Y’all sold?!?!

Good luck to England tonight 😶‍🌫️

Not gonna lie, this hurts. Still short

And if that support fails it'll plummet to $16K, and if that support fails it'll only slow down at $6K, then when that support fails it pauses at $3k for a brief moment before falling down to $1K, then the next support is not even very strong at $700, and then it'll blast right through that down to probably $200 or so, and when that support breaks it'll be the writing on the wall for it to crash right down to $30 again and then when its back in the low 2 digits people will realize i've been right all along and it'll go to zero. My 2011 prediction will prove to just be really, really early. 😆😘

Strategy needs Bitcoin to go up, yet it is going to sell a bunch of Bitcoin? Make it make sense.

What to expect at $STRC $60.

I was on a podcast yesterday and it crystallized something here. I actually don't think Strategy's immediate problem is financial. I think it's branding. The brilliance of Saylor's original strategy wasn't just that he discovered an interesting way to finance Bitcoin purchases. It was that he built an incredibly compelling narrative around it. It was a David versus Goliath story that fit perfectly with the ethos of Bitcoin itself. The implicit message was: "Wall Street has been engineering products to benefit itself for decades. We found a glitch in the system. Bitcoin's volatility lets us sell converts to sophisticated institutional arbitrage funds, and we're using that to benefit common shareholders." Whether you agreed with the trade or not almost didn't matter. The story was coherent. Retail investors felt like they were finally sitting on the winning side of financial engineering instead of the losing side. The problem is that stories evolve as markets evolve. As Bitcoin appreciated and volatility compressed, the economics of issuing converts became less compelling. That's just how markets work. The edge narrows as an asset matures. At that point, Strategy had a choice. It could slow down, wait for better opportunities, or move further out the capital structure with increasingly complex preferred securities. To me, that's where the narrative changed. I'm not arguing the preferreds are necessarily good or bad investments. I'm saying they changed the perceived alignment. The story stopped feeling like David taking on Goliath and started feeling more like one group of investors financing another. In finance, perception matters because perception becomes brand, and brand becomes access to capital. One of the oldest lessons in business is that just because you can monetize a brand doesn't mean you should. Brand isn't created by extracting the maximum value today. It's created by leaving people wanting to come back tomorrow. That's why I think this is fundamentally a branding discussion, not just a balance sheet discussion. Harry Singleton, John Malone, and other legendary capital allocators all understood that capital structure arbitrage can create extraordinary shareholder value. But they also understood that credibility is an asset. Once the market stops believing your narrative, every future financing becomes more expensive. That's why I think Strategy faces two different clocks. The long-term question is whether there's eventually a debt wall. The short-term question is whether the brand that made the strategy possible starts to erode first. Ironically, that may end up being the more important risk.

I don’t see a way out of this for them without selling a truckload of BTC.

Me riding to zero instead of panic selling for a loss

Selling STRC at $100 and buying it back at $75 is accretive to MSTR shareholders, no?

You clearly don't know how this works. STRC being below $100 means the yield must rise and rise significantly. If STRC or the others rise to 30% literally it's going to bankrupt the company due to payments.

I like Nic and generally agree with a lot of his work, but I think he's using the wrong framework here. This isn't a CCC bond. It's a distressed special situations security. I've spent the better part of two decades in distressed credit and roughly the last 12 years buying distressed crypto. I've competed with or worked alongside many of the largest distressed investors. When I ask myself who the marginal buyer of STRC is today, it isn't a traditional high-yield fund. It's an opportunistic credit fund. Those funds don't wake up looking for 15% returns. They generally need 30%+ IRRs before they commit capital to something this uncertain. Today you can buy: • Government refund claims targeting 10-15% IRRs. • Distressed crypto claims with recoveries denominated in dollars and often substantial collateral protection for 20-25%+ IRRs. STRC is riskier than both. You're subordinated. There are essentially no meaningful lender protections. The dividend is non-cumulative. The collateral is one volatile asset. There is negative convexity. And unlike a traditional distressed loan, you don't control the collateral or have meaningful enforcement rights. This isn't lending against Bitcoin. It's taking directional Bitcoin exposure through a structurally weak preferred security. There's an important distinction people miss. Common shareholders have a fiduciary relationship with management. Creditors don't. Management's job is to obtain the cheapest possible financing for shareholders - not to create an attractive security for creditors. To Strategy's credit, they did exactly that. They issued extraordinarily issuer-friendly paper because the market let them. Good for them! But once that paper leaves the hands of income-oriented crypto investors, who is the next buyer? That's the question. I think it's an opportunistic distressed investor. And that buyer isn't showing up for a 15-20% required return. They're looking for something closer to a 30%+ IRR. At an 11.5% coupon, that implies a price of roughly $38.33 (11.5 ÷ 30%), versus about $76.67 for a 15% yield and $57.50 for a 20% yield. Maybe 30% isn't exactly the right number. Maybe it's 35%. Maybe it's 40%. But I think anchoring this off CCC spreads misses who the actual marginal buyer is.