#strategy周五股价下跌9%
Stock drops 9% in a day, but founder says it’s not that important 📉
On October 15, MSCI revised the rules for its Global Investable Market Indexes, tightening the definition of non-operating companies and subjecting Bitcoin treasury companies to greater scrutiny.
📊 加入小恐龙聊天室
Strategy wasn’t removed from the index this time, but the real verdict has been pushed to the November index review.
At 3:47 p.m. today, Saylor gave his first direct response in an interview with Bloomberg.
He said the issue wasn’t that important to Strategy because the amount of capital the company controls is relatively small.
But then he added that he was very disappointed with MSCI’s position so far and hoped they would reconsider. 🦖
His reasoning is straightforward:
Oil counts as capital. Natural gas counts as capital. Land counts as capital. Machines count as capital. But somehow, Bitcoin doesn’t.
This isn’t an accounting issue; it’s a value judgment.
He even compared MSCI to an unregistered financial adviser, saying this sets a bad precedent for the entire industry.
There’s really only one core question in this debate:
Does Strategy count as a company with an actual operating business?
Saylor drew comparisons with banks and insurance companies: banks sell credit, and insurance companies sell policies.
Strategy sells digital credit products backed by Bitcoin, so he insists it’s an operating business.
The market has already reacted.
MSTR fell 6.46% on October 16, then dropped another 9% on Friday. It’s now at $136.83.
Bitcoin, meanwhile, barely moved, at $81,548, with a daily change of less than 0.1%.
One asset is falling while the other is going nowhere. That suggests the market is selling leverage and index membership—not Bitcoin.
There’s a mechanism many people overlook:
Being included in an index isn’t an honorary medal; it creates a layer of mechanical buying.
Passive funds buy according to weight, without having to judge whether a company is good or not.
The reverse is also true: if a company is removed, the selling is just as mechanical—and likewise has nothing to do with fundamentals. ⚖️
MSCI says existing constituents are still covered by a buffer mechanism. The specific consequences won’t be clear until the November review.
So October 15 isn’t the end of the story. November is.
My take:
Saylor says it’s not that important, but he’s gone on Bloomberg himself to make his case.
If it really didn’t matter, there’d be no need to explain.
And this rule doesn’t affect just one company. It sets a valuation benchmark for every treasury company that raises money by issuing shares to buy crypto.
Let them stay, and it means acknowledging that Bitcoin can count as operating capital.
Remove them, and it tells passive investors that companies like these don’t belong in mainstream indexes.
Do you think MSCI will ultimately allow them in or remove them?
Should Bitcoin treasury companies be included in mainstream indexes? 🏦
Every day, I bring you the latest Bitcoin and Wall Street stories—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind the headlines. 👀🚀
Stock drops 9% in a day, but founder says it’s not that important 📉
On October 15, MSCI revised the rules for its Global Investable Market Indexes, tightening the definition of non-operating companies and subjecting Bitcoin treasury companies to greater scrutiny.
📊 加入小恐龙聊天室
Strategy wasn’t removed from the index this time, but the real verdict has been pushed to the November index review.
At 3:47 p.m. today, Saylor gave his first direct response in an interview with Bloomberg.
He said the issue wasn’t that important to Strategy because the amount of capital the company controls is relatively small.
But then he added that he was very disappointed with MSCI’s position so far and hoped they would reconsider. 🦖
His reasoning is straightforward:
Oil counts as capital. Natural gas counts as capital. Land counts as capital. Machines count as capital. But somehow, Bitcoin doesn’t.
This isn’t an accounting issue; it’s a value judgment.
He even compared MSCI to an unregistered financial adviser, saying this sets a bad precedent for the entire industry.
There’s really only one core question in this debate:
Does Strategy count as a company with an actual operating business?
Saylor drew comparisons with banks and insurance companies: banks sell credit, and insurance companies sell policies.
Strategy sells digital credit products backed by Bitcoin, so he insists it’s an operating business.
The market has already reacted.
MSTR fell 6.46% on October 16, then dropped another 9% on Friday. It’s now at $136.83.
Bitcoin, meanwhile, barely moved, at $81,548, with a daily change of less than 0.1%.
One asset is falling while the other is going nowhere. That suggests the market is selling leverage and index membership—not Bitcoin.
There’s a mechanism many people overlook:
Being included in an index isn’t an honorary medal; it creates a layer of mechanical buying.
Passive funds buy according to weight, without having to judge whether a company is good or not.
The reverse is also true: if a company is removed, the selling is just as mechanical—and likewise has nothing to do with fundamentals. ⚖️
MSCI says existing constituents are still covered by a buffer mechanism. The specific consequences won’t be clear until the November review.
So October 15 isn’t the end of the story. November is.
My take:
Saylor says it’s not that important, but he’s gone on Bloomberg himself to make his case.
If it really didn’t matter, there’d be no need to explain.
And this rule doesn’t affect just one company. It sets a valuation benchmark for every treasury company that raises money by issuing shares to buy crypto.
Let them stay, and it means acknowledging that Bitcoin can count as operating capital.
Remove them, and it tells passive investors that companies like these don’t belong in mainstream indexes.
Do you think MSCI will ultimately allow them in or remove them?
Should Bitcoin treasury companies be included in mainstream indexes? 🏦
Every day, I bring you the latest Bitcoin and Wall Street stories—not just what’s happening, but the logic and opportunities behind the headlines. 👀🚀