Register and share your invite link to earn from video plays and referrals.

Grain of Salt
@GrainofSaltSF
It’s easier to challenge an idea than to change a belief. GoS, 2026
1.3K Following    27.6K Followers
There is a good chance that @Strive becomes the 2nd largest Bitcoin Treasury in 2027, but I prefer that ASST goes to $300+ and just being in the top 5.
Key bullish milestones for Bitcoin and @Strategy in 2026: ₿ rises above its 50-week moving average: $82K ₿ rises above its Jan 1, 2026 opening price: $87.5K MSTR above $149.77: 2030A converts move ITM MSTR above $183.19: 2028 converts move ITM MSTR above $204.33: 2032 converts move ITM MSTR above $232.72: 2031 converts move ITM MSTR above $433.43: 2030B converts move ITM MSTR at $434: ~$5.2 billion, or 78%, of its listed convertible-note principal is in the money->making that debt more equity-like and improving Strategy’s Net leverage, even though it is currently ~0% Strategy’s BTC reserve surpasses $100 billion—either with its current 840,447 BTC at ~ $119,000 per Bitcoin, or with 1 million BTC at $100,000 per Bitcoin.
Show more
Want know why Toxic Bitcoin Maximalists hate SATA and STRC, so call Digital Credit? @BTCtreasuries @Strive @Strategy @TNorth @roxom
Expert-level post. I may have reverse-engineered what @Strategy is doing with $STRC and $MSTR. This is not really a “preferred stock” story. It’s a synthetic internal yield curve for capital funding. The real spread is NOT: STRC yield vs SOFR The real spread is: MSTR market premium (mNAV) vs STRC funding cost. Strategy itself has effectively identified ~1.22x mNAV as an issuance floor. But once you layer in an 11.5% STRC funding cost, 1.22x is STILL negative carry. That means: (1.22 - 1.22) - 11.5% = -11.5% So the system only works if BTC/share growth (their “BTC Yield”) exceeds the funding drag. This is why the 10% BTC Yield (increase in ₿PS) target matters so much and is most likely a low number and easy for them to beat. It’s not a random KPI. It’s a reflexive sustainability threshold. The actual breakeven appears closer to ~1.33x mNAV: 1.33 - 1.22 ≈ 11.5% Below that, the curve is inverted. Above that, positive reflexive carry resumes. The heat map below is effectively a synthetic sovereign-style funding curve for Strategy. Red = destructive financing regime Orange = weak equilibrium Green = positive reflexive carry Dark green = convex accretion regime This is also why mNAV matters far more now than it did a year ago. Before STRC, mNAV was mostly a valuation metric. After STRC, mNAV became a funding spread.
Show more