- BTC fixed supply 21 million; ETF inflows plus corporate treasuries compress circulating float, increasing upward market price pressure.
- CBDC centralization reduces user optionality; deployments show market optionality favors BTC and stablecoins as executable alternatives.
Samson Mow, CEO of Jan3 and Aqua, presented a concise case for continued Bitcoin appreciation during an interview at the “Acelerando Bitcoin” event in Asunción. He attributed projected price trajectories to a simple arithmetic of fixed supply and rising demand. Mow emphasized a hard cap of 21 million units and highlighted growing demand from ETFs, corporate treasuries, and prospective state buyers as drivers of upward pressure on price.
Mow described Jan3 as a provider of tools for individuals, firms, and nation-states to participate in a financial system built on Bitcoin. He said company teams engage with political leaders to explain strategic advantages of adopting Bitcoin as a reserve asset or to adjust legal frameworks that encourage broader use. Jan3 seeks regulatory dialogue, outreach, and implementation pathways for large-scale adoption.
‘We are always interacting with politicians,’ explained Mow. ‘We are always talking about Bitcoin and the reasons why countries should implement some kind of Bitcoin strategy, whether it be a strategic reserve mining Bitcoin or some change in the law that encourages greater use of Bitcoin in the country.’
Mow dismissed central bank digital currencies as a meaningful competitor to Bitcoin. His argument rested on centralized design and extensive control mechanisms embedded in CBDC proposals, which, he argued, reduce user optionality and trigger public resistance. He cited the weak uptake of Nigeria’s eNaira and muted public response to China’s digital currency program as examples that underline adoption limits for centrally governed digital money. According to Mow, optional alternatives such as Bitcoin and stablecoins provide market choices that reduce adoption prospects for CBDCs.
Regulatory frameworks represent a core concern for policy makers and market participants. Mow criticized restrictive regimes that, in his view, erect barriers to capital inflows and user access. He described Europe’s Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation as a heavy-handed approach that risks disadvantaging local residents.
He offered a more favorable reading of the proposed GENIUS Act in the United States for its effort to establish issuer rules for stablecoins without suppressing market development. Mow framed the regulatory question as a trade-off between capital attraction and legal constraints, and he predicted governments will eventually choose capital access over strict limits if economic objectives prevail.
Aqua, the company’s self-custody wallet, reflects a practical approach to user adoption. Design goals target everyday financial tasks in Latin America: sending and receiving funds, bill payments, credit access, and card integration.
Mow described Aqua as a single application for daily finance operations aimed at users who currently rely on stablecoins for remittances and payments. Product focus centers on usability, custody control, and integration with local payment needs.
Mow summarized a bullish valuation thesis with economic clarity: fixed supply plus rising demand equals higher price. He pointed to recent ETF inflows and corporate allocations as quantitative evidence of demand growth. He also raised the prospect of sovereign purchases as an incremental source of demand.
Corporate disclosures and ETF subscriptions, he argued, reduce available supply while increasing market competition for remaining coins. In his words, everyone competes for slices of the 21 million supply, and much of the supply already resides in long-term holdings.
The argument contains empirical components and normative claims
Empirical elements include observed ETF flows, corporate treasury allocations, and public reports of sovereign interest. Normative elements include policy prescriptions and strategic recommendations to national leaders. Mow recommended legal changes or reserve strategies to capture capital benefits.
Traders and regulators will face practical choices. Portfolio managers must weigh volatility against potential hedging properties. Legislators must balance capital attraction with oversight requirements. Product teams must balance custody security with user convenience for mass adoption.
Observed data points support continued monitoring of inflows, corporate filings, and any reported state-level purchases as indicators of demand concentration and potential market impact.
