Treasurer North Dakota Skateboarding Association. Government auditor. Local events calendar. MSTR fixed income security suite engineer.
Joined November 2012
- Tweets10.8K
- Following243
- Followers581
- Likes16.1K
How do so many people have no idea who Michael Saylor is. I always forget how small our community is.
Alec retweeted
I read it. You're right that the 156% isn't yours. What your share gains is the only number that counts
But the 30% isn't the final count. At 1x, issuing common can't add anything per share, so your hypothetical turns off that engine. In practice these usually trade above 1x, where issuing common grows each share's sats on the spot. And the assets funded with preferred are stored leverage, paying the common if Bitcoin outruns the dividend
I hold these companies to grow my exposure to Bitcoin, not to the dollar. My bet as a Bitcoiner is that maximizing that exposure wins in any denomination over the long run
Alec retweeted
*Taps sign*
Are you seriously asking if there is a difference between filling every bid and filling a trickle of bids?
You’re basically asking: ‘Is there a difference between 1-2% and 90-100%?’
Also, British, where is your statistical analysis or regression model that supports your disagreement with this analysis? I have seen Adrian’s, but oddly I have never seen the regression model of an ATM doomer posted to support their position arguing against statistical modeling.
Weird, how that happens.
I want my portion of MSTR to remain the same or higher as a percent of the outstanding shares. In parallel, I want those same shares to be worth more priced in Bitcoin.
I don’t want price appreciation of my shares in fiat terms, I want it in Bitcoin terms.
Call me old fashioned, and I unfortunately do not yet have kids of my own, but the idea that I would force other people to pay for my childrens’ meals is absolutely abhorrent to me.
I have no idea how any parent could justify forcing someone else to take responsibility for feeding their child.
If we’re going to make school lunches free, will adults also be able to attend to get free lunch, too? I mean, by arguing against that you’re supporting making hungry people starve, which is morally and ethically wrong.
Plus when you think about it, adults don’t have anyone to look after them and be responsible for them, so there’s an argument to be made that adults should be the ones getting free lunches, not students who have parents that are presumably responsible for them. Unless we are saying that parents are not responsible for feeding their children, which is completely insane.
Interesting that this is where we are. I will be voting no on ND measure 2.
Honestly, why stop at children, do these people seriously think it’s ok to let adults go without food? Are they saying adults don’t deserve to be fed free lunch? What about afternoon tea?
Why stop at afternoon tea, let’s make all meals free, to everyone! After all, no one deserves to go hungry!!!
I love satire.
If parents can’t find a way to send lunch along with the kids or cough up the $500-1000 per year to buy school lunches, can we reasonably expect these same parents to be acting comprehensively in the care of their children? Probably not.
Why stop at giving them free lunch? We probably need to give all children on campus bedrooms, toothbrushes, floss, shoes, clothes, medical/dental/optical care, you know, all the stuff that parents should be responsible for, the state should just give it to them as a handout. I’m sure that will drive the proper incentives.
Just think of the children!!!!
Alec retweeted
Strategy Q3 2026 Earnings Call xitter.gq/i/broadcasts/1dKrPrXyY…
Alec retweeted
I estimate that once reinsurance of STRC begins it will take about 5 weeks to reissue the $1.65 billion of shares of STRC Strategy bought back.
Bids below par —> nothing at $100 —> issuance above
In my estimation supporting this prediction:
20% of volume is Strategy’s bids below $100, 10% at par, leaving 70% of volume as issuance at $100.01.
Math in millions:
$650 per week volume (notional) based on 10 week average volume.
70% = $455
$455 per week netted against the bought back 20% of the $650, which is $130, giving us $325 net issuance per week
1,650/325=5.08
5 weeks. Tick tock.
This analysis brought to you by Alec.
Alec retweeted
Link to Napkin Math I did 2 weeks ago applicable to @hillery_dan ‘s answer to @MasonFoard ‘s question, “do you think they [@Strategy] keep a constant bid on $STRC even after it hits par, or do you think once it hits par we have completed the mission…”
You can infer my answer.
I estimate that once reinsurance of STRC begins it will take about 5 weeks to reissue the $1.65 billion of shares of STRC Strategy bought back.
Bids below par —> nothing at $100 —> issuance above
In my estimation supporting this prediction:
20% of volume is Strategy’s bids below $100, 10% at par, leaving 70% of volume as issuance at $100.01.
Math in millions:
$650 per week volume (notional) based on 10 week average volume.
70% = $455
$455 per week netted against the bought back 20% of the $650, which is $130, giving us $325 net issuance per week
1,650/325=5.08
5 weeks. Tick tock.
This analysis brought to you by Alec.