability bet… to me anyway. If we ever were to see a change in that trend then that changes the equation. I don't. I wouldn't bet the farm on it but maybe the small pasture out by the creek.

Granted the level of currency devaluation has a huge impact on the prospects and MSTR is selling perhaps more of a best case scenario for BTC prices.

---

Instead of BTC, replace it with anything that has finite supply but no value.

Are Beanie Babies a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing currency? No, of course not, and that sounds ridiculous.

BTC is not a debasement trade, it's a speculative social media infused/spread pyramid/ponzi scheme trade. It's not a currency. It's not a store of value. And it's not an inflation hedge.

---

Are we still doing the beanie baby comparison in 2025? Embarrassing.

---

Yes we are, and the comparison is still appropriate no matter how many influencers and shills have taken on leverage to buy more of this fictional fiat crypto.

---

You mean like the Harvard Endowment fund?

Dude, you missed the trade. That's alright. But you have some weird fixation of proving yourself right when you clearly are not capable of mentally understanding it.

Smart people have already shut up and just accepted they were wrong.

---

Harvard adopting something doesn't disprove my point.

---

It does actually, but you can't see it. I'm sorry.

AggiEE said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

People make (and lose )money on currency trades and derivatives of same since forever . Those are also speculative. Isn't BTC a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing their currency and in that sense it seems like a high probability bet… to me anyway. If we ever were to see a change in that trend then that changes the equation. I don't. I wouldn't bet the farm on it but maybe the small pasture out by the creek.

Granted the level of currency devaluation has a huge impact on the prospects and MSTR is selling perhaps more of a best case scenario for BTC prices.

---

Instead of BTC, replace it with anything that has finite supply but no value.

Are Beanie Babies a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing currency? No, of course not, and that sounds ridiculous.

BTC is not a debasement trade, it's a speculative social media infused/spread pyramid/ponzi scheme trade. It's not a currency. It's not a store of value. And it's not an inflation hedge.

---

Are we still doing the beanie baby comparison in 2025? Embarrassing.

---

Yes we are, and the comparison is still appropriate no matter how many influencers and shills have taken on leverage to buy more of this fictional fiat crypto.

p-townag said:

---

Is a ledger that cannot be hacked valuable? Is final settlement valuable? Is absolute scarcity valuable? Is instant verification valuable? Is the ability to send value to someone in any jurisdiction without the government's permission and that government having no ability to stop you valuable?

Actually, yes, turns out that a network that checks all of those boxes does have value. In fact, that network's value is currently $1.892 trillion. Whether or not YOU see it as valuable or don't understand WHY it is valuable is irrelevant.

Your last post shows your complete ignorance on this topic.

---

Of course it can be hacked through quantum computing. And being decentralized, has no protocols in place for containment. That's the biggest asymmetrical risk of Bitcoin actually going to effectively zero.

Even assuming it can NEVER be hacked. Why is a transactional (but highly speculative) technology something that should compound greater than inflation? Especially when you can create as many fiat crypto currencies as you like. The technology isn't special.

Should my water utility bill or electricity bill be tokenized and then speculated on as "teh future" that people can gamble with?

The only ignorance are those that delude themselves into believing there's any value here other than expecting a cult like mentality to continue to grow and adopt something that is not even great as a means of what you are claiming it's supposed to accomplish.

---

Quantum is less of a threat to Bitcoin than it is to the NYSE, any bank, any power grid, any military defense system. Bitcoin is more difficult to hack than any of the above, and there's a financial incentive to use quantum computing to increase its quantum hacking resistance. If quantum computing is your concern then you shouldn't invest in anything online and should just store money and gold in your backyard.

It should compound greater than inflation because the vast majority of inflation is debasement. Because bitcoin isn't being debased like fiat currency, it mathematically has to compound greater than inflation.

The technology is extremely special. The technology plus the resilience plus the decentralization plus the network effect = almost $2 trillion and counting.

Decentralization is a feature. No one can mess with it. It's like a government changing how many inches in a foot every year then finally someone comes and says, "12 inches in a foot forever." Now we can get stuff done because we get to trust math not people.

p-townag said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

People make (and lose )money on currency trades and derivatives of same since forever . Those are also speculative. Isn't BTC a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing their currency and in that sense it seems like a high probability bet… to me anyway. If we ever were to see a change in that trend then that changes the equation. I don't. I wouldn't bet the farm on it but maybe the small pasture out by the creek.

Granted the level of currency devaluation has a huge impact on the prospects and MSTR is selling perhaps more of a best case scenario for BTC prices.

---

Instead of BTC, replace it with anything that has finite supply but no value.

Are Beanie Babies a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing currency? No, of course not, and that sounds ridiculous.

BTC is not a debasement trade, it's a speculative social media infused/spread pyramid/ponzi scheme trade. It's not a currency. It's not a store of value. And it's not an inflation hedge.

---

Are we still doing the beanie baby comparison in 2025? Embarrassing.

---

Yes we are, and the comparison is still appropriate no matter how many influencers and shills have taken on leverage to buy more of this fictional fiat crypto.

p-townag said:

---

Is a ledger that cannot be hacked valuable? Is final settlement valuable? Is absolute scarcity valuable? Is instant verification valuable? Is the ability to send value to someone in any jurisdiction without the government's permission and that government having no ability to stop you valuable?

Actually, yes, turns out that a network that checks all of those boxes does have value. In fact, that network's value is currently $1.892 trillion. Whether or not YOU see it as valuable or don't understand WHY it is valuable is irrelevant.

Your last post shows your complete ignorance on this topic.

---

Of course it can be hacked through quantum computing. And being decentralized, has no protocols in place for containment. That's the biggest asymmetrical risk of Bitcoin actually going to effectively zero.

Even assuming it can NEVER be hacked. Why is a transactional (but highly speculative) technology something that should compound greater than inflation? Especially when you can create as many fiat crypto currencies as you like. The technology isn't special.

Should my water utility bill or electricity bill be tokenized and then speculated on as "teh future" that people can gamble with?

The only ignorance are those that delude themselves into believing there's any value here other than expecting a cult like mentality to continue to grow and adopt something that is not even great as a means of what you are claiming it's supposed to accomplish.

---

Quantum is less of a threat to Bitcoin than it is to the NYSE, any bank, any power grid, any military defense system. Bitcoin is more difficult to hack than any of the above, and there's a financial incentive to use quantum computing to increase its quantum hacking resistance. If quantum computing is your concern then you shouldn't invest in anything online and should just store money and gold in your backyard.

It should compound greater than inflation because the vast majority of inflation is debasement. Because bitcoin isn't being debased like fiat currency, it mathematically has to compound greater than inflation.

The technology is extremely special. The technology plus the resilience plus the decentralization plus the network effect = almost $2 trillion and counting.

Decentralization is a feature. No one can mess with it. It's like a government changing how many inches in a foot every year then finally someone comes and says, "12 inches in a foot forever." Now we can get stuff done because we get to trust math not people.

---

This isn't true. Centralized institutions involve a human element for reclamation of security breaches and lockdown measures. De-centralized networks as far as BTC is concerned, do not. Quantum computing is only one risk that I mention, and it is greater in Crypto than anything else you mentioned.

If Crypto were a true "store of value", it should NOT compound greater than inflation. It should, in perfect lock-step, MATCH inflation. Why would it command a premium above inflation?

The technology is NOTHING special for BTC, and is in fact inferior on multiple measures compared to countless other fictitious fiat cryptos. The only special thing about it is a first mover advantage, which is a non-technical factor.

Trusting everything in Decentralization is a complete fantasy. Things get hacked or stolen. There's disputes over gray areas of interpretations of laws. That's why there's courts and lawyers. Decentralization is great for fraudsters and criminals, but that's about it.

TxAG#2011 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

AggiEE said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

People make (and lose )money on currency trades and derivatives of same since forever . Those are also speculative. Isn't BTC a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing their currency and in that sense it seems like a high probability bet… to me anyway. If we ever were to see a change in that trend then that changes the equation. I don't. I wouldn't bet the farm on it but maybe the small pasture out by the creek.

Granted the level of currency devaluation has a huge impact on the prospects and MSTR is selling perhaps more of a best case scenario for BTC prices.

---

Instead of BTC, replace it with anything that has finite supply but no value.

Are Beanie Babies a bet that currency issuers will continue to pay off debt by devaluing currency? No, of course not, and that sounds ridiculous.

BTC is not a debasement trade, it's a speculative social media infused/spread pyramid/ponzi scheme trade. It's not a currency. It's not a store of value. And it's not an inflation hedge.

---

Are we still doing the beanie baby comparison in 2025? Embarrassing.

---

Yes we are, and the comparison is still appropriate no matter how many influencers and shills have taken on leverage to buy more of this fictional fiat crypto.

---

You mean like the Harvard Endowment fund?

Dude, you missed the trade. That's alright. But you have some weird fixation of proving yourself right when you clearly are not capable of mentally understanding it.

Smart people have already shut up and just accepted they were wrong.

---

Harvard adopting something doesn't disprove my point.

---

It does actually, but you can't see it. I'm sorry.

---

This is just an appeal to authority fallacy; the idea that Harvard can't make a poor decision. The truth is that Harvard's BTC holdings are .8% of their portfolio. It's fairly negligible amount even if it goes to zero it's unlikely to do any major harm.

The normie retail investors aggressively shilling for BTC have much more, upwards of 100% to this one holding alone.

This isn't true. Centralized institutions involve a human element for reclamation of security breaches and lockdown measures. De-centralized networks as far as BTC is concerned, do not. Quantum computing is only one risk that I mention, and it is greater in Crypto than anything else you mentioned.

Your human element debanks people and freezes your assets (see Canadian trucker protests). It politically raises and lowers interest rates to benefit who it wants to benefit. It debases the monetary supply through printing and inflation, which devalues and dilutes your hard work, literally stealing time from you. It seizes assets (see Venezuela). It restricts who can and cannot participate (try having access to a bank account in Saharan Africa). It blocks WikiLeaks from donations. It bans your ability to own assets that can't be controlled (see China trying to ban Bitcoin). I don't like this human element with regards to monetary value.

--------------------------------------------------

If Crypto were a true "store of value", it should NOT compound greater than inflation. It should, in perfect lock-step, MATCH inflation. Why would it command a premium above inflation?

I feel like I already answered this. The M2 money supply has no limit. It will continue to expand forever as governments like the US continue to print money to fund themselves. Because Bitcoin is a fixed supply, it has to go up in value compared to the inflation rate. It is literally infinity over 21 million coins.

--------------------------------------------------

The technology is NOTHING special for BTC, and is in fact inferior on multiple measures compared to countless other fictitious fiat cryptos. The only special thing about it is a first mover advantage, which is a non-technical factor.

Bitcoin created proof of work and the difficulty adjustment. Bitcoin was also the first to implement a practical decentralized blockchain. It was the first blockchain cryptocurrency. It was also the first major cryptocurrency to use SHA-256. To say Bitcoin's technology is nothing special is lunacy.

--------------------------------------------------

Trusting everything in Decentralization is a complete fantasy. Things get hacked or stolen. There's disputes over gray areas of interpretations of laws. That's why there's courts and lawyers. Decentralization is great for fraudsters and criminals, but that's about it.

You should really consider reading about this. The base layer should be decentralized, immutable and final. Upper layers are where the gray areas and courts belong. Centralization is great for a company or even a country. But for universal money, decentralization is key. Trust math, not people.

ddp

Quote:

---

Harvard adopting something doesn't disprove my point.

---

You haven't proven anything.