Loading…
Published 20 Jun 2026, 19:45 UTC · fetched 20 Oct 2026, 05:27 UTC
Samson Mow
@Excellion
In reply to · 20 Jun 2026, 15:26 UTC · context given to the AI
Agree there is no hard peg. But there is an economic par constraint. If $STRC trades below par, Strategy does not have to defend it. But the instrument stops working as intended. The dividend obligation remains. The accretive Bitcoin funding mechanism weakens. That is fragility. $BTC is antifragile. The wrapper is not. As mentioned, i think $STRC will be fine bc $BTC will follow the power law up. I am just not a fan of the way this instrument was financially engineered.“But the instrument stops working as intended.” I can’t speak on Saylor’s behalf, but I believe that is the intention. Below par = no new issuance. Again, I think it’s an elegant design. It’s a self-repairing mechanism. When STRC isn’t at par: effective yield goes up, there is buy pressure from captain gain seekers, and no new obligations incurred.View original on X ↗
Deterministic: the same prices and policy always give the same result
r = 64119.98 / 63867.37 − 1 = +0.40%d × r = +0.40% against a neutral band of ±1.00% → neutralOnly the end-of-horizon price counts. A brief move followed by a reversal is not a success. Read the methodology
Uses only text available at publication time
Think the interpretation or outcome is wrong? Sign in with X to request a correction, so reviewers know who is asking.
Sign in to request a correction