527—Lawliet
1.4k Posts
527—Lawliet
🔸 币圈最帅的律师
🔸 在稳定币、RWA、DAT里挖掘财富密码
🔸 波浪理论信徒
Open Trade
BTC Holder
High-Frequency Trader
5.6 Years
7 Following
41 Followers
43 Liked
Posts
Portfolio
I saw a blogger use corporate debt, preferred shares, and cash, converting net senior claims (Senior Claims, SC) into an equivalent amount of BTC at the then/current BTC prices, and made a side-by-side comparison between 2022 and 2026:
In 2022: 130,000 BTC held; SC: 146,735 BTC;
Common equity exposure: −16,735 BTC;
In 2026: 847,363 BTC held; SC: 351,567 BTC;
Common equity exposure: +495,796 BTC;
Per-share metrics vs. NAV:
In 2022: −14,786 sats/share, CEBE NAV −$2.33/share.
In 2026: 138,146 sats/share, CEBE NAV +$81.69/share.
At the 2022 bear-market bottom, Strategy arguably had a theoretical “balance sheet insolvency,” but it was not forced into liquidation, and the stock didn’t go to zero.
Compared with that, the 2026 balance sheet is far more robust—an objective mathematical fact that can’t be easily overturned with mere FUD.
There’s also one more detail difference:
The $2.4 billion in 2022 was debt with a maturity date, carrying the risk of secured liquidation (the BTC-backed loan Silvergate had at the time was the real risk point then, but it was repaid at a discount later). In 2026, most of it is perpetual preferred stock, with no looming maturity wall.
Even though MSTR still faces a series of risks—dilution, pressure from preferred-share dividends, and BTC price volatility—extreme narratives like a “death spiral/liquidation crisis” clearly don’t match the facts of the current balance sheet.
----------------------------
While I don’t want to think in the direction of “conspiracy theories,” I can’t shake the subtle feeling that some force is using STRC’s de-anchoring to generate noise, applying extreme pressure on BTC.
Some onlookers who don’t really know what’s going on spread rumors. By the time it gets repeated, the final version becomes: in this cycle, “MicroStrategy will be liquidated for 800k BTC, so the BTC price will drop another 50% 🤣🤣🤣.”
Source: @Eth527 on X
Publish using the 6551 twitter mirror tool
#Crypto #Web3 #区块链
In 2022: 130,000 BTC held; SC: 146,735 BTC;
Common equity exposure: −16,735 BTC;
In 2026: 847,363 BTC held; SC: 351,567 BTC;
Common equity exposure: +495,796 BTC;
Per-share metrics vs. NAV:
In 2022: −14,786 sats/share, CEBE NAV −$2.33/share.
In 2026: 138,146 sats/share, CEBE NAV +$81.69/share.
At the 2022 bear-market bottom, Strategy arguably had a theoretical “balance sheet insolvency,” but it was not forced into liquidation, and the stock didn’t go to zero.
Compared with that, the 2026 balance sheet is far more robust—an objective mathematical fact that can’t be easily overturned with mere FUD.
There’s also one more detail difference:
The $2.4 billion in 2022 was debt with a maturity date, carrying the risk of secured liquidation (the BTC-backed loan Silvergate had at the time was the real risk point then, but it was repaid at a discount later). In 2026, most of it is perpetual preferred stock, with no looming maturity wall.
Even though MSTR still faces a series of risks—dilution, pressure from preferred-share dividends, and BTC price volatility—extreme narratives like a “death spiral/liquidation crisis” clearly don’t match the facts of the current balance sheet.
----------------------------
While I don’t want to think in the direction of “conspiracy theories,” I can’t shake the subtle feeling that some force is using STRC’s de-anchoring to generate noise, applying extreme pressure on BTC.
Some onlookers who don’t really know what’s going on spread rumors. By the time it gets repeated, the final version becomes: in this cycle, “MicroStrategy will be liquidated for 800k BTC, so the BTC price will drop another 50% 🤣🤣🤣.”
Source: @Eth527 on X
Publish using the 6551 twitter mirror tool
#Crypto #Web3 #区块链
I saw a blogger use company debt, preferred stock, and cash—based on the BTC price at the time/current—to convert net senior claims (Senior Claims, SC) into an equivalent amount of BTC, and make a horizontal comparison between 2022 and 2026:
In 2022: held 130,000 BTC; SC: 146,735 BTC;
common stock equity exposure -16,735 BTC;
In 2026: held 847,363 BTC; SC: 351,567 BTC;
common stock equity exposure +495,796 BTC;
Per-share metrics and NAV:
In 2022: −14,786 sats/share, CEBE NAV −$2.33/share.
In 2026: 138,146 sats/share, CEBE NAV +$81.69/share.
At the 2022 bear-market bottom, Strategy did have a theoretical scenario of being “technically insolvent,” but it also wasn’t forced into liquidation, and the stock didn’t go to zero.
By contrast, the balance sheet in 2026 is far more robust—an unrefutable mathematical fact that can’t be easily overturned with FUD.
There’s also one more key difference:
The $2.4 billion in 2022 was debt with maturity dates, carrying liquidation/secured-collateral risk (the BTC-backed loan Silvergate had at the time was the real risk point, but it was later repaid at a discount). In 2026, most of it is perpetual preferred stock with no “maturity wall.”
Even though MSTR still faces a range of risks—possible dilution, pressure from preferred dividends, BTC price volatility, and so on—the extreme narratives like a “death spiral/liquidation crisis” clearly don’t match the facts of the current balance sheet.
----------------------------
Although I don’t want to think in terms of “conspiracy theories,” I can’t shake the faint feeling that some force is using STRC’s de-anchoring to generate noise and exert extreme pressure on BTC.
A bunch of onlookers who don’t fully understand, spreading rumors and misinformation. By the time it’s passed around to the final version, it turns into: in this cycle, “MicroStrategy will be liquidated for 800k BTC,” so BTC’s price will be cut in half again 🤣🤣🤣
Source: @Eth527 on X
Published using the 6551 twitter mirror tool
#Crypto #Web3 #blockchain
In 2022: held 130,000 BTC; SC: 146,735 BTC;
common stock equity exposure -16,735 BTC;
In 2026: held 847,363 BTC; SC: 351,567 BTC;
common stock equity exposure +495,796 BTC;
Per-share metrics and NAV:
In 2022: −14,786 sats/share, CEBE NAV −$2.33/share.
In 2026: 138,146 sats/share, CEBE NAV +$81.69/share.
At the 2022 bear-market bottom, Strategy did have a theoretical scenario of being “technically insolvent,” but it also wasn’t forced into liquidation, and the stock didn’t go to zero.
By contrast, the balance sheet in 2026 is far more robust—an unrefutable mathematical fact that can’t be easily overturned with FUD.
There’s also one more key difference:
The $2.4 billion in 2022 was debt with maturity dates, carrying liquidation/secured-collateral risk (the BTC-backed loan Silvergate had at the time was the real risk point, but it was later repaid at a discount). In 2026, most of it is perpetual preferred stock with no “maturity wall.”
Even though MSTR still faces a range of risks—possible dilution, pressure from preferred dividends, BTC price volatility, and so on—the extreme narratives like a “death spiral/liquidation crisis” clearly don’t match the facts of the current balance sheet.
----------------------------
Although I don’t want to think in terms of “conspiracy theories,” I can’t shake the faint feeling that some force is using STRC’s de-anchoring to generate noise and exert extreme pressure on BTC.
A bunch of onlookers who don’t fully understand, spreading rumors and misinformation. By the time it’s passed around to the final version, it turns into: in this cycle, “MicroStrategy will be liquidated for 800k BTC,” so BTC’s price will be cut in half again 🤣🤣🤣
Source: @Eth527 on X
Published using the 6551 twitter mirror tool
#Crypto #Web3 #blockchain
At this time next year, when BTC is at 130,000, many people will again say it will go to 200–1,000,000 (200-100W). By then, the teachers who told people to get in will be trapped in losses as well. https://x.com/eth527/status/2070354034872250679
Source: @Eth527 on X
Published using the 6551 Twitter mirror tool
#Crypto #Web3 #Blockchain
Source: @Eth527 on X
Published using the 6551 Twitter mirror tool
#Crypto #Web3 #Blockchain
One interesting piece of data is that on @42space, about 20% of addresses are in profit, while on Polymarket that figure is under 1%.
Behind this is not only a difference in user skill, but also a different market structure. Traditional prediction markets are more like “buy and settle—no turning back.” Price fluctuations along the way don’t affect most people; when they’re wrong, they often just have to hold on until settlement.
42’s DNA is trading. Users aren’t forced to wait for the final outcome. Instead, they can continuously adjust their positions based on price and changes in events. If the direction is wrong, they can promptly reduce exposure, switch sides, and recoup costs. If the direction is right, they can also lock in profits early, rather than putting all potential gains on the final settlement moment.
This is more friendly to retail users, because retail users’ biggest disadvantage isn’t that they lack opinions—it’s low tolerance for error, weak capital management, and slow information updates. 42 is a mechanism that allows mid-course corrections, dynamic rebalancing, and taking profits early, while also reducing the punishment of “being wrong once and going to zero.”
So the difference between 42 and traditional prediction markets isn’t just UX or gameplay—it’s a difference in risk structure.
42.space/leaderboard
Source: @Eth527 on X
Publish by using 6551 twitter mirror tool
#Crypto #Web3 #区块链
Behind this is not only a difference in user skill, but also a different market structure. Traditional prediction markets are more like “buy and settle—no turning back.” Price fluctuations along the way don’t affect most people; when they’re wrong, they often just have to hold on until settlement.
42’s DNA is trading. Users aren’t forced to wait for the final outcome. Instead, they can continuously adjust their positions based on price and changes in events. If the direction is wrong, they can promptly reduce exposure, switch sides, and recoup costs. If the direction is right, they can also lock in profits early, rather than putting all potential gains on the final settlement moment.
This is more friendly to retail users, because retail users’ biggest disadvantage isn’t that they lack opinions—it’s low tolerance for error, weak capital management, and slow information updates. 42 is a mechanism that allows mid-course corrections, dynamic rebalancing, and taking profits early, while also reducing the punishment of “being wrong once and going to zero.”
So the difference between 42 and traditional prediction markets isn’t just UX or gameplay—it’s a difference in risk structure.
42.space/leaderboard
Source: @Eth527 on X
Publish by using 6551 twitter mirror tool
#Crypto #Web3 #区块链
Log in to explore more content