Author: 100y

Translation: Deep Tide TechFlow

Deep Tide Introduction: While Saylor shouts to increase the BTC per share content, he issues stocks at prices below the breakeven point, and only uses half of the raised funds to buy BTC—this is not buying the dip against the trend; it is subsidizing the sustainability of STRC with the interests of MSTR shareholders. For MSTR investors, understanding the logic behind this transaction is more important than focusing on how much BTC was purchased.

Saylor first sold 32 BTC and then bought 1,550 BTC today.

I do not want the Strategy to fail. But some points need to be made clear.

This is one of the worst transactions.

On the surface, this transaction looks great. The Strategy bought a large amount of BTC at a recent low point and even increased the dollar reserves for preferred stock dividends from 900 million to 1 billion dollars.

Is this the resurrection of the Strategy?

If you think this is good news, it shows you do not understand the Strategy.

1. You need to understand the breakeven mNAV

One of the core goals of the Strategy is to increase the BTC per share content (BPS) for MSTR shareholders.

The method to increase BPS is simple: issue common stock at a premium and then use the raised funds to buy BTC.

So, how high a premium is needed for MSTR to truly increase BPS through ATM issuance?

According to the Q1 2026 earnings call, the mNAV needs to be above 1.22.

This is called the "breakeven mNAV".

This concept comes from a simple condition: the BTC that can be bought by selling 1 share of MSTR must be greater than the existing amount of BTC corresponding to each share of MSTR.

The complete derivation process can be referred to in my previous articles.

In the end, the calculation method for breakeven mNAV is as follows:

By the way, the current breakeven mNAV is no longer 1.22.

Based on the data before this purchase of 1,550 BTC, my calculated result is 1.30.

2. The worst transaction

Now back to the Strategy's purchase of 1,550 BTC.

The Strategy raised 181 million dollars through MSTR's ATM issuance, of which 101.3 million dollars was used to purchase 1,550 BTC.

Here are two issues:

First, it seems that MSTR's ATM issuance occurred at a price below 1.30 mNAV. If stocks are sold to buy BTC at a price below breakeven mNAV, it is not increasing BPS, but diluting it.

Second, this is the key: not all funds raised through ATM are used to purchase BTC. The entire concept of breakeven mNAV is based on the premise that 100% of the raised funds are used to buy BTC. Even if mNAV is sufficiently high, if only part of the funds flow into BTC, this transaction may still lower BPS.

The Strategy seems to have supplemented the remaining unused funds into dollar reserves.

In other words: the Strategy sacrificed MSTR shareholders' shares and BPS to maintain the sustainability of STRC.

In fact, after this transaction, the Strategy's BPS decreased by about 0.19% compared to before the transaction.

What did they gain?

The available time for dollar reserves extended from about 6.3 months to 7 months.

3. The Strategy's Gamble

"Our goal is to promote the increase of the BTC per share content, and we are doing everything we can to promote the increase of the BTC per share content."

This was said by Michael Saylor during the Q1 2026 earnings call.

But in this transaction, the Strategy sacrificed MSTR's BPS for STRC.

The Strategy has already rolled the dice.

If sacrificing BPS can reverse market sentiment, restore STRC prices, and pull back mNAV, then the Strategy can continue to raise funds through MSTR and STRC's ATM issuance.

But what if sentiment does not improve?

Then the Strategy may have no choice but to continue sacrificing MSTR.

In the worst-case scenario, either delay the distribution of STRC dividends...

or slowly bleed out.

Pray that BTC, MSTR, and STRC can bounce back.

Amen.