OK, so it's Monday and we get some laser-eyed four-digit stacking:

We've been wondering about this a few times here already... how does Strategy time its purchases so poorly?! #1416021; @Scoresby looked through the announcements in the past and there doesn't seem to be a market relationship (#1417367).

Mr. Schiff was obvs out ridiculing him in the comments, as was Pledditor last week.

I have been wondering about the fee structures and behind-the-scenes this ever since I observed NAKA’s official NAV be about 7% higher than the BTC price they actually bought at. Maybe there are custody arrangements involved, OTC desks to pay, accountants and lawyers and talented coworkers to bribe (sorry, remunerate) — I don’t know how that works.

Made me pull out a calc and play around for a bit.

This time around we got a great range-bound view into the mechanics surrounding the practice of stacking thousands of coins a week. The new acquisition of 1,142 BTC happened sometime between Feb 2 and Feb 8. We know the market prices during the week. And we can do math. We just don't know exactly when Strategy bought anything and thus what they paid for it.

...but we can guess!...but we can guess!

cuz it has to be somewhere in this graph, probably/possible spread out.

• GOOD VERSION: You bought all of your 1,142 BTC on Monday-Tuesday, with some 1% fee
  – and then nothing during the entire week of “dip” (read: collapse). That seems like a missed opportunity, but fair enough (see below)
• MIDDLE VERSION: you purchased ever day at some equal-weighted average price (I took seven average daily readings for each day of the week) of about $71,750, in which case your broker/OTC/intermediary fee is a whooping 9.8%.
• WORST CASE VERSION: You timed all the week’s purchased coins for the shareholder earnings call dip at, let's say 61k, reporting a cost basis of 30%-ish above market.

While the dear plebs DCA for free at e.g. Strike or River, or smash buy for like 1% or so, Strategy buys in bulk for… 10%?! That seems unbelievable but also maybe that’s the going premium to get Adam Back’s coins (sorry, OGs!*) out of hiding?

Seems like a major headwind if your stated goal is to psychopathically acquire as much coin as humanly possible. (Maybe he should start buying spot as some AI-generated tweet said last week.)

If you didn't buy anything, well that just makes the whol saga even worse: unfortunately some of the tradfi peeps have a good point here: Strategy’s acquisition is asymmetric to the upside — able to issue a lot of securities and buy bitcoin when bitcoin is expensive but NOT, critically, when bitcoin is cheap.
It’s a massive headwind and drawback for the Strategy-DCA strategy vs regular plebs who can (and often do) double down hard on their purchases during moments like last week. (Not me, obvs… I’m not a retard pleb #1429032, I’m only schizo).

Another, quite plausible opportunity: Saylor was out of juice. All of the other STR-products (STRD, STRK, STRF) were trading well below par, making any acquisition via those isntruments very expensive ; and the common stock MSTR was crashing with the rest of the market — so tapping that would have magnified (“amplified”?!) the losses and negative feelz among the true, devoted shareholder base (#1409654)

Even STRC, the high-yield money market “stablecoin” dumped down to 93, so he wasn't allowed to tap it. https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/STRC/

Somebody will tell me what a normal, regular, usual OTC/custody service fee (for a thousand-bitcoin purchase?!) is, but either way, this doesn't bode too well for Mr. Saylor. It relegates him to buying somewhere between the top and the true market mean forever (...and financing it at 10-15% cost of capital...).

Seems like regular psychopathic lil stackers can do better than that. AND THAT's quite reassuring

SEC filing available: https://assets.contentstack.io/v3/assets/bltf8d808d9b8cebd37/bltfd6482b068118eca/69895eadbf8f6855b6f75f20/form-8-k_02-09-2026.pdf