Maxime Varry

At last! My two sats on the recent MSCI developments: From an industry perspective, the decision not to remove DATs from MSCI indexes was quite likely by the mere nature of Bitcoin Treasury Companies as operational structures with a discretionary treasury strategy, as well as by the list content of some of the firms that would have been impacted by such decision which would make it increasingly unlikely that this would have been pushed to execution anyway. I have seen some concerns on the new rules pushed by MSCI implying non-increase policies for the number of shares which would impact the ability to issue new shares as those would not be automatically absorbed by passive demand from MSCI indexes. In fact, historically, capital increases are primarily absorbed by active investors, not by passive funds (further illustrated by an estimated 20-30% passive AuM weight over global AuM). Thus, while the consequence is here and existing, its impact is I believe very much mitigated. This of course is even more true in the context of Capital B under current pararameters (MSCI Europe Micro Cap index with a ~0.13% weight, with current passive cumulated holdings estimated at 250k-350k shares which is less than 15% of daily volume). All of this said, this event enabled to visibly demonstrate the highly positive impact of leading industry actors, shareholders communities and ecosystem as a whole and its ability to coordinate and take action in a quick, unified, efficient manner to address subjects that matter the most. Bullish on Bitcoiners, Bullish on BTCTC shareholder communities!