This is worth watching. I don't agree with most of it, but I highly respect Mathew Kratter -- who both really understands TradFi, and is a serious Bitcoiner. Let's start with what I agree with - It's much better to actually buy Bitcoin and to learn to self custody than to buy STRC. As Mathew points out 2022 wasn't fun, but it's a learning experience and we made it through it tougher. STRC does not build that understanding or conviction - The ads and promoting DEFI protocols is a bit tacky. Do we really need the Oil Patch Cowboy talking about how STRC "works for him" or Binance pushing STRC backed coins? I would say this is a negative What I don't agree with - MSTR is not likely to ever go bankrupt into a "liquidation frenzy". They simply pause the dividend. STRC and MSTR will both go down, but they can wait it out. The sharehodler gets screwed, but Saylor is in a great position, and just waits. - While "it would be better if people just bought Bitcoin", STRC is a vehicle to get us there faster. This probably will not blow up, will not cause Bitcoin to crash, and will get us to 1MM faster. - The fact that MSTR is in the market is not "why Bitcoin is only $5K higher than previous highs. It is entirely due to OG Bitcoiners selling. We need capital rotation into institutional hands in order to get to the next level.
This tweet is unavailable

Last edited May 31, 2026 · 3:08 PM UTC

46
21
342
54,413
Sort replies: Relevant Recent Liked
Replying to @dotkrueger
Not worth watching with that ridiculous title. The correct video should be “How MSTR Goes To One Trillion And Beyond”
5
37
1,323
the title is ridiculous, i agree.
21
1,148
Replying to @dotkrueger
He was right about the Bitcoin Buddha
3
32
5,427
Replying to @dotkrueger
Thanks, I think it's worth watching, especially if you do not have a corporate finance background. If you do have a corporate finance background, the liquidation waterfall is obvious. Really nothing new. In order of security: Bitcoin: the asset. Debt: the senior claim. Preferred: yield with structure risk. Common: leveraged Bitcoin with capital-stack risk. If the Bitcoin power law holds, a Strategy liquidation spiral is extremely unlikely. Company failure risk: low. Forced Bitcoin liquidation risk: very low. Common-stock impairment risk: real. The key take away is understand where you sit in the capital stack in any of these products before buying.
1
2
22
848
Replying to @dotkrueger
Skin in the Game If $MSTR goes to zero, Saylor loses ~$3.2B. ~68% of his net worth. No one can say he lacks skin in the game. ✅
2
13
880
Replying to @dotkrueger
Maybe he should make a 30 minute video asking all the OGs why they are selling instead of holding the best asset that exists?
1
8
336
Replying to @dotkrueger
krater's right - owning $BTC directly and learning to self-custody beats any tradfi alternative or hosted wallets every time.
30
Replying to @dotkrueger
Some Bitcoiners seem convinced that if everyone would just spend a few hundred hours studying cryptography, multisig setups, and hardware wallets, mass adoption would magically happen. Meanwhile, the real world exists. Most people don’t understand #Bitcoin. Most Bitcoiners don’t understand $MSTR. Yet both groups benefit from a world where Bitcoin reaches more balance sheets, retirement accounts, and institutions. @Saylor recognized something the purists still struggle with: people adopt solutions, not ideologies. #Bitcoin doesn’t need everyone to hold their own keys. It needs everyone to have access.
1
1
13
279
Replying to @dotkrueger
I can’t see a good reason to donate money to Saylor and he takes on 0 risk while all shareholders bare the risk + provide the capital. Mis aligned incentives.
4
9
485
Replying to @dotkrueger
It’s wrong to say Bitcoin “needs” Institutions. Institutions adopting a Bitcoin Ethos and abandoning a Fiat Ethos would be positive Institutions applying a Fiat Ethos to Bitcoin does not help us get to the next level… it undermines and cannibalizes Bitcoin’s Network effect and adoption in real ways.
2
9
472
Replying to @dotkrueger
Matt Kratter is an idealist. Realists understand that Wall St Bitcoin adoption is necessary.
7
302
Replying to @dotkrueger
Fred, What’s your response to the claim that Saylor is falsifying his MNAV by counting $STRC debt-as-stock into the numerator as “enterprise value”? @mattkratter
2
5
613
Replying to @dotkrueger
You buy STRC for income. Bitcoin pays zero income and will always pay zero income. Two investments with completely different goals for your money.
2
6
183
Replying to @dotkrueger
Much more honest and reasoned take. The problem with that guy is he’s smarty and a true bitcoiner so people listen to him like he has all the answers. But he goes into these weird belief systems. Which comes from a good place, but it ends up being far from the truth.
3
4
367
Replying to @dotkrueger
I see this as a bottom signal and I will be buying a shitload more on margin
1
3
179
Replying to @dotkrueger
MSTR bankrupt? Shit no. Saylor just waits. But damn right self custody is the real answer.
2
3
164
Replying to @dotkrueger
Saylor has cannibalized MSTR shareholders to fund the exorbitant rates on his credit instruments. He'll keep issuing new instruments at ever-higher rates, wiping out holders of the earlier ones. It will all end badly.
3
121
Replying to @dotkrueger
Those OG are selling because of the concentration risk represented by MSTR. There would be no other reason to massively sell all at the same time, and keep doing it now that price is down so much.
3
167
Replying to @dotkrueger
This propaganda from the digital gold bugs that it’s all Saylors fault that bitcoin price isn’t higher and that all the flows into STRC would have come into spot is beyond embarrassing. Seriously unhinged, disingenuous people.
2
3
203
Replying to @dotkrueger
Institutional hands financially engineering demand for synthetic Bitcoin proxies extracts and diverts organic demand away from “raw” Bitcoin. This stifles growth of Bitcoin user base which suppresses NGU🤑 I don’t make the rules. That’s how network effects and power law works.
2
2
261
Replying to @dotkrueger
Hey Fred, at (22:10) Kratter says something that no one wants to address — paper Bitcoin. Why is it that you nor any of the many BTC evangelists ever address the elephant in the room — price manipulation via paper Bitcoin. Here’s a show topic for you “Can Bitcoin Survive if Paper Bitcoin Thrives?” You know it, we all (should) know it, there’s rampant price manipulation going on everyday. The same that’s gone on for decades with gold. Remember that JPM paid a $920M CFTC fine in 2020 for manipulating gold. What makes you think that this isn’t happening today with more advanced tools & technology? No one has answered this question. Why don’t you talk about it? Can Bitcoin still win if the price is controlled by rogue actors?
3
210
Replying to @dotkrueger
Saylor holds 818K Bitcoin. Kratter's analysis is sharp, but if Saylor thinks crypto's the move, that's the story—not MSTR.
1
2
86
Replying to @dotkrueger
Grok? x.com/i/grok/share/8ff21f003…

Critically Assess Kratter's thesis Is MSTR likely to be a good investm…

Kratter's thesis is fundamentally sound on the mechanics of capital structure and liquidation priority, but it overstates the near-term probability of MSTR (Strategy) common equity going to zero while underplaying Saylor's operational flexibility and the bullish case for Bitcoin leverage.<grok:render card_id="a1692c" card_type="citation_card" type="render_inline_citation"><argument name="citation_id">5</argument></grok:render><grok:render card_id="613ece" card_type="citation_card" type="render_i…

Answer by Grok
1
2
65
Replying to @dotkrueger
I truly believe the same elite high wealth ppl who were in BTC early then were early investers in ai & spacex. They also sold BTC in the last 2 years. They will use retail as exit liquidity out of ai/spacex. As ai does not Roi causing huge deflation they will have rotated back
2
2
119
Replying to @dotkrueger
Yes Saylor can ride it out. But it's doubtful the stock ever comes back to outperform Bitcoin. That's going to be the key lesson in the next bull market. You can't beat Bitcoin.
2
2
323
Replying to @dotkrueger
better syntax: “(…) who really understands both TradFi, and is (…)”. I was reading again and again trying to find the second person….
1
2
242
Replying to @dotkrueger
This the best the bears got? 🤣
1
2
120
Replying to @dotkrueger
Institutions are the very reason price is now muted. But ya we need more institution involvement. Let’s build more legacy fiat rails on top of btc that’s what we need everybody.
1
2
103
Replying to @dotkrueger
I agree with most of it.
1
1
38
Replying to @dotkrueger
👍
1
1
75
Replying to @dotkrueger
right, they will pause the dividend. This is what most detractors miss. Markets and lenders are smart and understand that this is a multistep/repeated game where reckoning occurs each time dividend has to be paid. Here the fundamental actions saylor can take is - pay, pause, increase, decrease. The 11.5 today is taking a bet against this future EV and saying its a positive EV bet. Thus market already assumes that there is non-zero probability that at some points in the future tree dividends maybe paused. OK? now to think that will come as a rude awakening and company will go to zero is absurd. Yes stock will fall and believers will buy it if future pay offs are positive or turn positive. This possibility exists. Why do you think they're paying you 11.5? bc they love your dumbass?
1
1
477
Replying to @dotkrueger @btc_ireland
agreed 👍🏽
1
54
Replying to @dotkrueger
I asked Grok to assign the risk percentage of this happening: I assign roughly 3–5% probability to MSTR (Strategy common stock) literally going to zero in a realistic timeframe (e.g., the next 3–5 years). This is a low-probability tail risk, not a base or even moderate-bear case.
1
96
Replying to @dotkrueger
Thanks for your analysis. I agree.
1
1
53
Replying to @dotkrueger
It is inevitable that he wont be taken out. Unless "this time is different"
2
1
134
Replying to @dotkrueger
Kudos, Fred!
1
1
41
Load more