On June 26, Arkham analyzed on X that STRC has de-pegged to $76.2, down approximately 25% from its $100 par value. Arkham pointed out that Strategy holds 104.89 million STRC shares, requiring approximately $1.2 billion in annual dividend payments based on an 11.5% annual dividend rate. In the long term, if investors believe that new financing is only used to reward early shareholders, future financing capabilities will be weakened.
Arkham Core Data: 104.89 million STRC shares, $1.2 billion annual dividends
According to Arkham's analysis figures: STRC has approximately 104.89 million shares outstanding; based on an 11.5% annual dividend rate, Strategy needs to pay approximately $1.2 billion per year to maintain STRC operations; as of Monday this week, Strategy holds approximately $1.4 billion in USD reserves, roughly covering one year's dividend expenses, but with almost no additional buffer.
On June 25, STRC fell to $76.2, a discount of approximately 25% from its $100 par value, causing the annual dividend yield to rise to an implied higher yield, but actual attractiveness is constrained by doubts about dividend sustainability.
Essential Differences Between STRC and Terra LUNA: Different Mechanisms of Legal Obligations and Forced Liquidation
Arkham clearly lists two essential differences between STRC and Terra LUNA:
Different legal obligations: Strategy is not legally obligated to pay STRC dividends; if the company is in trouble, Saylor does not need to prioritize the interests of STRC shareholders. This is fundamentally different from the Terra protocol's mechanism of having to maintain the UST peg.
Different trigger mechanisms: A decline in STRC price does not trigger any forced liquidation, which is completely different from Terra LUNA's death spiral mechanism (UST de-pegging → forced minting of LUNA → LUNA collapse → further UST de-pegging). STRC's price only reflects the market's expectations of Strategy's future dividend payment possibilities and financing ability, and does not have a self-reinforcing collapse mechanism.
Logic of Long-Term Financing Erosion: If MSTR Investors Believe Money Only Goes to Reward Early Shareholders
Arkham's long-term warning is that STRC's problem is not that it will directly cripple Strategy, but that it may erode investor confidence and financing capability. The logic chain is as follows: If MSTR common stock investors realize that a significant portion of the funds they use to buy MSTR ultimately flows only to STRC early shareholders as dividends, rather than accumulating more Bitcoin; then future buying pressure for MSTR may shrink, and the positive flywheel effect of Strategy relying on stock market financing to purchase Bitcoin may face deceleration or stagnation.
FAQ
Why doesn't a decline in STRC price trigger a collapse like LUNA?
According to Arkham's analysis, STRC is a perpetual preferred stock, not an algorithmic stablecoin. Its holders' rights are to receive dividends and have priority claims in liquidation, rather than relying on protocol mechanisms to maintain a peg; there is also no mechanism requiring 'burning' or 'minting' to maintain price. Therefore, a decline in STRC is merely a repricing by the market of dividend sustainability, and will not trigger a chain of liquidations.
Is Strategy's $1.4 billion cash position safe in the short term?
According to Arkham's analysis, $1.4 billion in cash roughly covers approximately $1.2 billion in STRC dividend expenses for one year, so it has the ability to pay in the short term; however, if STRC maintains a discount far below par for a long time, Strategy's ability to raise funds through the ATM mechanism (which is only effective when the stock trades above par) will be limited, and in the future it may need to sell Bitcoin or raise capital through other means.
Why do investors choose to sell STRC when its price falls instead of holding for the high dividend?
According to Arkham's analysis, the main reasons investors sell are: doubts about whether Saylor can continue to pay dividends in the future (requiring $1.2 billion annually over the long term); concerns about Strategy's future financing ability; and the choice to pursue better risk-reward offered by other stocks. When the market believes there are issues with the sustainability of dividend payments, a high dividend yield alone is not enough to attract buying.
