Anyone who thinks $MSTR or $ASST should buy back their own shares above 1x mNAV doesn't understand the model. Buying back equity at a premium reduces net Bitcoin per share. It's also a terrible use of capital. At 1.5x mNAV, $1 spent on Bitcoin gets you $1 of Bitcoin. $1 spent buying back stock retires only $0.67 of Bitcoin-backed value. Why would you ever choose the second? "But the company thinks it should trade at 3x mNAV, so buying at 1.5x is accretive". No, it isn't. You can't force the market to give you a premium. mNAV is set by sentiment, which is driven above all by the performance of the underlying, Bitcoin. You can't compare Strategy and Strive to other companies. They have no meaningful cash flow. Selling Bitcoin to buy back shares trading at a premium is a non-starter. Funding buybacks with preferreds adds leverage and permanent dividends, while still lowering net Bitcoin per share and weakening the credit. Only below 1x mNAV does a buyback make sense because it adds net Bitcoin per share. Notice how people asking Strategy and Strive to engineer share scarcity above 1x mNAV never have a credible answer for how to actually do it. There is no sustainable way to artificially keep the share price above 1.5x mNAV, or at any premium. That's up to the market.