I'm not going to give you a lecture on the connection between a creator/intent vs reality or the philosophy espoused in the Death of the Author as one example, but what you wrote has absolutely nothing to do with anything related to what Bitcoin *is*, describing what was written in a white paper by someone who at this point might be dead is irrelevant. Technically a currency in this case could also be an investment when you're dealing with an international instance heavily influenced in terms of price by network size, which doesn't start at full saturation.
The reason why its relevant to the topic is because there's a relevant risk/reward, company fundamentals analysis and necessary factors for a recovery to consider.
If I compare this to leveraged tech ETFs or Cryptocurrency, those are cyclical in nature and have had constant massive up and down cycles, heavily dependent on interest rates and risk appetite in markets. It might be hard to time a recovery here, but there's been at least 5 up and down cycles in crypto for example and it has come back stronger every single time. Therefore if I'm considering the percentage chance of making money, based on historical circumstances assuming rates ease at some point and market risk appetites increase (which they always do) I'd put the chance of a recovery and massive upside at 90%+. And the upside in many cases in can be 100%-1000% commonly to even 10000% gains.
For Magellan, what is the chance that they manage to retain (or grow) clients while underperforming for over 5 years and under the current yearly and even monthly period, while getting smashed in the news and bleeding 5% of the FUM every month? I'd put it at a few percent at best. Incredibly unlikely unless they have consistent outperformance that they've failed to achieve for the next few years, starting tomorrow. Even if this occurs, at best maybe the stock doubles over the next few years, but its incredibly unlikely.
Looking at asymmetric risk and considering the investment thesis required to invest here, there might be a 10% chance of a recovery in which you 2x your money and a 90% chance this stock ends up almost halving. The risk/reward is just God awful here compared to alternatives as for example in crypto or in tech ETFs which currently do present value they haven't in a long time. The connection I'm making to MFG specifically is that the case for investing in this hoping for a turnaround or engaging in any sort of sunken cost fallacy is for fools, the percentage chance of success and upside are nowhere near good enough to buy or hold.
The rest of your post veers into conspiracy brained nonsense quite frankly. "Plaything of competing managers" is a deluded way of ignoring the very REAL problems this company has and their awful track record over the last 3 years. The company is bad, the stock price reflects it. There's no cabal at play here, no aliens, no fat, rich men in smoke filled rooms trying to bring it down. There's just an awful track record of performance the company is suffering because of it. People who short a stock have less of an impact than the average person who is a buyer, they can't magically make stonk go down for no reason, at least not in the medium term.
You should lose the ego, stop thinking people are trying to doom and gloom you out of the stock and look at the fund performance at Magellan over the last 3 years and their fees. If you don't buy the argument that FUM leaving the company is that bad, then you don't understand the business and shouldn't be investing.
I'm shorting the stock via CFD and I'm bad mouthing it on this forum. Not because I'm trying to trick people but because I think this is a bad company, same with all the people selling out and shorting. Accept the fact that this might be a badly run company and falling because of it.
(20min delay)