Something unprecedented is happening in the Bitcoin market right now.
The world’s largest asset manager and a 37-year-old software company that pivoted its entire balance sheet to digital assets are locked in a race to accumulate Bitcoin at a scale that the crypto market has never seen.
As of March 16, 2026, BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust holds 784,062 Bitcoin. Strategy, formerly known as MicroStrategy, holds 761,068 Bitcoin.
The gap between them is roughly 22,994 coins. At Strategy’s current buying pace, that gap could close within days.
This is not just a footnote in the history of digital assets. It is one of the most consequential financial stories of 2026.
Two entities with fundamentally different structures, different motivations, and different risk profiles are competing for the same finite asset. Bitcoin has a fixed supply cap of 21 million coins.
Every coin these two institutions buy is a coin that no longer sits on an exchange waiting to be sold. The race between BlackRock and Strategy is accelerating the supply squeeze that Bitcoin advocates have been predicting for years.
This article breaks down how each player accumulates Bitcoin, what drives their pace of buying, what the risks are on each side, and what the outcome of this race means for investors watching from the sidelines. Whether you hold IBIT shares, MSTR stock, Bitcoin directly, or none of the above, this race directly affects the market you are participating in.
Two Entities, Two Completely Different Models
BlackRock and Strategy both hold enormous amounts of Bitcoin. But they hold it for completely different reasons, through completely different mechanisms, and with completely different obligations attached.
How BlackRock Accumulates Bitcoin
BlackRock does not buy Bitcoin for itself. The company launched its iShares Bitcoin Trust, ticker IBIT, on Nasdaq in January 2024, giving investors a regulated vehicle to gain Bitcoin exposure without holding the asset directly. When investors buy IBIT shares, authorized participants, which are large financial institutions, purchase Bitcoin on the open market and deliver it to the fund. When investors sell IBIT shares, the process runs in reverse. Bitcoin flows out of the fund and back to the market.
This means BlackRock’s Bitcoin holdings are entirely a function of investor demand. When institutional and retail buyers want Bitcoin exposure through a traditional brokerage account, IBIT holdings grow. When sentiment turns negative, and investors redeem their shares, holdings shrink. BlackRock has no strategic mandate to accumulate Bitcoin. It is a custodian. The Bitcoin it holds belongs, in economic terms, to the IBIT shareholders, not to BlackRock itself.
Since its launch, IBIT has attracted cumulative net inflows of $63.21 billion, according to SoSoValue data. In the week of March 9 to March 13 alone, IBIT took in $600.1 million in net inflows, accounting for 78% of all Bitcoin ETF inflows that week. The fund has seen positive inflows every single day since March 9, a streak that underscores the depth of institutional demand driving BlackRock’s Bitcoin accumulation.
How Strategy Accumulates Bitcoin
Strategy’s model is the opposite of passive. The company does not wait for investors to bring it capital. It goes out and raises capital specifically to buy Bitcoin. That capital comes from three primary sources: convertible notes, which are debt instruments that can be converted into MSTR common shares; at-the-market equity offerings, where the company sells new shares directly into the market; and preferred stock instruments, most recently the STRC preferred share that carries an 11.5% annualized yield and is sold to investors who receive monthly dividends in exchange for providing capital that goes directly toward Bitcoin purchases.
Once Strategy raises the cash, it buys Bitcoin through institutional trading desks, primarily Coinbase Prime, and stores the coins in secure cold storage. The company does not trade these coins. It does not hedge them. It has a simple mandate: buy and hold. This means Strategy’s Bitcoin holdings only go one direction. Unlike IBIT, which can shrink during periods of redemption, Strategy’s Bitcoin stack grows with every capital raise, regardless of market conditions.
In the first two weeks of March 2026, Strategy acquired 40,332 Bitcoin and posted a Bitcoin yield of 3.0%, according to Michael Saylor. Year to date through mid-March 2026, the company accumulated 88,568 Bitcoin with a 3.4% yield. These numbers reflect a pace of accumulation that no publicly traded company has ever attempted before.
The Numbers Right Now: A Race That Could Flip Within Days
The current gap between the two is smaller than at any point since BlackRock briefly overtook Strategy’s holdings in July 2025. As of March 16, 2026, BlackRock holds 784,062 Bitcoin. Strategy holds 761,068 Bitcoin. The gap is 22,994 coins.
At Strategy’s recent weekly buying pace of 22,337 Bitcoin, the company would nearly close the entire gap in a single week. At its daily buying pace of approximately 2,881 Bitcoin, it would need roughly seven to eight days to surpass BlackRock’s current holdings, provided IBIT inflows pause entirely. That last condition is critical. IBIT is not standing still. The fund has been drawing in capital daily, which means the target keeps moving upward as Strategy closes the gap.
The race became a genuine story in mid-March because both the pace of MSTR buying and the slowdown in BlackRock’s week-over-week inflow growth happened to coincide. That convergence narrowed the gap faster than most analysts expected. Bitcoin Magazine reported on March 17 that MSTR shares were pushing toward $150, a sign that market participants are watching this race and betting on Strategy’s momentum.
The deeper question is not just who crosses a holdings threshold first. It is what the sustained buying of both entities does to the available supply of Bitcoin on the open market. Total Bitcoin holdings across all US spot ETFs climbed to 1.29 million BTC as of late February 2026, according to Checkonchain data. Add Strategy’s 761,068 coins, and you have more than 2 million Bitcoin absorbed by just these institutional vehicles. Exchange inventories are declining. The supply shock that drives long-term Bitcoin price appreciation is not a theoretical future event. It is happening right now.
The Financial Architecture Behind Each Model
BlackRock’s Structural Advantages
BlackRock operates the world’s most liquid Bitcoin investment product. IBIT is the most traded Bitcoin exchange-traded product since its launch, according to BlackRock’s own disclosures. The fund manages over $55 billion in Bitcoin assets, gives investors daily liquidity, and charges a 0.25% annual management fee. It is backed by the institutional credibility of a firm that manages more than $14 trillion in assets across all its products.
For institutional investors, IBIT removes the operational complexity of Bitcoin custody entirely. The Bitcoin is held by Coinbase Custody Trust Company, a qualified custodian regulated under New York banking law. Investors access it through their existing brokerage accounts. There are no wallets to manage, no private keys to secure, and no operational overhead. That simplicity is worth a great deal to the pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, endowments, and family offices that have driven IBIT’s inflows.
BlackRock also benefits from a structural insulation that Strategy does not have. Because IBIT’s Bitcoin holdings are tied to investor demand rather than to a corporate balance sheet, a collapse in investor sentiment triggers redemptions, not bankruptcy. BlackRock, the company, does not face liquidation risk from a Bitcoin price crash. Its IBIT fee revenue would shrink, but its own financial health is insulated from the volatility of the underlying asset it holds in trust.
Strategy’s Structural Advantages
Strategy’s advantage over BlackRock is precisely its willingness to act without waiting for market permission. While IBIT’s Bitcoin buying depends on the sentiment of millions of retail and institutional investors choosing to buy ETF shares, Strategy can buy Bitcoin anytime it can successfully raise capital through the capital markets.
VanEck research describes Strategy’s debt structure as its quiet engine. As of early 2026, the company holds significant zero-coupon convertible senior notes that it issued at no interest cost. These zero-interest debt instruments gave Strategy access to billions of dollars of capital for free, routing all of it directly into Bitcoin purchases. The company also avoids the 0.25% annual drag that IBIT shareholders pay in management fees, making MSTR a cost-efficient vehicle for investors who want leveraged Bitcoin exposure without paying ongoing ETF costs.
Strategy’s model also benefits from what analysts call the mNAV premium. When Strategy’s market capitalization exceeds the market value of its Bitcoin holdings, the premium allows the company to raise equity capital at prices above the per-share Bitcoin value, meaning each new share issued adds more Bitcoin per share than it dilutes. When the premium is high and sentiment is bullish, this flywheel can accelerate accumulation at extraordinary speed. The company used exactly this dynamic to raise $25.3 billion in 2025, nearly all of which went to Bitcoin purchases.
The Risks Each Player Carries
Risks for Strategy
Strategy’s risks are real and well-documented. The company carries a total debt load exceeding $8.2 billion, and its preferred stock obligations add significant annual cash demands on top of that. The STRC preferred share alone carries an 11.5% annualized yield, and the company has established a cash reserve covering roughly 23 months of that dividend. But that reserve is not unlimited, and the dividend burden grows with each new STRC issuance.
The mNAV compression is the most visible near-term risk indicator. Strategy’s market-to-net-asset-value ratio stood at a peak of 3.4x in 2024. By mid-March 2026, it had compressed to 1.20x. That compression matters because the mNAV premium is what makes Strategy’s equity issuance accretive. When the company sells new MSTR shares at 1.20x the value of its Bitcoin per share, it adds less Bitcoin value per share issued than it does at 3.4x. A further compression toward 1.0x or below would effectively shut down Strategy’s equity-raise-to-buy-Bitcoin flywheel, forcing greater reliance on debt instruments.
The liquidation floor for Strategy is also worth understanding clearly. Based on the analysis of multiple research firms, a sustained Bitcoin price collapse below approximately $40,000 would challenge Strategy’s ability to service or refinance its convertible notes. Below approximately $20,000, the risk of forced asset sales escalates dramatically, though the company has structured its debt with long maturities specifically to avoid near-term liquidation pressure. Bitcoin’s history does include drawdowns of 70% to 80% from peak prices. That history cannot be ignored when evaluating Strategy’s risk profile.
Strategy’s credit rating, assigned by major rating agencies, is non-investment grade. Rating agencies have listed Bitcoin price volatility as Strategy’s primary risk factor and assigned the company a long-term negative outlook. This junk-rated status means Strategy pays higher borrowing costs when it accesses traditional debt markets and has limited access to investment-grade institutional capital.
Risks for IBIT
BlackRock’s risks are considerably smaller in absolute terms, but they are not absent. IBIT’s inflows are driven by market sentiment, and sentiment can turn. During Bitcoin’s downturn in early 2026, IBIT recorded outflow weeks that erased billions of dollars in accumulated holdings. The fund can shrink as fast as it grew if investors decide to exit.
The structural risk for IBIT is competitive pressure from other Bitcoin ETFs. Fidelity’s FBTC, Grayscale’s GBTC, and newer entrants all compete for the same pool of ETF investor capital. IBIT currently dominates with approximately 78% of weekly Bitcoin ETF inflows, but that market share is not guaranteed. If a competitor offers a lower fee, a better structure, or a more attractive product feature, IBIT could lose share.
A regulatory reversal, while now highly unlikely under the current SEC and CFTC framework, would also affect IBIT in ways that do not apply to Strategy. IBIT is a regulated investment product that depends on its SEC registration to operate. If the regulatory ground shifted dramatically, IBIT would face compliance challenges that Strategy, as a direct Bitcoin owner rather than an ETF, would not encounter in the same way.
What the Race Means for Bitcoin’s Market Structure
The BlackRock vs. Strategy race is not just a financial story about two companies. It is reshaping the structural dynamics of the Bitcoin market in ways that will persist for years.
Both entities are removing Bitcoin from circulation. When Strategy buys Bitcoin and puts it in cold storage, those coins are effectively off the market permanently unless the company’s financial model breaks down. When IBIT buys Bitcoin through authorized participants, those coins go into the Coinbase Custody vault and only return to the market when ETF shares are redeemed. In practice, long-term ETF holders redeem infrequently. The Bitcoin absorbed by IBIT, like the Bitcoin absorbed by Strategy, tends to stay absorbed.
Total spot ETF holdings in the United States crossed 1.29 million Bitcoin as of late February 2026. Add Strategy’s 761,068 coins, and institutional vehicles now control roughly two million Bitcoin, nearly 10% of the total supply that will ever exist. That number is growing. Strategy has publicly discussed a goal of holding one million Bitcoin under its 42/42 capital plan, which targets $42 billion in equity raises and $42 billion in debt issuance by 2027. If successful, Strategy alone could hold close to 5% of all Bitcoin ever mined.
Bernstein analysts, led by Gautam Chhugani, have described Strategy as functioning as a Bitcoin central bank of last resort. That framing is not hyperbole. A central bank does not trade its reserve asset. It accumulates. It holds. It provides a floor of institutional confidence that prevents disorderly market collapse. Strategy is playing that role in the Bitcoin ecosystem in a way that no traditional institution does. BlackRock’s IBIT plays a different but complementary role: it is the gateway, the access product, the vehicle that turns institutional interest into actual Bitcoin demand. Both functions matter. They are not in competition with each other in the market-structure sense. They serve different parts of the same institutional adoption story.
The Investor Decision: IBIT, MSTR, or Direct Bitcoin?
For investors watching this race from the outside, the practical question is where to position themselves. The answer depends entirely on what you are trying to accomplish and how much risk you can absorb.
The Case for IBIT
IBIT is the right vehicle for investors who want Bitcoin exposure without operational complexity, corporate risk, or leveraged volatility. It provides a direct, one-to-one relationship with Bitcoin’s price performance, minus the 0.25% annual fee. It trades on Nasdaq. It settles through normal brokerage accounts. It is accessible in retirement accounts, pension portfolios, and institutional mandates that cannot hold direct crypto or equity in a highly leveraged company. Year to date through mid-March 2026, IBIT has returned negative 18%, a direct reflection of Bitcoin’s price performance during a turbulent early quarter. That is the deal with a spot ETF: you get what Bitcoin gives you, no more and no less.
The Case for MSTR
MSTR is the right vehicle for investors who want leveraged Bitcoin exposure and are willing to accept additional corporate-specific risk in exchange for amplified upside. When Bitcoin rallies strongly, MSTR historically outperforms IBIT significantly because of the leverage embedded in Strategy’s capital structure and the mNAV premium that rises with bullish sentiment. Year to date through mid-March 2026, MSTR has returned negative 8%, a considerably better result than IBIT’s negative 18%, despite Bitcoin falling sharply. That relative outperformance reflects Strategy’s ability to issue preferred shares and buy more Bitcoin even as the price declined, which reduced its average cost basis through continued accumulation. However, in a sustained Bitcoin bear market, MSTR’s corporate risk factors can amplify losses beyond what Bitcoin itself delivers.
The two instruments are not interchangeable. IBIT tracks Bitcoin. MSTR amplifies Bitcoin with corporate leverage, preferred share obligations, dilution risk, and CEO concentration risk all layered on top. Investors need to understand which one they are buying before they buy it.
The Case for Direct Bitcoin
Direct Bitcoin ownership eliminates the 0.25% annual fee, eliminates corporate risk, and gives investors full self-custody optionality. It also eliminates the regulatory scaffolding that makes IBIT accessible in institutional accounts and removes the leveraged upside that MSTR offers. For investors who want pure, unmediated Bitcoin exposure and are comfortable with self-custody, direct ownership remains the most structurally clean option.
What Happens After Strategy Surpasses BlackRock?
The moment Strategy’s Bitcoin holdings cross above BlackRock’s will be a major symbolic milestone. It will mark the first time a corporate treasury has held more Bitcoin than the world’s largest institutionalized ETF product. That moment is close. Based on current trajectories, it could happen within the next several weeks, depending on IBIT’s inflow pace and Strategy’s capital raise cadence.
But crossing that threshold changes nothing about the fundamental dynamics of either entity. Strategy will continue buying. BlackRock will continue accumulating as long as investor demand flows into IBIT. The race has no finish line. There is no prize for holding the most Bitcoin, no regulatory benefit, no structural advantage that accrues to whoever is in first place on a given day.
What the milestone does signal is the scale of institutional commitment to Bitcoin that has developed in less than three years since IBIT launched. In January 2024, BlackRock’s IBIT held zero Bitcoin. In March 2026, it holds 784,062. Strategy began its accumulation in 2020 with 21,454 Bitcoin. It now holds 761,068. These numbers represent the fastest institutionalization of any asset class in financial history.
For long-term investors, the more important question is not who holds more Bitcoin in March 2026. It is what the sustained, expanding institutional ownership of Bitcoin means for price discovery, volatility, and market structure over the next five to ten years. The answer to that question is not settled. But the direction of travel is clear. Bitcoin is becoming a core institutional asset, held by the world’s largest asset manager and by one of the most aggressive corporate treasury operations in history. That structural shift does not reverse easily.
The Broader Picture: Corporate Bitcoin Adoption Beyond These Two
BlackRock and Strategy are the largest players in institutional Bitcoin accumulation, but they are not the only ones. The corporate Bitcoin treasury model that Strategy pioneered is spreading. Metaplanet, a Japanese investment firm, crossed 10,000 Bitcoin in holdings in early 2026, surpassing Coinbase’s own corporate holdings in the process. Tesla holds approximately 11,509 Bitcoin. Block holds 8,883 Bitcoin. SpaceX holds approximately 8,285 Bitcoin.
None of these positions approaches the scale of Strategy or IBIT, but they represent a meaningful shift in how corporate finance teams think about reserve assets. Under the new FASB fair value accounting rules effective from 2025, companies no longer face the asymmetric accounting treatment that previously made Bitcoin holdings unattractive for corporate balance sheets. Under the old rules, companies had to mark Bitcoin losses immediately but could not mark gains until they sold. Under the new rules, fair value changes flow directly through earnings each quarter. That change removes one of the biggest structural barriers to corporate Bitcoin adoption.
The US political environment is also supportive in a way it has not been before. Ongoing discussions about a potential US Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, while still at an early stage, signal a governmental posture toward Bitcoin that is favorable to institutional adoption. The SEC’s March 17 token taxonomy formally classified Bitcoin as a digital commodity, placing it outside securities law and giving institutional investors the regulatory clarity they needed to justify full allocation programs. The environment for corporate and institutional Bitcoin accumulation in 2026 is the most supportive it has ever been.
Conclusion: Two Models, One Asset, One Direction
The race between BlackRock and Strategy is, at its core, a story about two different answers to the same investment thesis: Bitcoin’s supply is fixed, demand is growing, and the best time to accumulate is before the next supply-driven price cycle peaks.
BlackRock answers that thesis through distribution. It built a product that lets millions of investors participate without the friction of direct ownership. Its scale comes from the market’s willingness to buy IBIT shares. Its accumulation is democratic in the sense that it reflects collective investor demand.
Strategy answers that thesis through conviction. It built a company that raises capital through every financial instrument available and routes all of it into Bitcoin. Its accumulation is relentless and independent of market sentiment cycles. It does not wait for investors to bring it capital. It goes out and gets it.
Neither model is inherently superior. Both are adding Bitcoin to institutional vaults at a pace that the market has never seen before. Both are accelerating the supply absorption that underpins the long-term Bitcoin investment thesis. And both are doing it in a way that raises the floor of institutional commitment to the asset, making a complete reversal progressively more difficult as the holdings grow.
Who holds more Bitcoin on any given day matters far less than what the combined force of both of these entities does to Bitcoin’s long-term market structure. That force is enormous. It is accelerating. And it shows no sign of slowing down.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1. Who currently holds more Bitcoin, BlackRock or Strategy?
As of March 16, 2026, BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust holds 784,062 Bitcoin, while Strategy holds 761,068 Bitcoin. The gap is approximately 22,994 coins. At Strategy’s recent buying pace of roughly 2,881 Bitcoin per day, the company could close that gap within days, provided BlackRock’s ETF inflows do not accelerate significantly.
2. Does BlackRock actually own the Bitcoin in IBIT?
No. BlackRock holds Bitcoin on behalf of IBIT shareholders, not for itself. When investors buy IBIT shares, authorized participants purchase Bitcoin and deliver it to the fund. The Bitcoin economically belongs to the shareholders who own IBIT shares. If all IBIT shares were redeemed, the Bitcoin would flow back to the market. BlackRock earns a 0.25% annual management fee for operating the fund.
3. How does Strategy raise money to buy Bitcoin?
Strategy uses three main capital-raising tools: convertible senior notes, which are debt instruments that convert into MSTR stock at the holder’s option; at-the-market equity offerings, where the company sells new MSTR shares into the open market; and preferred stock instruments, most recently the STRC preferred share that pays an 11.5% annualized yield and generates capital used exclusively for Bitcoin purchases. All proceeds are directed toward buying and holding Bitcoin.
4. What is mNAV, and why does it matter for MSTR investors?
mNAV stands for market-to-net-asset-value ratio. It compares Strategy’s market capitalization to the market value of its Bitcoin holdings. When mNAV is above 1.0x, Strategy’s stock trades at a premium to the Bitcoin it owns. That premium allows Strategy to sell new equity and buy more Bitcoin per share than it dilutes. When mNAV compresses toward 1.0x or below, that accretive dynamic weakens or disappears. As of mid-March 2026, MSTR’s mNAV had compressed from its 2024 peak of 3.4x to approximately 1.20x.
5. Is MSTR or IBIT a better investment for retail investors?
These are different investment products designed for different risk tolerances. IBIT provides direct Bitcoin price tracking, minus a 0.25% annual fee, with no corporate risk and no leverage. MSTR provides leveraged Bitcoin exposure with additional corporate risk factors including debt obligations, dilution from equity issuances, and dependency on the mNAV premium. Investors seeking Bitcoin exposure with lower volatility and no corporate-specific risk should consider IBIT. Investors seeking amplified upside who are comfortable with higher risk should research MSTR thoroughly. This is not investment advice, and readers should consult a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions.
6. What is Strategy’s 42/42 plan?
The 42/42 plan is Strategy’s capital raise target announced in late 2024. The company aims to raise $42 billion through equity issuances and $42 billion through fixed income securities by 2027, with all proceeds directed toward Bitcoin purchases. If the plan succeeds, analysts project Strategy’s Bitcoin holdings could approach one million coins. As of early 2026, the equity portion of the plan was largely complete, and the company was executing on its fixed income and preferred share issuance program.
7. What happens to IBIT if Bitcoin’s price falls sharply?
If Bitcoin’s price falls sharply, IBIT investors see the value of their shares fall in proportion. Some investors may redeem shares, which causes IBIT to sell Bitcoin back to the market, further reducing the fund’s holdings. However, BlackRock itself does not face financial distress from a Bitcoin price drop because it does not own the Bitcoin in the fund. BlackRock’s fee revenue would decline as IBIT’s assets under management shrank, but BlackRock’s own balance sheet would not be impaired. IBIT’s structure protects BlackRock from the liquidation risk that a corporate balance sheet like Strategy’s carries.
8. How does IBIT’s continuous inflow streak affect the BlackRock vs. Strategy race?
Since March 9, 2026, IBIT has recorded positive net inflows every single day. That means the target Strategy needs to reach keeps moving higher. If IBIT takes in 2,000 new Bitcoin per day while Strategy buys 2,881, the net closing rate is only around 881 Bitcoin per day, extending the timeline for Strategy to surpass BlackRock significantly. The race’s outcome depends not just on Strategy’s buying pace but on whether IBIT’s inflows slow, stabilize, or accelerate.
9. Could Strategy’s model collapse if Bitcoin’s price falls enough?
Research firms including VanEck and BeInCrypto have analyzed Strategy’s liquidation risk. The company has structured its convertible debt with long maturities to avoid near-term forced selling. However, if Bitcoin sustains a fall below approximately $40,000 and stays there for an extended period, Strategy’s ability to service or refinance its debt would face serious pressure. A fall below approximately $20,000, while historically rare, would create much more severe stress on the company’s capital structure. Strategy also maintains a cash buffer equivalent to approximately 23 months of STRC preferred dividends to provide a near-term safety net without touching its Bitcoin holdings.
10. What does the institutional Bitcoin accumulation race mean for regular Bitcoin investors?
The sustained accumulation of Bitcoin by BlackRock, Strategy, and other institutional players removes coins from the available supply on exchanges. Exchange Bitcoin inventories have declined steadily as ETF and corporate treasury demand has grown. This supply absorption creates structural upward price pressure over time, which benefits all Bitcoin holders. It also increases Bitcoin’s correlation with institutional financial market cycles, as large institutional players now have significant positions that they manage alongside traditional portfolios. For retail investors, the institutional race represents validation of Bitcoin’s role as a macro-level asset class, but also means Bitcoin price behavior is increasingly influenced by factors beyond the crypto-native market.
Disclaimer
This article is published for informational and editorial purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. The data and analysis presented reflect publicly available information as of March 18, 2026. Bitcoin prices, corporate holdings, and ETF inflows are subject to rapid change. Past performance of any investment product does not guarantee future results. Strategy (MSTR) and IBIT are different investment instruments with distinct risk profiles. Readers should conduct their own due diligence and consult a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. Neither the author nor the publisher holds positions in any of the instruments discussed in this article.
BlackRock vs. Strategy: Who Will Win the Bitcoin Accumulation Battle? was originally published in Coinmonks on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.
