Collateral refers to a kind of debt instrument.  So for example, if there were debt instruments issued, and MSTR was used as collateral or bitcoin was used as collateral to service the debt then that would be a collateral situation.  Saylor/MSTR has mostly not been doing that. 

I believe  that in 2022 or so, Saylor/MSTR learned their lesson, when they had a collateralized loan with Silvergate bank, and so they ended up paying that collateralized loan back early.  That loan had been collateralized by bitcoin.. but Saylor/MSTR paid that loan back and they stopped getting into those kinds of loan products (at least so far).

If Saylor/MSTR issues extra shares then they are getting money for those shares, and the person buying the shares are buying a portion in the company, so the shares are not encumbered.  Now you might assert that if Saylor/MSTR generates more shares, then the rest of the shares would be diluted since if there used to be 100,000 shares, and if they issue 10k more shares,  then the outstanding shares are 10% less valuable because 10% shares have been issued, which would largely be true, except that Saylor is specifically using the money to buy bitcoin, so then everyone in the company owns more bitcoin per share because the company bought bitcoin with the money that was generated from selling additional shares.  None of the shares are encumbered since the bitcoin is 100% owned by the company once the money is used to buy BTC with the money that was generated from the shares. 

So your talking about collateral makes no sense in the context in which shares were issued.

I am pretty sure that I also discussed the convertible bond in one of my other posts to you, which such creation of convertible bonds also does not cause any encumberance of the bitcoin, so there is no collateral involved in those converitble bonds either.  So your continuing to talk about collateral means that you are not even talking about any kind of financial instrument that Saylor MSTR is currently issuing, since I am pretty sure that Saylor/MSTR stopped encumbreing their BTC after their 2022 experience with Silvergate. .


Just because the numbers are larger, how is Saylor/MSTR engaging in higher levels of risk than individuals?   He has various cashflow management matters, and we do not know all of the details, yet I think that his debt to asset ratio is pretty damned low.  Sure, there is a lot of bitcoin being held by a variety of custodians, yet we do not necessarily know the details of his custodial arrangements, but you don't seem to be referring to custodial concerns.  You seem to be narrowly focused on the fact that Saylor bought a lot of bitcoin, and proclaiming that buying a lot of bitcoin is risky, but still don't even seem to understand what Saylor/MSTR is doing.  It seems strange that you would  proclaim Saylor/MSTR to be engaging in "risky" behaviors merely because they bought a lot of bitcoin.


I am not sure if that is the point... but sure there are a lot of folks who seem to not understand what Saylor/MSTR is doing.. .and some of them are shilling meme  coins or NFTs or some other variable of valueless shit-coin related projects/gambles/trades.