Pip, is all (😈,😇)

gets excited easily

[James E. Thorne @DrJStrategy]

The Clarity Act.

Will the Bankers ever be satisfied.

The short answer is no.

The ABA’s latest stablecoin broadside is pure 1970s money‑market déjà vu. Back then, banks warned that money market funds would starve communities of credit; today, it’s yield‑bearing stablecoins supposedly draining deposits that “support” Main Street lending.

The through‑line is defensive: whenever innovation offers savers market‑rate returns outside the insured‑deposit box, banks rediscover their sudden love for small businesses and farmers. The irony is that the new CLARITY draft largely gives the ABA exactly what it demanded, Reg‑Q‑style bans on passive stablecoin yield and tight limits on “yield‑like incentives” and yet it still complains.

Having secured protection for its subsidized funding base, it now insists that even residual rewards are intolerable.

[Paul Prager @PaulBPrager]

$WULF

[Parker @TheOtherParker_]

What a day for $STRC. When it rains it pours.

When panic is setting in, it helps to revisit the fundamentals of why you made the investment in the first place.

The main thing to focus on is that STRC is designed as a "bend, not break" instrument. Or, better yet, a "Stretch, not snap" instrument - yes, cringe.

First, let's get some facts out there:
1. Strategy's total annual cash outlays are about $1.7B for dividends and coupons. Most of that is for STRC dividends.

2. Strategy currently has $1.4B in cash, and raised $300M last week on the $MSTR ATM. They raised $100M each of the prior two weeks as well. The stock is still trading at a small premium to mNAV as of today. They have likely raised a few hundred million additional this week, maybe even $300M .

3. Strategy's converts have put dates mostly in mid 2028; however, a third of the converts are still trading at a premium to par, meaning they would be unlikely to be put.

4. Strategy has a number of mechanisms at their disposal to help bring the price of STRC back to par.

Ok, now for some additional thoughts:
1. The $1.7B that Strategy "owes" each year amounts to $33M/wk. The MSTR common traded $11B last week. $IBIT traded $6B last week. $BTC traded about $3B on Coinbase alone, while globally, traded multiples of that. If they need to raise $33M/wk, they can, basically forever. Even if they were just selling BTC and turned off the MSTR ATM, they'd be selling 545 BTC/wk at current BTC prices. They could do a mixture of MSTR ATM and BTC sales to spread it out. To put 545 BTC into perspective, so far in 2026, Strategy has acquired 174,863 BTC. So, if they simply sold what they acquired this year on a weekly basis, they could fund dividends and coupons for 74 months beyond the 10 months they already have - total of 84 months, or 7 years. What if BTC drops to $30k you say? They can fund things for 47 months, including existing cash, so 4 years. To be VERY CLEAR, this is only selling the BTC they bought this year, it leaves the other 672,500 BTC acquired prior to 2026 in tact. If you throw that all into the mix, they can fund cash needs for 31 and 16 years at $60k and $30k BTC respectively. If BTC is at $30k in 16 years, I think it is dead.

TL;DR - cash outlays aren't a problem. No "death spiral" is triggered from selling a few hundred BTC/wk.

2. The converts seem really scary, with put dates coming up in 2 years roughly. However, there are a few things to consider. First, with a volatile stock like MSTR, they can very likely refinance the converts with another convert that has a later put date, later maturity and lower strike price on the conversion price. This is due to the very high value of the imbedded option in the convert. There's some dilution there for the common holders, but not crazy, since it's somewhat offset by the elimination of the old converts. Based on today's prices and a 30% conversion premium, that would be about 10% in net additional shares issuable upon conversion of the new convert. If the common float doubles between now and that future conversion (very likely), that's only a 5% dilution. Not amazing, but also not horrible for the MSTR common holders. That 5-10% dilution would push back the conversion date by many years. Additionally, other companies have successfully swapped converts for preferreds in the past, e.g. Strive, so there's no reason that Strategy couldn't come to an arrangement there with a number of the convert investors.

TL;DR - the converts are not a huge problem and wouldn't require the company to come up with $6.7B in cash right on the spot.

3. Strategy has no margin debt. So, BTC could actually fall to $1 tomorrow and they would not be "liquidated". There is no liquidation price in the short-term. Period.

4. So, what is the "death" scenario for Strategy? Turns out, there's no killshot, just a slow bleed. Sure, if BTC falls to $20k and stays there for 6-7 years, then Strategy has a problem. But only at that point do they have a problem. If you think this is a realistic scenario, you should leave bitcoin immediately and short every company in crypto. Very few crypto businesses would survive that.

So, putting it all together, Strategy is specifically designed as an anti-fragile fortress for bitcoin accumulation. Sure, leverage creates some risk, but it is also the ONLY reason they are able to accumulate BTC. If they had zero leverage, then IBIT would be the better investment. Any big hedge funds that want to "liquidate" them would need to keep the price of BTC generationally low for over half a decade.

The biggest advantage that Strategy has is time. They can wait and be deliberate. To flip a common phrase on its head, Strategy can stay solvent MUCH longer than the market can stay irrational.

Now, regarding STRC specifically, this is Strategy's flagship product. If they stop paying the dividends on it, they lose S3 eligibility for a year. That's a HORRIBLE outcome, so they would only stop paying the dividend in the most dire of circumstances. In fact, very few preferred stock issues ever stop paying dividends, and most that do, do it because of bankruptcy.

They very much want to see STRC trading back at par, because it is their primary cash-raising mechanism for accumulating more BTC.

That does NOT mean they are going to panic, raise the dividend to 15%, and sell a bunch of BTC to buyback all the STRC. They have plenty of time, and as long as you don't sell, you have time too. You continue to collect the dividend that you signed up for, and likely an increased one as they increase the dividend over time. You still get $11.5 per year per share of STRC, regardless of the market price.

STRC can certainly go lower, but as long as you're not margined against it, it shouldn't really matter. It's very clear that Strategy has both the capacity and the desire to continue paying the dividends and ultimately support getting the price back to par. Maybe it takes a few weeks or maybe it takes a few months. STRC is a low time preference instrument issued by a low time preference company.

The important thing is, there's no "breaking point" anytime soon. BTC basically must completely fail before there's a "breaking point". There is certainly a "panic point" though for investors, and with STRC down almost 15% so far this week, nearly 3x worse than BTC, it's very clear we are at "panic point".

Ultimately, STRC was designed to remove the possibility of "breaking points". The goal is to "bend, not break".

"Stretch, not snap."

[Pip, is all (😈,😇) @Pippo2k1]

@matthew_sigel Understanbley not the same but the timing gives me FTX Arena vibes.

[Pip, is all (😈,😇) @Pippo2k1]

@CalebFranzen Seriously. Is this charity? Is his arb supposed to make me feel better?

[Pip, is all (😈,😇) @Pippo2k1]

@coinbureau I would argue that bc more people use it they act at support and resistance more so. Maybe it’s not helpful to his style of investing/trading?

[Perry Lin @perry_lin1]

$WULF Morgan Stanley raises price target to $66.50

“Our WULF price target rises to $66.50 from $42, a 58% increase. Our bull case
rises to $103 from $84, and our bear case rises to $15 from $12. The principal drivers
are the +1,000 MW addition and the 80/20 weighting toward hyperscaler-backed
economics on unsigned MWs.
The acquisition also reinforces a point that has been central to our positive view of
WULF: management has continued to add sizable, credible power opportunities while
converting existing assets into contracted HPC infrastructure. The time-to-
energization is not immaterial; the first 500 MW ramp begins in 2H28. However, in a
market where competing grid interconnection timelines can stretch for many years,
a large, transmission-backed 2H28 pathway remains highly relevant to hyperscale
buyers.”

[Pip, is all (😈,😇) @Pippo2k1]

@neilksethi Sell the news event as soon as its confirmed. Total guess here

[Scott @Nogimics]

Today on @CNBC Power Lunch, @TeraWulfInc CEO @PaulBPrager summed up the AI/HPC bottleneck perfectly.

Brian Sullivan: “Is there any indication that companies needing compute power are dialing back? Considering Google is one of your clients.”

Paul Prager: “Not to my knowledge… GPUs are critical, but the real constraint now is scalable power infrastructure.”

Paul made clear today that WULF’s edge in AI/HPC starts with energy infrastructure and scalable power, built on 25 years of experience.

Interview faded out a bit at the end, apologies.

Also, while this was airing, $WULF hit a new 52-wk high of $26.85 🐺

[zerohedge @zerohedge]

Terawulf CEO on CNBC: "we started off as a bitcoin miner but really that's not what we were, we were an energy infrastructure company"

[Pip, is all (😈,😇) @Pippo2k1]

@TheTechInvest Separate of this guy or anyone else’s plan, I’ve been eyeing the “resolution” of the war w/ iran as an eventual (maybe one week later) sell the news event. All that being said I’ve done nothing either way.

[Pip, is all (😈,😇) @Pippo2k1]

@LynAldenContact @CaitlinLong_ Does it really matter?

[Jordi Visser @jvisserlabs]

It has been a shocking two months since Iran became the doom of X and AI driven EPS became the driver of alpha. In this week's Substack post I go through why the next decade is about benchmark arbitrage driven by "Your Capex is My Opportunity."
https://t.co/BIpgTxLHVq

[Coin Bureau @coinbureau]

BREAKING: 🇺🇸US blockade strands 1.8M barrels a day of Iranian crude oil, per Nikkei.

Iran's exports have collapsed from 1.85M bpd in March to just 567,000 bpd, a ~70% drop in weeks.

Per Kpler, not a single Iranian tanker has successfully evaded the blockade.

The White House says Iran is losing $500 MILLION per day in revenue.

"If the blockade holds for another two months, Iran's oil revenues could crash to ZERO," Kpler reports.

[Pip, is all (😈,😇) @Pippo2k1]

@CryptoHayes @CoinDesk Are the Martinez brothers still there? Man I miss church

[Pip, is all (😈,😇) @Pippo2k1]

@KobeissiLetter This much confidence means a major pullback in 1-3 months. Definitely no recession on horizon either way

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

Iron Dome for cats 😂

[Vaishnavi @_vmlops]

SOMEONE BUILT A MAP THAT SHOWS EXACTLY WHERE EVERY POWER PLANT, TRANSMISSION LINE, SUBSTATION & DATA CENTER SITS ON THE US GRID

all on one interactive map. all free

you can see how the grid is laid out... where the datacenters cluster... which transmission corridors carry the load... where the high-capacity connection points are

https://t.co/bRWJj6OA5P

zoom into any region and the whole picture comes into focus why energy costs what it costs, why data centers go where they go, why some states are power exporters and others aren't

this is the kind of infrastructure visibility that used to require expensive industry reports

now it's one tab

[The Wolf Of All Streets @scottmelker]

Absolutely disgusting.

[Nic @puckrin]

When the US Treasury starts calling in regulators, it means something has gone wrong enough to worry Washington.

Yesterday, the Treasury convened meetings with domestic AND international insurance regulators to discuss private credit risks.

The specific concern: billions in retirement savings managed by life insurers have been quietly moved into illiquid private credit products.

Apollo and KKR bought insurance companies to get direct access to that capital.

State-level regulation alone can't handle what's now a multitrillion-dollar, cross-border, offshore-reinsurance-linked web.

The Treasury calling this meeting is not routine. It's a signal.