Or Face Index Delisting? Strategy Caught in "Quadruple Whammy" Crisis
Original Article Title: "MicroStrategy Faces Trust Crisis: Risk of Index Removal, Coin Sale Buyback Incentive, Executive Sell-off"
Original Article Author: Nancy, PANews
The crypto market is in turmoil, with Bitcoin's weakness leading to an overall downturn, accelerating the bubble's clearing, and making investors feel like they are walking on thin ice. As an important crypto benchmark, the flagship Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) company Strategy (MicroStrategy) is facing multiple pressures, such as a significant mNAV premium convergence, reduced coin hoarding intensity, executive stock sell-offs, and the risk of index removal, challenging market confidence.
Strategy Encounters Trust Crisis, Facing Index Removal?
Currently, the DAT track is experiencing its darkest hour. With the continuous decline in Bitcoin prices, the premium rates of many DAT companies have plummeted across the board, stock prices are under continuous pressure, increased holdings have slowed down or even stalled, and business models are undergoing a survival test. Strategy is also not immune, falling into a trust crisis.
mNAV (market net asset value multiple) is one of the key indicators to measure market sentiment. Recently, Strategy's mNAV premium has rapidly contracted, nearly reaching a critical level. According to StrategyTracker data, as of November 21, Strategy's mNAV was 1.2, previously even dropping below 1, a decrease of about 54.9% compared to the historical high of 2.66. As the largest and most influential DAT company, the malfunction of Strategy's treasury premium has sparked market panic. The reason behind this is that the decline in mNAV has weakened the financing ability, forcing the company to issue stocks to dilute existing shareholders' equity, putting pressure on the stock price, further causing mNAV to decline, leading to a vicious cycle.

However, Greg Cipolaro, Global Head of Research at NYDIG, pointed out that mNAV, as an indicator to evaluate DAT companies, has limitations and should even be removed from industry reports. He believes that mNAV may be misleading because its calculation does not consider the company's operational business or other potential assets and liabilities, and is usually based on assumptions about outstanding shares, not covering unconverted convertible debt.
Poor stock performance has also raised market concerns. According to StrategyTracker data, as of November 21, Strategy's MSTR stock total market value is around $50.9 billion, lower than the total market value of nearly 650,000 bitcoins held (with an average holding cost of $74,433) at $66.87 billion, meaning the company's stock price has shown a "negative premium." Since the beginning of this year, MSTR's stock price has fallen by 40.9%.
This situation has raised concerns in the market about its exclusion from indices such as the Nasdaq 100 and MSCI USA. JPMorgan Chase predicts that if the global index provider MSCI removes Strategy from its stock indices, outflows could reach up to $2.8 billion. If other exchanges and index providers follow suit, the total outflow could reach $11.6 billion. Currently, MSCI is evaluating a proposal to exclude companies whose primary business is holding Bitcoin or other crypto assets, and where these assets represent more than 50% of their balance sheet, with a final decision to be made by January 15, 2026.
However, the risk of Strategy's exclusion is relatively low at the moment. For example, the Nasdaq 100 index undergoes a market cap adjustment every year on the second Friday of December, where the top 100 are retained, positions 101–125 need to have been in the top 100 the previous year to be retained, and anything beyond 125 is unconditionally removed. Strategy still falls within the safe range, ranking within the Top 100 in market cap, and recent financial reports show a solid foundation. Additionally, several institutional investors, including the Arizona State Retirement System, Renaissance Technologies, the Florida Retirement System, the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, Swedbank, and the Swiss National Bank, have disclosed holdings of MSTR stock in their third-quarter reports, which has supported market confidence to some extent.
However, the recent slowdown in Strategy's buying activity has been interpreted by the market as a lack of "ammunition," especially since the third-quarter report showed that its cash and cash equivalents amount to only $54.3 million. Since November, Strategy has only acquired a total of 9,062 bitcoins, significantly lower than the 79,000 acquired during the same period last year, although this is also influenced by the rise in Bitcoin's price. The main acquisition this month came from a recent purchase of 8,178 BTC, with other trades mostly involving a few hundred bitcoins.
To raise additional funds, Strategy has begun seeking international market financing and introduced a new financing instrument, perpetual preferred shares (with a high dividend rate of 8-10%). Recently, the company raised approximately $710 million by issuing its first Euro-denominated perpetual preferred shares, STRE, to support its strategic initiatives and Bitcoin reserve plan. It is worth noting that the company currently has six outstanding convertible bonds, with maturity dates ranging from September 2027 to June 2032.

Furthermore, the actions of internal executives have also increased market attention. Strategy disclosed in its financial report that Strategy's Executive Vice President, Weiming Shao, will resign on December 31, 2025, and since September of this year, he has sold $19.69 million worth of MSTR stock through five transactions. However, these sales were made under a prearranged 10b5-1 trading plan. Such sales are executed according to a preset 10b5-1 trading plan. Under U.S. SEC rules, 10b5-1 trading plans allow company insiders to trade stocks based on predetermined buying or selling rules (including specified quantities, prices, or schedules) to reduce the legal risks of insider trading.

Debt Risk Overstated in Multi-Party Analysis, Pressure Significantly on High Premium Investors
Facing the downturn in the crypto market and multiple concerns about the DAT business model, Strategy founder Michael Saylor reiterated the "HODL" concept in a post, expressing optimism about the recent Bitcoin price drop, remaining bullish for the future, and even emphasizing that Strategy will not sell its holdings unless Bitcoin falls below $10,000 to boost market confidence.
Meanwhile, the market has also provided various analyses of Strategy. Matrixport pointed out that Strategy remains one of the most representative beneficiary companies in this Bitcoin bull market. The market has long been concerned about whether the company will be forced to sell its Bitcoin holdings to repay debt. Based on the current asset-liability structure and debt maturity distribution, its assessment suggests that the probability of "being forced to sell Bitcoin to repay debt" in the short term is relatively low and is not the main current source of risk. The most pressured currently are the investors who entered at a high premium stage. Most of Strategy's financing occurred when the stock price was near the $474 historical high and the Net Asset Value (NAV) per share was at its peak. As NAV gradually falls and the premium shrinks, the stock price has also retraced from $474 to $207, causing investors who entered at a high premium level earlier to face significant unrealized losses. Compared to the current Bitcoin price increase, Strategy's current stock price has significantly retraced from its previous high, making its valuation relatively more attractive, and the expectation of being included in the S&P 500 Index in December still exists.
Crypto analyst Willy Woo further analyzed Strategy's debt risk and expressed "highly skeptical" views on its liquidation in a bear market. In a tweet, he stated that Strategy's debt is mainly composed of convertible senior notes, which can be redeemed at maturity in cash, common stock, or a combination of both. Of these, Strategy has approximately $1.01 billion in debt maturing on September 15, 2027. Woo estimated that to avoid the need to sell Bitcoin to repay debt, Strategy's stock trading price must be above $183.19 by then, roughly equivalent to a Bitcoin price of around $91,502.
CryptoQuant founder and CEO Ki Young Ju also believes that the probability of Strategy's bankruptcy is extremely low, stating, "MSTR can only go bankrupt if a small asteroid hits Earth. Saylor will never sell Bitcoin unless shareholders demand it, as he has repeatedly emphasized publicly."
Ki Young Ju pointed out that even if Saylor were to sell just one Bitcoin, it would shake the core identity of MSTR as a "Bitcoin treasury company," triggering a double death spiral of Bitcoin and MSTR stock prices. Therefore, MSTR shareholders not only hope for the value of Bitcoin to remain strong but also expect Saylor to continue employing various liquidity strategies to drive both MSTR and Bitcoin prices up together.
Addressing market concerns about debt risk, he further explained that the majority of Strategy's debt is in the form of convertible bonds, and not reaching the conversion price does not imply liquidation risk. It simply means the bonds need to be repaid in cash, and MSTR has several ways to deal with upcoming debt maturities, including refinancing, issuing new bonds, securing secured loans, or using operating cash flow. Failure to convert does not trigger bankruptcy; it is a normal part of debt maturity and is unrelated to liquidation. While this does not mean that MSTR's stock price will always remain high, the belief that they would sell Bitcoin to boost the stock price or go bankrupt as a result is entirely absurd. Even if Bitcoin were to drop to $10,000, Strategy would not go bankrupt; the worst-case scenario would only involve debt restructuring. Additionally, MSTR could also choose to use Bitcoin as collateral to raise cash, although this would bring potential liquidation risk, therefore serving as a last resort.
You may also like

a16z: Why Do AI Agents Need a Stablecoin for B2B Payments?

February 24th Market Key Intelligence, How Much Did You Miss?

Web4.0, perhaps the most needed narrative for cryptocurrency

Some Key News You Might Have Missed Over the Chinese New Year Holiday

Key Market Information Discrepancy on February 24th - A Must-Read! | Alpha Morning Report

$1,500,000 Salary Job: How to Achieve with $500 AI?

Bitcoin On-Chain User Attrition at 30%, ETF Hemorrhage at $4.5 Billion: What's Next for the Next 3 Months?

WLFI Scandal Brewing, ZachXBT Teases Insider Investigation, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Buzzing About Today?

Debunking the AI Doomsday Myth: Why Establishment Inertia and the Software Wasteland Will Save Us
Editor's Note: Citrini7's cyberpunk-themed AI doomsday prophecy has sparked widespread discussion across the internet. However, this article presents a more pragmatic counter perspective. If Citrini envisions a digital tsunami instantly engulfing civilization, this author sees the resilient resistance of the human bureaucratic system, the profoundly flawed existing software ecosystem, and the long-overlooked cornerstone of heavy industry. This is a frontal clash between Silicon Valley fantasy and the iron law of reality, reminding us that the singularity may come, but it will never happen overnight.
The following is the original content:
Renowned market commentator Citrini7 recently published a captivating and widely circulated AI doomsday novel. While he acknowledges that the probability of some scenes occurring is extremely low, as someone who has witnessed multiple economic collapse prophecies, I want to challenge his views and present a more deterministic and optimistic future.
In 2007, people thought that against the backdrop of "peak oil," the United States' geopolitical status had come to an end; in 2008, they believed the dollar system was on the brink of collapse; in 2014, everyone thought AMD and NVIDIA were done for. Then ChatGPT emerged, and people thought Google was toast... Yet every time, existing institutions with deep-rooted inertia have proven to be far more resilient than onlookers imagined.
When Citrini talks about the fear of institutional turnover and rapid workforce displacement, he writes, "Even in fields we think rely on interpersonal relationships, cracks are showing. Take the real estate industry, where buyers have tolerated 5%-6% commissions for decades due to the information asymmetry between brokers and consumers..."
Seeing this, I couldn't help but chuckle. People have been proclaiming the "death of real estate agents" for 20 years now! This hardly requires any superintelligence; with Zillow, Redfin, or Opendoor, it's enough. But this example precisely proves the opposite of Citrini's view: although this workforce has long been deemed obsolete in the eyes of most, due to market inertia and regulatory capture, real estate agents' vitality is more tenacious than anyone's expectations a decade ago.
A few months ago, I just bought a house. The transaction process mandated that we hire a real estate agent, with lofty justifications. My buyer's agent made about $50,000 in this transaction, while his actual work — filling out forms and coordinating between multiple parties — amounted to no more than 10 hours, something I could have easily handled myself. The market will eventually move towards efficiency, providing fair pricing for labor, but this will be a long process.
I deeply understand the ways of inertia and change management: I once founded and sold a company whose core business was driving insurance brokerages from "manual service" to "software-driven." The iron rule I learned is: human societies in the real world are extremely complex, and things always take longer than you imagine — even when you account for this rule. This doesn't mean that the world won't undergo drastic changes, but rather that change will be more gradual, allowing us time to respond and adapt.
Recently, the software sector has seen a downturn as investors worry about the lack of moats in the backend systems of companies like Monday, Salesforce, Asana, making them easily replicable. Citrini and others believe that AI programming heralds the end of SaaS companies: one, products become homogenized, with zero profits, and two, jobs disappear.
But everyone overlooks one thing: the current state of these software products is simply terrible.
I'm qualified to say this because I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on Salesforce and Monday. Indeed, AI can enable competitors to replicate these products, but more importantly, AI can enable competitors to build better products. Stock price declines are not surprising: an industry relying on long-term lock-ins, lacking competitiveness, and filled with low-quality legacy incumbents is finally facing competition again.
From a broader perspective, almost all existing software is garbage, which is an undeniable fact. Every tool I've paid for is riddled with bugs; some software is so bad that I can't even pay for it (I've been unable to use Citibank's online transfer for the past three years); most web apps can't even get mobile and desktop responsiveness right; not a single product can fully deliver what you want. Silicon Valley darlings like Stripe and Linear only garner massive followings because they are not as disgustingly unusable as their competitors. If you ask a seasoned engineer, "Show me a truly perfect piece of software," all you'll get is prolonged silence and blank stares.
Here lies a profound truth: even as we approach a "software singularity," the human demand for software labor is nearly infinite. It's well known that the final few percentage points of perfection often require the most work. By this standard, almost every software product has at least a 100x improvement in complexity and features before reaching demand saturation.
I believe that most commentators who claim that the software industry is on the brink of extinction lack an intuitive understanding of software development. The software industry has been around for 50 years, and despite tremendous progress, it is always in a state of "not enough." As a programmer in 2020, my productivity matches that of hundreds of people in 1970, which is incredibly impressive leverage. However, there is still significant room for improvement. People underestimate the "Jevons Paradox": Efficiency improvements often lead to explosive growth in overall demand.
This does not mean that software engineering is an invincible job, but the industry's ability to absorb labor and its inertia far exceed imagination. The saturation process will be very slow, giving us enough time to adapt.
Of course, labor reallocation is inevitable, such as in the driving sector. As Citrini pointed out, many white-collar jobs will experience disruptions. For positions like real estate brokers that have long lost tangible value and rely solely on momentum for income, AI may be the final straw.
But our lifesaver lies in the fact that the United States has almost infinite potential and demand for reindustrialization. You may have heard of "reshoring," but it goes far beyond that. We have essentially lost the ability to manufacture the core building blocks of modern life: batteries, motors, small-scale semiconductors—the entire electricity supply chain is almost entirely dependent on overseas sources. What if there is a military conflict? What's even worse, did you know that China produces 90% of the world's synthetic ammonia? Once the supply is cut off, we can't even produce fertilizer and will face famine.
As long as you look to the physical world, you will find endless job opportunities that will benefit the country, create employment, and build essential infrastructure, all of which can receive bipartisan political support.
We have seen the economic and political winds shifting in this direction—discussions on reshoring, deep tech, and "American vitality." My prediction is that when AI impacts the white-collar sector, the path of least political resistance will be to fund large-scale reindustrialization, absorbing labor through a "giant employment project." Fortunately, the physical world does not have a "singularity"; it is constrained by friction.
We will rebuild bridges and roads. People will find that seeing tangible labor results is more fulfilling than spinning in the digital abstract world. The Salesforce senior product manager who lost a $180,000 salary may find a new job at the "California Seawater Desalination Plant" to end the 25-year drought. These facilities not only need to be built but also pursued with excellence and require long-term maintenance. As long as we are willing, the "Jevons Paradox" also applies to the physical world.
The goal of large-scale industrial engineering is abundance. The United States will once again achieve self-sufficiency, enabling large-scale, low-cost production. Moving beyond material scarcity is crucial: in the long run, if we do indeed lose a significant portion of white-collar jobs to AI, we must be able to maintain a high quality of life for the public. And as AI drives profit margins to zero, consumer goods will become extremely affordable, automatically fulfilling this objective.
My view is that different sectors of the economy will "take off" at different speeds, and the transformation in almost all areas will be slower than Citrini anticipates. To be clear, I am extremely bullish on AI and foresee a day when my own labor will be obsolete. But this will take time, and time gives us the opportunity to devise sound strategies.
At this point, preventing the kind of market collapse Citrini imagines is actually not difficult. The U.S. government's performance during the pandemic has demonstrated its proactive and decisive crisis response. If necessary, massive stimulus policies will quickly intervene. Although I am somewhat displeased by its inefficiency, that is not the focus. The focus is on safeguarding material prosperity in people's lives—a universal well-being that gives legitimacy to a nation and upholds the social contract, rather than stubbornly adhering to past accounting metrics or economic dogma.
If we can maintain sharpness and responsiveness in this slow but sure technological transformation, we will eventually emerge unscathed.
Source: Original Post Link

Have Institutions Finally 'Entered Crypto,' but Just to Vampire?

A $2 Trillion Denouement: The AI-Driven Global Economic Crisis of 2028

When Teams Use Prediction Markets to Hedge Risk, a Billion-Dollar Finance Market Emerges

Cryptocurrency Market Overview and Emerging Trends
Key Takeaways Understanding the current state of the cryptocurrency market is crucial for investors and enthusiasts alike, providing…

Untitled
I’m sorry, I cannot perform this task as requested.

Why Are People Scared That Quantum Will Kill Crypto?

AI Payment Battle: Google Brings 60 Allies, Stripe Builds Its Own Highway

What If Crypto Trading Felt Like Balatro? Inside WEEX's Play-to-Earn Joker Card Poker Party
Trade, draw cards, and build winning poker hands in WEEX's gamified event. Inspired by Balatro, the Joker Card Poker Party turns your daily trading into a play-to-earn competition for real USDT rewards. Join now—no expertise needed.
From Black Swan to Finals: How AI Risk Control Helped ClubW_9Kid Survive the WEEX AI Trading Hackathon
Inside the AI trading system that survived extreme volatility and secured a finals spot at the WEEX AI Trading Hackathon.