MicroStrategy Buys $250M in Bitcoin, Calling the Crypto ‘Superior to Cash’

[nikola22]

Strategy sold 4 818 781 MSTR shares between July 6 and July 12 buy did not buy or sell bitcoin during the period. Proceeds from the MSTR sales were used to boost Strategy's USD reserve by $450 million to $3 billion as of July 12.

8-K filing for SEC: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1050446/000119312526301483/mstr-20260713.htm



https://x.com/saylor/status/2076638696053276748

Strategy has therefore retained its bitcoin holdings at 843 775 BTC worth around $53 billion bought at an average price of $75 476 per coin.

[WillyAp]

Strategy has therefore retained its bitcoin holdings at 843 775 BTC worth around $53 billion bought at an average price of $75 476 per coin.

When selling coins the average price is meaningless.
Buy at 11 000 and selling at 125000 is a killer. Everything above 25 000 is actually.
 

[Free Market Capitalist]

Proceeds from the MSTR sales were used to boost Strategy's USD reserve by $450 million to $3 billion as of July 12.

Rather than just parroting the marketing pitch used to sell this move, it would be good to take a critical look at it. And my take is that he keeps diluting shareholders’ stakes as if there were no tomorrow, in an attempt to fix his previous screw-ups.

[Ambatman]

Rather than just parroting the marketing pitch used to sell this move, it would be good to take a critical look at it. And my take is that he keeps diluting shareholders’ stakes as if there were no tomorrow, in an attempt to fix his previous screw-ups.

I recall that he stated in the past that they would issue new shares only when they were valued at premium compared to Bitcoin.
Another thing he has failed to keep
Like it cost the shareholders more now when the value of their Bitcoin is more than how they are valued.
He would argue that EV is higher
But I disagree with that
It's the common shareholders that are getting diluted not the debt holders.
To him they are trading on premium via EV but from simple marketcap they below.

[Taskford]

Proceeds from the MSTR sales were used to boost Strategy's USD reserve by $450 million to $3 billion as of July 12.

Rather than just parroting the marketing pitch used to sell this move, it would be good to take a critical look at it. And my take is that he keeps diluting shareholders’ stakes as if there were no tomorrow, in an attempt to fix his previous screw-ups.

It seems that currently those dilutions they made make it looks like less strategy on their side and it leaves impression that they are doing damage control. Instead of taking responsibilities of those mistakes made or happen.

What they did is they keep issuing new shares to cover up their mess and as always the burden or troubles always end ups with their share holders, which in first place they are not the one make those problems.

[nikola22]

President and CEO Phong Le said that Strategy has no plans to stop buying bitcoin despite its recent sales and would only begin considering risks associated with its debt if bitcoin falls to around $8,000-$10,000.

"We're not going anywhere," Le said in a Bloomberg TV interview on Tuesday afternoon. "My objective would be the largest buyer of bitcoin for the foreseeable future."

You can find more details here: https://x.com/phongle/status/2077121655596282287

[boumalo]

It's messy.
Now they sell as well as buy.
But to be honest, their financial situation is not dire for at least 12 months and as long as BTC stays upward of 30K which is likely. If BTC rises to 80-90-100K, they're even in a great situation.

[Alex077]

It's messy.
Now they sell as well as buy.
But to be honest, their financial situation is not dire for at least 12 months and as long as BTC stays upward of 30K which is likely. If BTC rises to 80-90-100K, they're even in a great situation.

Michael Saylor's latest post on X says it all: "People keep giving me advice." 
https://x.com/saylor/status/2077691849393737945
He's basically referring to all the people who've spent the last few years telling him to sell Bitcoin, stop issuing shares and debt, cut leverage, diversify, and so on.
His chart is essentially saying, "I ignored the advice-and so far, the numbers speak for themselves."
And of course, there's a bit of cherry-picking here since everything depends on the time frame. If you only look at 2026, the comparison isn't nearly as impressive. And there have definitely been periods when stocks like NVIDIA, Palantir, or CoreWeave delivered even stronger returns than MSTR.

But overall, Saylor's argument is still a pretty strong one. So far, his strategy has done exactly what he said it would.

[fillippone]

I think we are in a new era for Strategy.
The one where accumulation of Bitcoin is more sensitive to the overall condition of the Society, and the balance of the various stakholders-equity shareholder, credit holders, and the hybrid community overall, have opposing forces on the best decision from the management.
Not buying every week, selling opportunistically, might seem harsh at first, but it is beneficial to the long term benefit of the company, whose fate is well distinguished from that of our mutual orange friend.

[ultrloa]

I think we are in a new era for Strategy.
The one where accumulation of Bitcoin is more sensitive to the overall condition of the Society, and the balance of the various stakholders-equity shareholder, credit holders, and the hybrid community overall, have opposing forces on the best decision from the management.
Not buying every week, selling opportunistically, might seem harsh at first, but it is beneficial to the long term benefit of the company, whose fate is well distinguished from that of our mutual orange friend.

Somehow Strategy need to consider their obligations to their community and also to their share holders, that's why its reasonable for them to made those changes. They need to adopt on the changes happening on the market. That's why maybe this is the reason why currently they need to change their approach with their investment.

Current action like selling which we already seen and slowing down their accumulation may really look harsh, but if we look at the deeper reason. This move is rational if their main intention is to protect their company to stay intact with their long term investment plans on Bitcoin.

[Free Market Capitalist]

If you only look at 2026, the comparison isn't nearly as impressive. And there have definitely been periods when stocks like NVIDIA, Palantir, or CoreWeave delivered even stronger returns than MSTR.

But overall, Saylor's argument is still a pretty strong one. So far, his strategy has done exactly what he said it would.

Why are you lying? Have you cut the image? This is the actual image that anyone can check on

https://www.strategy.com/charts

[Alex077]

If you only look at 2026, the comparison isn't nearly as impressive. And there have definitely been periods when stocks like NVIDIA, Palantir, or CoreWeave delivered even stronger returns than MSTR.
But overall, Saylor's argument is still a pretty strong one. So far, his strategy has done exactly what he said it would.

Why are you lying? Have you cut the image? This is the actual image that anyone can check on
https://www.strategy.com/charts

I think you're being a little unfair. The original post is literally linked. Just click the link, it very simple and compare it yourself. It's the exact same chart-I didn't change a thing.
https://x.com/saylor/status/2077691849393737945
I even said that the chart isn't completely accurate without considering the time frame, and that 2026 hasn't looked nearly as good for Saylor. If you can see I pointed out that companies like NVIDIA, Palantir, and CoreWeave have outperformed MSTR.

Maybe give my post another read. I think you'll see that I already covered what you're talking about.

[Free Market Capitalist]

I think you're being a little unfair. The original post is literally linked. Just click the link, it very simple and compare it yourself. It's the exact same chart-I didn't change a thing.
https://x.com/saylor/status/2077691849393737945
I even said that the chart isn't completely accurate without considering the time frame, and that 2026 hasn't looked nearly as good for Saylor. If you can see I pointed out that companies like NVIDIA, Palantir, and CoreWeave have outperformed MSTR.

Maybe give my post another read. I think you'll see that I already covered what you're talking about.

Ok, so the one lying is Michael Bullshit, as usual. It's not just that he's posting a doctored image that cuts out NVIDIA—it's that when it worked in his favor, he did post the full image, including NVIDIA.

But let's keep debunking his bullshit. It’s okay to make the comparison using a time frame starting from what he calls the “Bitcoin Standard Era.” But the vast majority of people who have invested in his company didn’t do so on August 10, 2020, which is where he begins his calculation.

Let’s compare the last 5 years, which is a standard medium-term timeframe and spans more than one Bitcoin cycle. Here is MSTR’s return:



Now, this is Bitcoin return:



It has been more profitable to buy Bitcoin directly than to buy Michael Bullshit's MSTR.

Now, let's see the Nasdaq 100 for example:



The moral of the story: buy Bitcoin and keep it in cold storage, don't fall for the bullshit.

[Ambatman]

I think we are in a new era for Strategy.
The one where accumulation of Bitcoin is more sensitive to the overall condition of the Society, and the balance of the various stakholders-equity shareholder, credit holders, and the hybrid community overall, have opposing forces on the best decision from the management.
Not buying every week, selling opportunistically, might seem harsh at first, but it is beneficial to the long term benefit of the company, whose fate is well distinguished from that of our mutual orange friend.

It's ironic how one thing we didn't encourage is one of the least harmful path they could take.
I would want to believe this is because it's their first time and they would do better next time
Maybe prioritising Cash reserve during peak periods and purchase during bear season.

But overall, Saylor's argument is still a pretty strong one. So far, his strategy has done exactly what he said it would.

No it hasn't. Imagine how people that bought around the MSTR rally would feel.
He made alot of his strategy around bitcoin always going up and started thinking what if late.

Ok, so the one lying is Michael Bullshit, as usual.

Lol I'm surprised you surprised that Saylor could perform such an act.

The moral of the story: buy Bitcoin and keep it in cold storage, don't fall for the bullshit.

At the end of the day all may fail but this wouldn't.

[fillippone]

I think we are in a new era for Strategy.
The one where accumulation of Bitcoin is more sensitive to the overall condition of the Society, and the balance of the various stakholders-equity shareholder, credit holders, and the hybrid community overall, have opposing forces on the best decision from the management.
Not buying every week, selling opportunistically, might seem harsh at first, but it is beneficial to the long term benefit of the company, whose fate is well distinguished from that of our mutual orange friend.

It's ironic how one thing we didn't encourage is one of the least harmful path they could take.
I would want to believe this is because it's their first time and they would do better next time
Maybe prioritising Cash reserve during peak periods and purchase during bear season.

I think the trigger was the decision to deplete the cash reserve to buy back the credit they issued.
I think this signalled a fear of not being able to repay that debt.
Instad a more balanced, mature approach to bitcoin buying and Bitcoin Yield Accretion is an ultimate benefit to all the stakeholders.

[ultrloa]

I think we are in a new era for Strategy.
The one where accumulation of Bitcoin is more sensitive to the overall condition of the Society, and the balance of the various stakholders-equity shareholder, credit holders, and the hybrid community overall, have opposing forces on the best decision from the management.
Not buying every week, selling opportunistically, might seem harsh at first, but it is beneficial to the long term benefit of the company, whose fate is well distinguished from that of our mutual orange friend.

It's ironic how one thing we didn't encourage is one of the least harmful path they could take.
I would want to believe this is because it's their first time and they would do better next time
Maybe prioritising Cash reserve during peak periods and purchase during bear season.

I think the trigger was the decision to deplete the cash reserve to buy back the credit they issued.
I think this signalled a fear of not being able to repay that debt.
Instad a more balanced, mature approach to bitcoin buying and Bitcoin Yield Accretion is an ultimate benefit to all the stakeholders.

If the company just like Strategy decide to drains their liquidity just to pay their obligations, this usually determines that they don't want to prolong their liabilities to their shareholders. This is also the reason why those steadier approach they made somehow better to everyone and they can maintain their pace on their Bitcoin investment. Somehow this action they made can potentially strengthen up their balance sheet then possible they can grow more their exposure without putting their company in much vulnerable situation. We can really see in their action that they plan this so well. That's why those actions they made didn't much create any issues to their shareholders.

[Ambatman]

This is also the reason why those steadier approach they made somehow better to everyone and they can maintain their pace on their Bitcoin investment. Somehow this action they made can potentially strengthen up their balance sheet then possible they can grow more their exposure without putting their company in much vulnerable situation. We can really see in their action that they plan this so well. That's why those actions they made didn't much create any issues to their shareholders.

They didn't
If they did things wouldn't have gone this far that they have to sell Bitcoin to satisfy their creditors and preference shareholders.
The common stockholders have suffered alot from their dilution through ATM
Even when MSTR wasn't really trading at premium despite their EV showing otherwise.

[Gragebox]

I think the trigger was the decision to deplete the cash reserve to buy back the credit they issued.
I think this signalled a fear of not being able to repay that debt.
Instad a more balanced, mature approach to bitcoin buying and Bitcoin Yield Accretion is an ultimate benefit to all the stakeholders.

In all honesty, liquidating their cash reserves solely for purchasing their own credit was a huge red flag. That alone was a surefire sign of panic as if they were panicking about not being able to pay that debt off in the future. Rather than taking rash decisions, they should look into developing a more measured approach to dealing with their situation. Going slow and steady by concentrating on acquiring Bitcoins as well as investing in Bitcoin Yield Accretion is definitely the way to go.

This is also the reason why those steadier approach they made somehow better to everyone and they can maintain their pace on their Bitcoin investment. Somehow this action they made can potentially strengthen up their balance sheet then possible they can grow more their exposure without putting their company in much vulnerable situation. We can really see in their action that they plan this so well. That's why those actions they made didn't much create any issues to their shareholders.

They didn't
If they did things wouldn't have gone this far that they have to sell Bitcoin to satisfy their creditors and preference shareholders.
The common stockholders have suffered alot from their dilution through ATM
Even when MSTR wasn't really trading at premium despite their EV showing otherwise.

That's exactly right, and that's why things got so out of hand. They would not have found themselves in this awful position of having to sell their Bitcoin just to appease the creditors and preference shareholders if only they had used some maturity. It is a complete disaster, and it is the common stockholders who will suffer the most from all of this.

Another problem, which just adds insult to injury is that there was really no premium attached to their shares despite the fact that MSTR seemed to be trading at a premium according to its Enterprise Value. It didn't add up in reality. The common stockholders ended up losing out while the managers were trying to clean up their balance sheet problems.

[Free Market Capitalist]

They didn't
If they did things wouldn't have gone this far that they have to sell Bitcoin to satisfy their creditors and preference shareholders.
The common stockholders have suffered alot from their dilution through ATM
Even when MSTR wasn't really trading at premium despite their EV showing otherwise.

It's just like that. It's a problem I run into a lot. Now that the topic of strategy has become trendy, you can find several threads besides this one on the subject, where people come in and spout off a long rant that, at first glance, makes some sense, but if you know the subject, you realize that the person who wrote it lacks basic knowledge.

I just laugh it off now.

[nikola22]

there have been a lot of critics of Saylor's actions lately. now he's asking for your advice "What's next?"  



https://x.com/saylor/status/2078821350114824461