Strategy’s Saylor Says It’s Not The Time To Buy Rivals – Details

Strategy Chairman Michael Saylor told investors that his company is not looking to buy peer Bitcoin treasury firms, saying such deals often take too long and carry too much uncertainty.

Strategy’s Focus Remains On Buying Bitcoin

According to Strategy’s third-quarter earnings call, Saylor said the company has “no plans to pursue M&A” even when a deal might look accretive at first.

He warned that deals can stretch out “six to nine months or a year,” and that an idea that looks good at the start may not be attractive months later.

Strategy’s stated plan is straightforward: sell digital credit, shore up the balance sheet, buy Bitcoin and keep investors informed.

That clarity, Saylor argued, makes the company’s results easier for analysts to check and for the market to judge.

M&A Activity Picks Up Elsewhere

Reports have disclosed that Strive moved ahead with a deal in late September, agreeing to buy rival Semler Scientific in an all-stock transaction that left the combined firm with 11,006 BTC.

That haul would put Strive among the larger public holders — roughly the 12th-largest — trailing big names such as Tesla. By contrast, Strategy’s holdings remain huge: 640,808 BTC, the largest stash reported by any public firm.

The numbers underline why Strategy feels little pressure to rush into consolidation when its primary aim is accumulation.

Phong Le, Strategy’s CEO, warned that buying other firms often hides surprises. He said software M&A is “very difficult,” and added that the same caution applies to purchases of Bitcoin treasury businesses.

Those comments were made alongside Saylor’s more guarded line that the company would not say “never” to acquisitions, but that the current focus is clear and narrow.

S&P Global Ratings last week gave Strategy a B- grade – or “junk” rating – placing the firm in a speculative, non-investment-grade slot.

According to the rating agency’s view, much of the company’s Bitcoin hoard was not counted toward its equity, and that had an effect on the final score.

Le suggested that credit metrics could change if Bitcoin is ever treated differently on corporate balance sheets — for example, if it were recognized as a capital asset — which would likely affect how ratings are assessed.

The credit rating does not change what Saylor says drives the business. He pointed out that each Bitcoin purchase can be measured and shown to investors, which makes the firm’s model predictable and transparent.

That predictability is used by company leadership to argue that accumulation beats acquiring rivals right now.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView