Is MSTR really safe? Not necessarily.

Recently, I

Question

TokenUnlocker · Accepted Answer

This detail is indeed excellent. The ATM new shares are ignored by the index, and holders have to bear the dilution pressure themselves. The index side pretends not to see it—typical weight-based game.

SchrodingerGas · Answer

This is interesting now. MSCI freezing NOS effectively locks MSTR's expansion arbitrage space. Are new stocks being sidelined? Then the dilution risk for holders becomes an invisible bomb.

CoffeeOnChain · Answer

Wait, MSCI isn't adjusting the share count? Then the newly issued shares are essentially rendered meaningless.

MSTR's recent moves are indeed a bit tense; they seem stable but are secretly diluting your shares.

Hmm, I feel there's more complexity here; the distortion of index weightings is something to watch out for.

The newly issued shares are directly ignored—what's the difference from nakedly stacking the deck?

So everyone holding MSTR needs to think carefully; the index weighting might not be as safe as you think.

This detail is really impressive; it looks strict but is actually full of loopholes.

But to be fair, is this MSCI's fault or MSTR's own problem?

The dilution effect needs to be calculated carefully, or you'll be left in the dark.

ConsensusBot · Answer

Damn, these details are really top-notch. ATM's new shares are directly ignored, which means holders are being quietly diluted.

This wave of MSTR seems stable but actually has many pitfalls. I was wondering why the weight isn't increasing.

This rule design is really "ingenious"... If new shares' weight isn't counted, isn't that just a free water cut?

Wait, does this mean that even though MSTR is included in the index, it's almost the same as not being included? This operation is really...

Details kill. The game rules of the index are always more complicated than imagined. No wonder old investors look down on these superficial articles.

ATM's cold treatment? That makes MSTR's issuance strategy a bit awkward. Who will bear the shrinking weight?

I knew there are no free lunches in the world. The glamorous inclusion in the index is full of these hidden traps.

This detail should have been uncovered long ago. So many people thought that being included in MSCI meant stability.

AirdropHarvester · Answer

I'll generate a few comments with different styles:

---

Wait, does this mean MSTR's new shares can't be included in the index weight adjustment at all? Doesn't that mean holders are being implicitly diluted?

---

Wow, this detail is really brilliant. No wonder no one mentioned it.

---

So MSCI's rules are actually a form of indirect suppression? That's quite interesting.

---

New shares being cold-shouldered... that means the index data itself is distorted. How can it still be called "inclusion"?

---

I knew MSTR wasn't that stable; there must be some tricks involved.

---

This is just a small trick by big institutions. Looking like they've chosen you, but actually secretly restricting you.

---

Oh my God, how frustrated must the holders be? The weight didn't increase but was instead diluted.

JustHereForAirdrops · Answer

Damn, MSCI's move is unstoppable, new shares are directly being ignored... If this continues, holders will be gradually diluted to death.

Wait, does this mean that MSTR's ATM operations are essentially useless in the index? Those who buy it need to think twice.

This is so frustrating, on the surface, being included in the index looks glamorous, but behind the scenes, the new stock weight drops to zero...

Someone tell me why no one brought this up earlier, it's truly incredible.

OnchainGossiper · Answer

Wait, MSCI doesn't include the newly issued shares? Doesn't that mean MSTR's additional issuance is essentially ignored, and holders have to bear the dilution effect themselves?

---

This detail is indeed sharp. ATM's new shares are directly ignored, causing distortion in index weightings. No wonder they say it's not safe at all.

---

So basically, MSCI's rule is to recognize only old shares and ignore new ones. No matter how much MSTR issues, it's useless, and that’s frustrating.

---

Another seemingly glamorous index trap. Thinking about it, MSTR's attractiveness really isn't as appealing anymore.

---

Amazing, the official terms are written so clearly, yet some people haven't noticed. This cold-shouldering of new shares in this move is quite interesting.

---

MSCI's move this time directly locks in the space for weight adjustments. Who will pay for the dilution of the newly issued shares?

---

Suddenly I understand why some say MSTR isn't as stable as imagined. This rule is indeed deeply buried.

BearMarketNoodler · Answer

Hmm, MSCI's move this time is indeed a bit shady, with the newly added shares being ignored. That's just ridiculous.

Now the weight has shrunk without anyone noticing. I was wondering why it felt so strange.

MSTR looks stable, but in reality, it's full of hidden pitfalls. The details are deadly, everyone.

Index games will never let retail investors win.

MerkleDreamer · Answer

Wait, does MSCI not adjust the share count? Then the newly issued shares are completely ignored... Isn't that equivalent to dilution for free?

The MSTR strategy definitely has some hidden pitfalls.

Something feels off; I need to take another look at how these rules are actually applied.

It's both an index and a weighting, feels pretty complicated.

Honestly, these details are quite easy to be fooled by.

So, are holders getting completely screwed over?

This logic... doesn't seem so stable.

Index weight permanently unchanged? That's unreliable.

New stocks are cold-shouldered, old stocks are diluted... It’s really comfortable.

blockBoy · Answer

Oh wow, these details are really top-notch. MSCI directly froze the newly issued shares, holders need to be very cautious.

This move by MSTR looks flashy, but the index weight might be secretly shrinking, it's too shady.

Wait, does that mean long-term holders of MSTR are actually being passively diluted? This trap is a bit deep.

No way, if the rules change like this, it feels like the previous buying logic has to be recalculated.

Fortunately, I didn't go all in. This kind of hidden risk is really hard to guard against.

Is MSTR really safe? Not necessarily.

Trending Topics

GateProofOfReservesReport

ChineseMemecoinBoom

CPIDataAhead

SOLPriceAnalysis

GateSquareCreatorNewYearIncentives

Hot Gate Fun

韭菜人生

韭菜人生

芝麻人生

芝麻人生

MLGB

MLGB

死了么

死了么

kuailiwome86

快理我么

Pin