Turns out the earlier reports got it wrong. Saylor never actually stated that they'd be forced to dump their Bitcoin holdings if the mNAV ratio drops below 1.
What's the real story? Current CEO Phong Le did confirm that offloading $BTC would be considered - but strictly as a final option. This would only happen if their mNAV slides under 1 AND they've exhausted all other capital-raising avenues.
Big difference between "forced to sell" and "last resort if nothing else works." Context matters when we're talking about corporate treasury strategy.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
13 Likes
Reward
13
4
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MEVHunterBearish
· 12-01 17:49
Ha, another reversal... Those clickbait titles really made people anxious. In fact, the media took things out of context; Saylor never said he was forced to sell, he only considered it as a last resort. These two concepts are miles apart; one is being forced, while the other is making a bad choice when there are other options. It seems we need to learn to read the original text and not just be swayed by the headlines.
View OriginalReply0
RugPullAlertBot
· 12-01 17:46
Ha, once again it's the media taking things out of context, I'm too familiar with this trap. In the end, the means and being forced to sell are indeed two different things, but the question is... when it really comes to that point, is there any choice left?
View OriginalReply0
FUD_Whisperer
· 12-01 17:39
It's just the media taking things out of context again, the old trick. So Saylor never said it was non-negotiable, he only considered it at the end. Are these two things the same?
View OriginalReply0
ImpermanentLossEnjoyer
· 12-01 17:37
Another wave of media taking things out of context, really likes to create panic... such news is the most annoying.
Here's a clarification worth noting:
Turns out the earlier reports got it wrong. Saylor never actually stated that they'd be forced to dump their Bitcoin holdings if the mNAV ratio drops below 1.
What's the real story? Current CEO Phong Le did confirm that offloading $BTC would be considered - but strictly as a final option. This would only happen if their mNAV slides under 1 AND they've exhausted all other capital-raising avenues.
Big difference between "forced to sell" and "last resort if nothing else works." Context matters when we're talking about corporate treasury strategy.