pull down to refresh

So its just going to be diluting existing shareholders.... that sounds like a terrible idea....
No, it's all about bitcoin/share. The dividends are about 10%/y whilst BTC continues to accrete at an average of 50% per year. That's a 40% margin/y, i.e. a very good business.
Also understand that on the initial purchase the bitcoin/share increased significantly without any cost or dilution.
reply
33 sats \ 2 replies \ @freetx 8h
Exactly. Its a balancing act. As long as bitcoin-per-share keeps increasing above the dilution rate then in theory shareholders are still happy.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @euthymic 7h
No. Ironically, MSTR is the ponzi scheme that no-coiners claim BTC represents.
reply
You've been listening too much to denlilapan. There's no evidence it is a ponzi. As long as Bitcoin outperforms the dividend yield it's a profitable business.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @euthymic 7h
Small point: Bitcoin doesn't accrete. Accrete means to 'grow by accumulation or coalescence'. Bitcoin just rises in nominal USD terms as the currency is devalued.
Big point: the market is realizing BTC per share doesn't matter. MSTR shareholders have no claims to the underlying, and Microstrategy will never realize gains (they have stated they never plan to sell their BTC), so 'btc per share' is, at best, a song and dance. Microstrategy will also continue to issue common stock to fund their dividends in perpetuity - a disaster for MSTR holders.
This is coming from someone who held a sizeable MSTR position up until recently. Look out below.
reply
It accretes in dollar value which is the unit of account of the dividends. That's the only math that needs to check out. It's not a linguistic problem.
If you say the shareholders don't have claims to the underlying then basically you're against the stock market as a whole. To me it seems that most people who got rich owned some kind of business whether public or private. It's been working rather well for the last couple of hundred years.
reply