Strategy - full-fledged game theory.

Saylor perfectly understands that Strategy has long become a target for major market players, so he makes the scenario of its forced bankruptcy as unprofitable as possible in advance.

The board of directors' decision to allow the sale of part of BTC to replenish dollar reserves and pay dividends on STRC effectively changes the rules of the game.

If earlier the bet against Strategy was based on the liquidity crisis forcing the company to sell all its bitcoin at minimum prices, now this scenario becomes significantly less realistic.

In the event of a prolonged market downturn, Strategy will first use up dollar reserves, and then, if necessary, sell bitcoins in small volumes, restoring liquidity.

This means that the company will be able to remain solvent much longer, and the market will be under constant pressure of potential sales.

Attempting to quickly 'finish off' Strategy turns into an extremely expensive and unprofitable operation, from which virtually all crypto market participants will ultimately suffer.

Yes, the reputational damage to the company is obvious.

However, this is probably the best solution among all the bad ones.

Endlessly financing itself with new stock issuances in a falling market is a much shorter path to real bankruptcy.

In essence, Strategy is now telling the market: either a reversal will happen sooner, or the decline will become so painful that everyone will lose.

The company is effectively becoming too large and systemically important for the crypto market for its collapse to be painless.

Paradoxically, but in the long term this is even positive for bitcoin.

Currently, the market is nervous about possible sales by the largest Bitcoin Treasury, but a key uncertainty disappears.

Now investors understand the mechanism of Strategy's actions in a crisis, and any market evaluates a known risk much more easily than an unknown one.

It is possible that Saylor was heading towards this model from the very beginning.

While the bull market lasted, he convinced investors never to sell BTC.

But it is quite possible that he himself understood perfectly well: in a severe bear phase, his company would be forced to sell part of its reserves.

The main task was different - to first become Too Big to Fail.

This is generally a characteristic strategy of many prominent adventurers.

First, build a structure so large that its destruction becomes a problem not only for the owners but for the entire system.

In this sense, Strategy increasingly resembles Elon Musk's companies: their valuations may cause endless debate, but the scale itself becomes a protective factor.

And one more curious point: people with high intelligence do not always seek 'objective truth.'

Much more often they are able to very convincingly defend the position that maximizes their interests at the moment.

Saylor is a good example.

At one time he was a convinced crypto skeptic and would easily have found dozens of arguments against companies like today's Strategy.

But as soon as his interests changed, he began to prove the exact opposite point of view just as convincingly.

#BTC

PROFIT TO EVERYONE! 💪👍