I agree with @coffeebreak_YT here

An insurance company and $STRC might look similar at first (both insurance claims and dividends being financed by new money coming in) but they are nothing alike…
Real insurance has decades of hard actuarial substance behind it, to name a few:
- Precise modeling of claim frequency (e.g., historical crash rates per 1,000 cars or per million miles driven)
- Severity distributions (average cost per wreck)
- Massive statistical databases and probability tables
Insurers aren’t gambling. They’re pricing their products with refined math on millions of real policies backed by decades of data and experience.
$STRC (@Strategy’s perpetual preferred stock) on the other hand is mostly backed by hope that @saylor can raise more money and Bitcoin keeps rising in price.
Don’t get me wrong, I see no issues with STRC until Strategy’s BTC reserves vs dividend liability ratio is healthy (currently at 1:5)
Due to Bitcoin’s nature and design, I also believe it should go up in price and Strategy’s STRC should remain attractive for investors for some time (even if the yield decreases)
The catastrophe comes when the assets/liabilities ratio tightens or turns negative, but since Saylor can adjust yields down at any time, this is not an issue for the foreseeable future.
TLDR: Although @PunterJeff did a great job during this interview, This comparison has no ground.
STRC dividends rely on continued investor demand and BTC price performance, while insurance relies on decades of data and probability calculations — among dozens of other measurable factors.
Let’s call a spade a spade