Bitcoin and Michael Saylor fud

[Free Market Capitalist]

No one said MSTR and BTC are pegged one to another in 1 to 1 ratio, so you can spare the condescension.

Actually, I'm not going to spare it. You can spare the strawman.

The 40% drop you've referenced was largely due to MSTR's massive net asset value compressing.

Saylors primary metric for success has always been Bitcoin yield per share. As long as his treasury is expanding, he's absolutely going to be smiling.

BTC yield was 22.8% in 2025, so it seems that according to you he was smiling when BTC went down 7% while MSTR went down 50% in the same year, in spite of that smiley BTC yield.

BTC yield keeps growing and according to you he keeps smiling like here:

Michael Saylor | The Bitcoin Treasury Debate Gets Heated

[Dogedegen]

people always try to compare microstrategy with those small treasuries that have no real plan but its not the same. saylor has made it clear they arent trading they are building a financial structure based on bitcoin. that fud about them selling is old and always turns out to be fake. as long as they have the cash flow price drops are just noise for people looking for quick gains.

Yes unfortunately these are the kinds of things that we have to deal with on almost a daily basis. If we took this to any other sphere of the technology world, such comparisons and articles would be ridiculed. Just think if someone were claiming that they know what would happen to Apple based on what happened to some phone producing company that has a total yearly revenue of $5m.  I mean if such a person was called a journalist and I was the editor, I would fire them on the spot. Simultaneously we have to accept these kinds of comparisons quite frequently from the massive media and other people that call themselves journalists or researchers.

My post about Saylor and Strategy: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5573639.msg66395921#msg66395921

I think that in fact the best move the entire Bitcoin community can make is to shake off Saylor by intentionally pushing down the price to $1000 / Bitcoin. He would lose everything and will be forced to sell all the Bitcoin to payback the banks what he owns. Saylor and Strategy is a significant, I would even say the most dangerous thing happened to Bitcoin. 

I don't know if you are trolling or not, but I can't accept that this is a serious post. Nobody benefits from a $1000 Bitcoin here, and the benefits of shaking off Saylor do not outweigh the damage that would be done to Bitcoin. Because of that your idea is not welcome.

It can be argued that it will be concerning if 1 company begins controlling a big percentage of bitcoin, however, on what Michael the Saylor man has said, they will buy bitcoin forever! This is certainly very bullish for the bitcoin market and the cryptospace!

I agree to some point but I also don't. Firstly there were periods in time where the centralization was much worse in terms of holdings, so even if they control a big percentage then we are just oscillating towards some sort of mean value. It was very bad, then it got much better and now it is reaching towards some middle value. Next, Strategy is a corporation that is owned by many entities so even though they are technically the holder of it they represent many owners so it is not like all of this Bitcoin is owned by a single person. Lastly, who is going to stop them? This is the beauty of Bitcoin. If someone wants to do this, they do not need permission from anyone else and nobody can really stop them. What we can only do is not sell our Bitcoin to them.

This is another type of news that certainly can be used to create fud on Michael Saylor. However, these types of news are also the warning signs that we are nearing the bottom! Do not be afraid of the dump! It cannot be very much lower than $60k!
Strategy is under attack by bearish investors after Bitcoin’s price sunk nearly 50% from its October 2025 all-time high.

The world’s largest treasury, led by Bitcoin evangelist Michael Saylor, has become the most shorted large-cap stock in the US, with bearish investors betting against 14% of the company’s entire market capitalisation.

Read in full https://www.dlnews.com/articles/markets/strategy-most-shorted-stock-as-bitcoin-price-nears-70000/

This does not affect Bitcoin or Strategy's Bitcoin holdings. The risk is not related to the price of the stock.

I don't know it is already nearly the market bottom but I see $60k price is very good price for entry and accumulation, especially with people who are applying Dollar Cost Averaging strategy.

Nobody really is able to know whether this is the bottom or not, we will only know this in hindsight. Some people will pretend that they knew the whole times, and others will be correct because of pure chance but they will not admit this. Be careful of those that claim that they can accurately tell whether something is the bottom, top and so.

BTC yield was 22.8% in 2025, so it seems that according to you he was smiling when BTC went down 7% while MSTR went down 50% in the same year, in spite of that smiley BTC yield.

You are right about that but it is primarily because MSTR was very overvalued. I think it was a hyped up thing that comes in phases for different things in the cryptocurrency world. We've seen it happen with NFTs, Ordinals, and many other things moving back into the past. In terms of hype you could compare it to something like the most popular NFT at the time. Even those lost a lot of value since those peak inflated values.

[Sandra_hakeem]

The 40% drop you've referenced was largely due to MSTR's massive net asset value compressing.

Saylors primary metric for success has always been Bitcoin yield per share. As long as his treasury is expanding, he's absolutely going to be smiling.

BTC yield was 22.8% in 2025, so it seems that according to you he was smiling when BTC went down 7% while MSTR went down 50% in the same year, in spite of that smiley BTC yield.

The irony behind this statement is clear. It's either melinoe doesn't understand that MSTR operates in tandem with the volatility of Bitcoin and/or he just wanted to defend his shredded point about the 'smiley face' thing. With their current equity, they better make plans on how to pay up people's dividend.

BTC yield keeps growing and according to you he keeps smiling like here:
Michael Saylor | The Bitcoin Treasury Debate Gets Heated

Everyone knows Saylor bought those coins recently, with the leverage to prove a point; not because they had any paper profit, but so the public wouldn't lose faith after that huge slash. He literally tried to make everything sound right for 2hrs straight.

[Dogedegen]

The 40% drop you've referenced was largely due to MSTR's massive net asset value compressing.

Saylors primary metric for success has always been Bitcoin yield per share. As long as his treasury is expanding, he's absolutely going to be smiling.

BTC yield was 22.8% in 2025, so it seems that according to you he was smiling when BTC went down 7% while MSTR went down 50% in the same year, in spite of that smiley BTC yield.

The irony behind this statement is clear. It's either melinoe doesn't understand that MSTR operates in tandem with the volatility of Bitcoin and/or he just wanted to defend his shredded point about the 'smiley face' thing. With their current equity, they better make plans on how to pay up people's dividend.

I don't think that you have understood the point of the issue. The stock did drop a lot exactly because of what he said, it was overvalued and its net asset value also compressed a lot. In addition to that he is correct to state the thing about Saylor's primary metric, that is the one that they have widely been using for a long time. The primary goal is to expand the Bitcoin yield per share and then subsequently also reduce the risk involved as time allows it. They have a lot of equity and they even bought reserves to guarantee the dividend payout for several years from today, so I don't know why you bring that up as if it were a big problem today. The dividend situation has been resolved for several years, and the debt is not in any amount or terms that would pose a big issue except under some extremely negative BTC circumstances. I am pretty sure that the whole team that is working on these things with Strategy is much smarter than internet users.

BTC yield keeps growing and according to you he keeps smiling like here:
Michael Saylor | The Bitcoin Treasury Debate Gets Heated

Everyone knows Saylor bought those coins recently, with the leverage to prove a point; not because they had any paper profit, but so the public wouldn't lose faith after that huge slash. He literally tried to make everything sound right for 2hrs straight.

They have been using leverage to buy coins the whole time, the whole thing that they have been doing can be seen as leveraging the financial system to buy more coins. So I have no idea why you bring it up as criticism as it is misplaced and wrong. They continue to acquire, they continue to be convinced, only online internet people seem to be doubting and scared all the time.

[Free Market Capitalist]

They have a lot of equity and they even bought reserves to guarantee the dividend payout for several years from today, so I don't know why you bring that up as if it were a big problem today. The dividend situation has been resolved for several years,

That's not entirely true. At the moment, cash reserves cover about 2.5 years of dividend payments, but we mustn't forget that every time they sell a share of STRC or any other preferred stock, they increase the future dividend payments so that reserve gets smaller in relation. Incidentally, these cash reserves were obtained through a dilutive move, as Saylor himself acknowledged, because they had to sell common stock through the ATM to accumulate those cash reserves.

Besides, no matter how much they want to promote STRC, it is crystal clear to anyone who knows anything about finance that it is a junk preferred stock. The high dividend alone should make that clear, but if you do your research and realize what that dividend is based on, you would never even consider buying that preferred stock.

[Dogedegen]

They have a lot of equity and they even bought reserves to guarantee the dividend payout for several years from today, so I don't know why you bring that up as if it were a big problem today. The dividend situation has been resolved for several years,

That's not entirely true. At the moment, cash reserves cover about 2.5 years of dividend payments, but we mustn't forget that every time they sell a share of STRC or any other preferred stock, they increase the future dividend payments so that reserve gets smaller in relation. Incidentally, these cash reserves were obtained through a dilutive move, as Saylor himself acknowledged, because they had to sell common stock through the ATM to accumulate those cash reserves.

Which part is not true? 2.5 years from today is several years. Yes I am not so a big fan of this preferred stock thing, it increases the risk but I expect them to know better what to do with the army of people and advisors that are doing this than random people. It would be better to stop increasing the risk based on where they are today, and if they did that then I would consider this a pretty low risk vehicle. I mean you have to remember that he is doing exactly what he said he will do, and people seem to keep forgetting that. If you believe in Bitcoin as he claims to do, then this is an approach which does work out in a future where Bitcoin has succeeded as he believes it would. If Bitcoin does not or has very long bear markets, obviously it becomes a difficult situation. Whether preferred stock or debt or some other things that don't involve cash balance, there is always going to be some risk. The current setup of Strategy can be at most considered a low risk approach and if they manage to get rid of this preferred stuff and the debt in the future, it can turn into a zero risk approach.

Besides, no matter how much they want to promote STRC, it is crystal clear to anyone who knows anything about finance that it is a junk preferred stock. The high dividend alone should make that clear, but if you do your research and realize what that dividend is based on, you would never even consider buying that preferred stock.

Yet people are still giving him massive amounts of money so to what extent can we consider it a junk? You said that you would never consider buying that preferred stock but it seems that people are doing. Do you mean to state that all buyers of this do not know what they are doing?

[Mate2237]

Michael saylor company strategy is one company, that is committed to Bitcoin so I don't see micro strategy selling their Bitcoin holding due to the current drop in price. What we should know is that most of these rumours we  hear about Bitcoin is not true but they are well calculated attempts in making sure that they discredit Bitcoin.



Some of these news is also targeted at making sure that, the Bitcoin price is controlled by some people with the hopes of benefiting from it. When ever we see news regarding anytime the crypto space we should try and verify it, because some news are not real.

[bbc.reporter]

This article is another fud that makes it appear that this is not fud heheheh. However, I can agree that the danger on one company holding this much bitcoin is the economic influence it might have on bitcoin. This has been an argument raised in Grin's monetary policy proposal.

https://docs.grin.mw/wiki/extra-documents/monetary-policy/

Grin might be a failure, however, the proposal in their monetary policy has good arguments.



Strategy (MSTR), the leading corporate holder of bitcoin, has described the launch of its Perpetual Stretch Preferred Stock (STRC) as the firm’s “iPhone moment,” and despite its support in BTC accumulation, risks remain.

Bullish investors often point out that STRC is well-capitalized and could easily cover dividend payments, given Strategy’s massive 761,068 BTC war chest and more than $2.2 billion in cash reserves. That’s around 50 years of covered dividend payments, while the company can still lower STRC’s dividend over time to further the coverage. On top of that, there are monetization options for the company’s massive bitcoin stash, which could further dividend payments.

The risks, however, aren’t based on dividend coverage at all, according to NYDIG's Cipolaro.

The mechanism STRC uses also creates a stress path. If bitcoin drops and confidence in Strategy’s balance sheet weakens, STRC could slip below par.

To defend the price, the company would need to raise the dividend. Higher payouts increase cash obligations, which can, in turn, worry investors and push the price lower. That feedback loop is a familiar one in credit markets.

In a standard corporate setting, that cycle can end in forced asset sales. Companies may have to sell core holdings to meet rising obligations, locking in losses at the worst time. For Strategy, that would mean selling BTC into a falling market. However, Strategy's Michael Saylor has repeatedly said he won't sell the company's bitcoin stack.

Read in full https://www.coindesk.com/business/2026/03/22/the-genius-and-the-danger-of-strc-how-strategy-s-new-funding-model-bends-so-it-doesn-t-break

[Free Market Capitalist]

Which part is not true? 2.5 years from today is several years.

I said not entirely true, followed by an explanation of how the STRC ATM increases the dividend payments. As a result of the recent sales, the cash reserves only covers 2 years instead of 2.5.

I mean you have to remember that he is doing exactly what he said he will do,

False, I've explained it several times. He said "I will never sell my bitcoin" only to retract and say recently that he will if it makes mathematical sense. He said "people who save in fiat we call them poor" to dilute MSTR shareholders to build a cash reserves.  And I won't go on because these are things I've explained many times, and it's clear that people like you, who only have a superficial understanding of the subject, refuse to get it.

This article is another fud that makes it appear that this is not fud heheheh. H

I don't think it's FUD. The main problem is that STRC's dividend is based on a false premise, and for now,he can pay it out thanks to its access to liquidity but that might change in the future.

He stated before that they would increase if it falls below par

But he didn't say that in isolation; he said it in the context of a 30% CAGR for Bitcoin, which is not happening. Bitcoin's CAGR over the last five years is 6.5%, and Strategy's purchases are of negative return.

He's paying that dividend based on faith.

What I think is that unless the price recovers before the end of the month, he will raise the dividend again based on a negative return of 9% on the underlying asset, when according to his hypothesis it should currently be a total return of 334%. These are really just simple matters of basic statistics, but whenever I watch interviews with Saylor, no one ever brings this up. The inconsistency in the numbers is glaringly obvious.

[bbc.reporter]

@Free Market Capitalist. I cannot argue against your argument because we certainly cannot predict the future, however, if there is a chance that Microstrategy will dump some bitcoin the chance of this will certainly be very low.

According to Polymarket there is only 13% chance that Microstrategy will dump bitcoin by December. I reckon if this will increase to more than 50%, this will be a warning sign.



Source https://polymarket.com/event/microstrategy-sell-any-bitcoin-in-2025

[Free Market Capitalist]

@Free Market Capitalist. I cannot argue against your argument because we certainly cannot predict the future, however, if there is a chance that Microstrategy will dump some bitcoin the chance of this will certainly be very low.

According to Polymarket there is only 13% chance that Microstrategy will dump bitcoin by December. I reckon if this will increase to more than 50%, this will be a warning sign.

I don't think it's very likely that Strategy will have to sell Bitcoin this 2026 either, but I wasn't talking about whether or not it's more likely that he'll sell Bitcoin in 2026—I was talking about the contradiction, one of Saylor's many, of repeating ad nauseam that he won't sell his Bitcoin, only to then admit that he will claiming that he will only do so if it makes mathematical sense. That is, if the mNAV falls below 1—which is quite a complex issue because, for starters, there are several ways to calculate mNAV, and in all of them except the one Saylor uses, it has fallen below 1.

[bbc.reporter]

@Free Market Capitalist. My prediction on the Michael the Saylor man's tactic if it will mathematically make sense to sell bitcoin is be will use this as a type of collateral with favorable terms to borrow more money to buy his stock heheheh.

If he can use his company stock as collateral to buy bitcoin, he can also use bitcoin as collateral to buy his company stock. He will never sell bitcoin.

[Free Market Capitalist]

@Free Market Capitalist. My prediction on the Michael the Saylor man's tactic if it will mathematically make sense to sell bitcoin is be will use this as a type of collateral with favorable terms to borrow more money to buy his stock heheheh.

I don't know about your prediction, I know that's what Strategy's CEO said:

CEO Strategy Phong Le: Selling Bitcoin is possible if necessary

We can sell bitcoin, and we will sell it if necessary to finance dividend payments when valuation falls below one times mNAV

According to Saylor, scepticism that the company cannot or will not sell BTC to pay dividends needs to be dispelled.

He stressed that the company is capable of selling a small portion of its appreciated bitcoin, paying dividends, and still increasing its bitcoin holdings each quarter.

If he can use his company stock as collateral to buy bitcoin, he can also use bitcoin as collateral to buy his company stock. He will never sell bitcoin.

You said the opposite of what Saylor and Phong Le said. Surely you know more than them.

[Dogedegen]

I mean you have to remember that he is doing exactly what he said he will do,

False, I've explained it several times. He said "I will never sell my bitcoin" only to retract and say recently that he will if it makes mathematical sense. He said "people who save in fiat we call them poor" to dilute MSTR shareholders to build a cash reserves.  And I won't go on because these are things I've explained many times, and it's clear that people like you, who only have a superficial understanding of the subject, refuse to get it.

Come on, there is no need to be that misleading over nothing. If we analyzed everything you ever said we would find many times that you have said one thing and done the other. I was referring to his strategy of acquiring as much Bitcoin as possible and leading a Bitcoin first approach, which is what he is doing. They are even taking on too much risk for my own taste all in favor of pursing Bitcoin. How many Bitcoin have you acquired? How many people have you brought into Bitcoin? You are shitting on people who are million times better than you are and there is no need to be a bad person like that. What they are doing is never going to be perfect and it is something that is radically new so mistakes are expected.

@Free Market Capitalist. My prediction on the Michael the Saylor man's tactic if it will mathematically make sense to sell bitcoin is be will use this as a type of collateral with favorable terms to borrow more money to buy his stock heheheh.

Selling an asset is not the same as using it as collateral, so this does not sound correct unless I misunderstood what you are trying to say. If he wants to use Bitcoin as collateral with favorable terms, then that is not a sale.

He will never sell bitcoin.

This is not true, and they have stated that they may do that. You need to check it out, they are as transparent about these things as it gets despite some evil people continuing to trash talk them.

[vanesha]

Michael Sylor is a true crypto philanthropist. Without him, we might never have seen Bitcoin reach $120,000 this year. Michael and Microstrategy have elevated Bitcoin and cryptocurrency to a level not everyone can match. Bitcoin and cryptocurrency are now enjoyed only by those who truly protect them, and only those who follow Michael know for certain what the future holds for crypto in the near future.