The crucial question remains: Who should buy MSTR shares if 1) one can buy Bitcoin directly and 2) one can buy ETFs if you want a leveraged exposure or don't have access to BTC spot, if both of these options are cheaper than MSTR regarding the risk premium? 21 Capital should have the same problem.
Due to the bitcoin yield. MSTR gave a 74% bitcoin yield on 2024 and a 14% this year so far. If I bought 1 bitcoin or 1 bitcoin through an ETF now I have 1 bitcoin and in a year I'll hav 1 bitcoin whereas if I spent the same money on MSTR at 2 NAV premium I almost have 1 bitcoin exposure now and will have much more than one bitcoin in a couple of years.
The only really important reason I can see is indeed volatility just due to the risk premium, but you could simply increase your leverage on ETFs.
Comparing leverage on ETF to be able to borrow billions of dollars at 0% with no margin call is like comparing an elephant to a mosquito.
The comparison with Bitcoin demand here doesn't make sense in this context because the Bitcoin (circulating/total) supply is predictable. The focus of my post was the influence of the market entry of 21 Capital, not some other factors which could influence demand.
So what if the supply is predictable. What MSTR has demonstrated with facts is that it has created products that no one could even imagine a few years ago and that it has a growing demand for them, such as bitcoin bonds, which are the most profitable in the entire bond market. To think that demand is going to remain fixed when it has not stopped increasing is an unjustified assumption. And the fact that bitcoin has a predictable supply has nothing to do with it, Litecoin also has a predictable supply and its demand has not increased.