Schiff claims MSTR’s debt-driven Bitcoin strategy risks eventual insolvency. BitOrdi and Schiff dispute whether convertible notes mirror a sustainable business model. Jeff Dorman argues MSTR faces no forced-selling risk and remains structurally stable. A public dispute over MicroStrategy’s (MSTR) long-running Bitcoin accumulation strategy widened after economist Peter Schiff accused the company and its executive chairman, Michael Saylor, of operating on an unsustainable model. Schiff, a noted Bitcoin skeptic, argued that MSTR’s debt-fueled approach exposes the firm to eventual insolvency. His comments sparked a wide range of responses from market analysts, who rejected the assertion and challenged his interpretation of the company’s debt structure and risk exposure. Related: MicroStrategy’s Historic Outperformance Reverses as MSTR Trails Bitcoin in 2025 Schiff Renews “Fraud” Claim, Challenges Saylor to Debate Schiff stated that MSTR’s business model is “a fraud” and asserted that the firm would “eventually go bankrupt,” adding that he is willing to debate Saylor at Binance Blockchain Week in Dubai. He framed his criticism around MSTR’s reliance on capital raises that, in his view, repeat the same cycle of issuing debt to acquire more Bitcoin. In response to Schiff’s post, commentator BitOrdi argued that this pattern mirrors how a company could theoretically raise funds to purchase an asset correlated to its strategic thesis repeatedly. He suggested this mechanism resembles MSTR’s use of proceeds from “Convertible Senior Notes.” Schiff rejected this comparison, stating that NEM, the example BitOrdi used, is a business generating operating earnings and dividends, which he said could service its debt obligations. Analysts Refute Forced Selling Risk, Cite Debt Structure BitOrdi responded by claiming Schiff’s definition of a “real business” shifts depending on the argument. He pointed out that convertible notes are a legal arrangement in which noteholders are paid interest and may convert the notes into equity at maturity, with returns tied to MSTR’s future valuation. Further reactions emerged as analysts weighed in. Jeff Dorman challenged Schiff’s characterization and disagreed with broader claims that MSTR presents a systemic risk to Bitcoin. Dorman noted that MSTR’s balance-sheet strategy is often misunderstood and said that concerns about forced Bitcoin selling are unfounded based on how the company’s debt and cash flows operate. He also noted that Saylor’s 42% ownership makes activist intervention unlikely and highlighted the absence of covenants requiring asset liquidation.
https://bitcoinethereumnews.com/tech/analysts-refute-peter-schiffs-mstr-will-go-bankrupt-thesis/
Analysts Refute Peter Schiff’s “MSTR Will Go Bankrupt” Thesis
