A short thread on TSLA selling 10% of their BTC.

The sale "in order to demonstrate liquidity," is a totally legitimate action on their part. It looks as if this move may have been pre-meditated by @elonmusk to de-fang shareholder derivative lawsuits.

⅛

MSTR had the ability to announce their intention before buying, and give their shareholders time to be bought out at a premium.

2/8

This worked for @michael_saylor since their initial announcement was unlikely to move BTC much, their shareholders were a much smaller group than TSLA, & (at the time) they were a lower-profile company than TSLA.

⅜

If TSLA were to pre-announce like MSTR did, the media hype would not only move the BTC price in advance of their purchase, but that alone could be seen by some investors as a breach itself (since it would clearly move the price against TSLA).

4/8

Of course TSLA could have HODLd, but given the negative attitudes still present toward BTC, anything that could be done to weaken the case for a shareholder lawsuit would be worth it.

⅝

By demonstrating that BTC has sufficient liquidity to freely trade like USD, they have weakened one of the biggest arguments that could be used against TSLA.

6/8

It would not be surprising if this was part of their initial plan, and was priced into their initial purchase.

One could also consider that by taking this action, TSLA has done a great service to all future companies that put BTC on their balance sheet.

⅞

I could be wrong, but were I to be in the position that I'm trying to minimize lawsuit routes on this score, this is how I'd play it. @allenf32 @bennd77

8/8