Strategy update for experts. Strive poll results

all accounting stuff. I'm not an accountant. I'm not giving anybody accounting advice, but this is basic understanding of accounting. So going back to the net debt. The net debt for strike is a negative number because it's debt minus the cash. Their debt is zero. Their cash is 154.8 million. Therefore, it's a negative number. I don't make the formula, but that negative net debt is actually something that's positive in the sense that it's a goodness. And if you can't prompt this to the AI correctly, you're not going to get good information. So hopefully this resonated. And that's I want to talk about stride. I'm going to switch gears and go to MSTR. And this is going to be a bigger summary and we're going to go right to questions in about four or five minutes. There was a question that I had asked to Natalie Brinnell and she had asked sailor, it was at the 27 minute mark. And then the Q1 presentation for for strategy, they said that they could sell STRC and buy back a billion dollars worth of MSTR shares. That was in their deck. They said that at the end of Q1. I'm like, okay. So I said to Natalie Brinnell, like anybody, there's lots of people that asked her questions. I posted the question send her and I said at the end of Q1, they said that they could sell stretch and buy back MSTR. Now when they sell stretch right now, for the most part, they were buying the magical bitcoins. Right? Stretch gets to a hundred dollars and one cent. If it certain percentage stays there, let's say 50% of the trading volume. And then they buy the magical bitcoins. And everybody's like, oh my god, this is so great. And it's accreted to the shareholders because it increases the amount of bitcoin that they hold. It does not increase ADSO, assumed alluded shares outstanding because it's a pref and not the common, I'm well aware of CBE, common equity, bitcoin exposure. But what does is it increases the amount of bitcoin that strategy has and they have a metric for it called amplification. Cool. We all get that. So I'm like, wow, that is great. But on today's call, when Natalie asked that question exactly as I said to Michael Saylor, he responded back within 30 seconds. The whole answer was we're open to using stretch proceeds to do a wide variety of things. He just said, we could buy bitcoin. We could buy back stock. We can use it any way we see fit that's going to be accreted to shareholders. Then what he said for the next three minutes was this. He only wants the buyback things that are a discount. So as we speak right now, MSTR shares, their MNAB, the new MNAB is 1.06. Well, assuming that 1.00MNAB, multiple in an asset value on bitcoin means that this is a positive number, there's no reason for them to buy back MSTR. As much as I would love for them to buy back MSTR, because it's not trading at a discount. So there's really my interpretation with Saylor said is there's really no reason to buy back MSTR. But if we look at STRC, STRC closed at 94.36. So basically it's 5.64% discount. Well, that makes sense. He should buy back STRC and he doesn't have to buy back a billion dollars of it. He should buy back about a hundred million dollars at a time in order to get it back up to par. He wants to use the least amount as possible to get it back to par because he's buying it at a discount. So I want people to understand this in the bitcoin world. And I've been in it with my own personal funds since May of 2017. So about nine and a half years. Every cycle I've had to learn something new. With strategy and with took place from 2022 to now and the bitcoin treasury space, which really got kicked off with other companies besides strategy. In the beginning of 2025, every three to six months, whatever you thought was true might still be mathematically true, but that may not be what they're focusing on. Things will change. The one thing that I can guarantee for everybody, like how can you guarantee something is I can guarantee that things will always change. And what would happen with strategy was this. STRC was phenomenally successful. Phenomaly successful. And what happened was wow, this is great. Then they raised a bunch of cash. Then they bought back the converts for $1.38 billion at a discount. Why did that make sense? And Fong, there were two videos of Fong like why did buy back the converts? And he said at the time, they look great. We bought them back as a discount. They were the highest price ones. And we thought it was great. And then on June 1st, bitcoin basically dropped from the 70,000 range all the way down to 59,000. And when stretch was doing awesome, bitcoin was trading at 82,000. So what I think has happened since June 1st, you know, in the olden days, like real long time ago, June 1st or June 15th, the 2026. That's like such a long time ago. Literally, it's August 17th. And what I'm telling you is basically two months after that, they thought about this a lot. And they updated all the metrics on their website. And they're like, you know, things are different now. And everybody's like, yeah, but strategy changed their mind how they're doing things. I'm like, okay, what did I just guaranteed everybody? Things will change. And that's exactly what happened. Right? And I don't like when they change guidance. That was something that was not well received last year. And this year, but I think what they have to do is they have to adapt to the market that you have, not the one that you want. And what that said, I am, you know, I don't know how a true bitcoiner could say, I want strategy to fail. And they have 840,000 bitcoin. And why that would be good. They're net leverage that they're buying as of today. Their net leverage is now 3.62%. It used to be 14% in November. Again, in the olden days, November of 2025, prior to December 3rd of 2025, their net leverage was 14%. Nobody cared about it. Nobody talked about strategies cash balance, which was probably somewhere between 40 and 80 million dollars. Nobody even asked the question. Cash is a melting ice cube, cash is trash. No reason to stock buybacks because it's surrendering cash, it's surrendering capital. You know, those are all true statements. But today, we live in a different world with strategy. And what I've just described to you now is they're sitting on 4.8 billion dollars in cash. Right? The cash can pay out the dividends for 2.8 years. That's all on their website. And now what they're saying is we will do it's in the best interest of buying back things that are out of discount. I believe that they want, they truly have not given up on the fact that STRC is an iPhone moment. That is their more key product, right? Along with MSTR. And they know that once STRC is back to, um, SIR is back to par at $100 and one cent that they will have a choice. They can buy magical bitcoins. They could buy some cash. They could use that cash to increase the USD duration. I think what I'm telling you right now is that I think that they want their net leverage to go to zero. I think that they will acquire at least $6.7 billion in cash over time. I have no doubt that they're going to do that. I also am thinking based upon the other questions that happened today, they could get the $10 billion in cash six months from now. They'll have $10 billion in cash. And a Bitcoin goes up and you're like, oh my god, they're sitting on $10 billion in cash, $950,000 Bitcoin or a million Bitcoin. And people will be like, what just happened? The comes got $10 billion in cash more than a million in Bitcoin. And the stock price is at $300. And people will be like, wow. And my takeaway is that I want the biggest buyer of Bitcoin to be phenomenally successful. With that, let's take questions. I'm going to invite some people to jump in here that I see have followed me that made comments on what I'm saying. You know, there's no wrong questions here. If you're willing to learn, there's no wrong questions. So I invited a bunch of speakers here. Hopefully I was making sense. And I will invite Jamie up to speak. So, and with that, I want people to, if you don't understand what I'm saying, that's totally cool. I will explain as best they can in different ways. And I know that I want people to realize this. I have dropped off from doing a lot of spaces because what I've figured out on spaces from talking to many people, I could discern within 30 to 60 seconds, somebody's relative sophistication, willingness to learn and willingness to change their mindset. If I know that within 30 to 60 seconds that you're not willing to learn, that you're not willing to change your mindset and you're not willing to use the correct terms, then I don't view while I wish you well and we could talk about cars or motorcycles. If you like that, that's okay. But on this space, I have to prioritize people that are willing to learn, willing to change their mind, willing to use the terms correctly. So, Jamie, what's going on? I appreciate you, Graeme. And I agree 100% with the net debt percentage. So, that's very factual. I've been doing a lot of the under the hood, balance sheet, pro forma, running through all these scenarios. And I'm grateful to have an opportunity to balance a couple of them off of you because I know you could fact-check them to being relevant. And I think they'll be helpful for the space. And also, I would say, the reason that you have frustrated in these spaces because you're too smart, and I'm half retard. And so, maybe I identify with the other side of the spaces where I am not smart enough to be talking over that side of the audience that would like to understand this. And you are incredibly intelligent. So, I think that's where our niche is that could be helpful. So, thank you so much for saying that. So, I don't think that my, I have certain skills. Fluidity with ratios and formulas going forwards and backwards. So, that is true. But there are many people, lots of people. And when I say this to Fred Krueger, he's a real Stanford mathematician. And what he tends to think, because I've said this on spaces, I'm like the math that I'm saying is rudimentary. He's like, yeah. And when I talk about some of these things, like, for instance, that a negative number is what you want in this case, net debt. And he would be like, well, yeah, of course, he knows that. But when I run the poll and 88% of the people get it wrong, that's, and I do the cheat sheet. And then the next hundred people continue on with getting it wrong when I give the cheat sheet. I think that's the part, you know, where it is. So, thank you so much for saying that I'm intelligent. I appreciate that. But what I want people to understand is that I think a lot of times, and this is when you're using AI and we have an AI guy coming up here, is that when you prompt AI, the prompt is just as important as what you get as the output. And that's garbage and garbage out. So, if your prompt is, oh, well, Michael Sailer's buying Bitcoin on margin and AI is sloppy in the response back to you, yeah, he can get margin called the Bitcoin drop 50%. Yeah, but strategy does not buy on margin. So go ahead with your point, Jamie, I appreciate it. Yeah, absolutely. So, I think there's a lot of things. And again, I look at this completely differently now that I've consumed my last five weeks of looking at the balance sheet, understanding what they did prior to May 11th, when they, by the way, that data is significant because that was the day they started discussing paying off the $1.5 billion debt trotch. And if you look at a chart, you can see clearly from that day was when their upward trend changed direction and went down. You know, I don't know if I tried to find out who the debtors were, it's not disclosed, but it's clear that the 11th through the 19th was when there was negotiations on discussing about paying that off and clearly on the chart. From those discussions, the market as we understand was not happy about it. They would have preferred that the USD reserve was increased. So, it's clearly in the chart and clearly aligns with the negotiations starting on that. So, Jamie, Jamie, you're saying something very insightful here. I want everybody here what I'm thinking about based upon what you just said. What you're saying is this is that it's possible that the people that were owning the converts could also own large positions of Bitcoin. And when he paid off the converts and bought them back at a discount, they were like, oh, we kind of got screwed. So, let's dump the Bitcoin that we have here because that will affect strategy more. Is that kind of like what you were saying? 100%. And that's why I wanted to bring it up to see if what I'm seeing in the chart and they're confirmed negotiations starting date aligns if that was a fair thing because obviously I'm not in public markets.