Key Points
- Between May 26-31, Strategy divested 32 BTC, though public disclosure didn’t emerge until June 1
- A Polymarket prediction market attracted over $79 million in bets on whether Strategy offloaded Bitcoin before May 31
- The platform ruled “No” since no public confirmation existed prior to the cut-off time
- Participants have divided into three factions debating whether transaction timing or announcement timing matters
- Final arbitration rests with UMA token holders — who have previously contradicted Polymarket decisions
Michael Saylor’s firm Strategy completed a 32 Bitcoin transaction during the final week of May. The transaction itself isn’t contested. What’s igniting fierce debate is whether a $79 million Polymarket wager should be settled based on that transaction.
The wager posed a seemingly clear-cut question: had Strategy liquidated any Bitcoin before May 31 ended? The response appeared obvious — until the company’s regulatory documentation surfaced on June 1.
That single 24-hour discrepancy has fractured the prediction marketplace into three competing factions, with enormous sums hanging in the balance.
The Three-Way Split
One faction maintains the outcome should be “Yes.” Strategy’s regulatory submission explicitly states the transaction occurred “during the period May 26, 2026 to May 31, 2026.” Since the actual sale fell within the specified timeframe, they contend the affirmative answer is correct.
Another faction insists on a “No” resolution. Their position centers on the absence of verified public information before the May 31 deadline expired. They maintain that only information accessible before the midnight cutoff should determine the outcome.
A third, smaller faction questions the market’s fundamental design. They argue the contract language was insufficiently precise for clean resolution and suggest settlement should have been postponed until Strategy’s official filing appeared.
Platform Response and Arbitration Process
Polymarket aligned with those advocating “No.” The platform modified its market page to clarify that “no information from MSTR, on-chain data, or consensus of credible reporting confirmed that MicroStrategy sold Bitcoin within the market’s timeframe.”
The site emphasized that confirmations revealed beyond the deadline “does not qualify.” Probability of a “Yes” settlement plummeted from 81% to virtually zero.
Yet ultimate authority doesn’t rest with Polymarket. Instead, UMA token holders cast votes to resolve contested markets.
These entities have clashed previously. During 2024, UMA determined Barron Trump had no connection to the DJT memecoin. Polymarket rejected that determination and issued refunds to “Yes” participants regardless.
Currently, both organizations appear united on “No.” A subsequent dispute vote was scheduled for Wednesday at 12:00 am UTC.
Context Behind the Transaction
Strategy’s divestment marked a departure from its longstanding never-sell Bitcoin philosophy. Saylor floated the possibility during a May 5 earnings discussion, describing the sale as a way to “inoculate” the marketplace against potential turbulence.
Bitcoin experienced a 2.5% decline to $70,815 in the hours following the June 1 announcement. The cryptocurrency has since climbed back partially to $71,200.
Participants affected by the settlement expressed dissatisfaction across social platforms. “Polymarket should trade truth, not technicalities,” one participant posted.
Get 3 Free Stock Ebooks
Discover top-performing stocks in AI, Crypto, and Technology with expert analysis.
- Top 10 AI Stocks - Leading AI companies
- Top 10 Crypto Stocks - Blockchain leaders
- Top 10 Tech Stocks - Tech giants
