"We have real BTC backing, unlike Luna."

Does this sound particularly familiar?

Coincidentally, before Luna collapsed, they said the same thing.

The only difference is they backed it with an algorithm. Strive backs it with BTC.

But the market has given its answer:

STRC has fallen below 82, a historic low.

It has already dropped 18% from the offering price.

Price never lies. Price only votes.

Strive released something called STRC, and the general logic is —

When you buy STRC, it corresponds to the BTC held by Strategy.

Simply put, it's a leveraged BTC shadow stock.

Strategy holds hundreds of thousands of BTC, staking, packaging, and issuing products.

STRC is one part of that.

"We're not an algorithmic stablecoin; we have real assets as backing."

Sounds much more reliable than Luna, right?

But the reality is —

Since the day it was listed, STRC has been heading south.

It broke below 90, then 85, and now below 82.

A new all-time low.

"Having real asset backing and being able to provide a safety net in extreme market conditions are two different things."

What does that mean?

You have $10 billion in BTC assets.

But what if your product size is $20 billion?

What if liquidity dries up and you can't sell your BTC?

What if you're forced to sell BTC at the bottom to meet redemptions, pushing the price of BTC even lower?

This is what the market fears most — a death spiral.

Luna was an algorithmic death spiral.

STRC is a liquidity death spiral.

Different names, but the way they die is the same — a stampede.

The Vice President of Strive came out to respond.

He said, "We have essential differences."

But have you ever considered this:

Does something that is truly safe need to be personally explained by a Vice President?

USDT doesn't need to say "we have dollar reserves" every day.

BTC doesn't need to say "I am decentralized" every day.

Truly strong assets never need to be backed by words.

When you have to repeatedly emphasize "we are different" —

The market actually already thinks you are "the same."

Can asset backing truly provide a safety net in extreme market conditions?

I believe:

Yes, but on the condition that there is always a firewall between assets and liabilities.

Once that wall collapses, physical assets are just the last ballast stone.

And ballast stones can sink a ship.

"The market is always right. What's wrong is the 'we are different' you believed in."

Is STRC the next Luna?

I don't know.

But I do know —

When the price breaks through everyone's psychological defense,

whether there is BTC backing doesn't matter at all.

What matters is whether there is someone willing to buy at the bottom.

And right now, that person has clearly not appeared in the market yet.#0成本拿2股SK海力士 #以太坊基金会重组降本 #苏格兰VS巴西 $BTC $ETH $LUNC