Trump's plan: Replace Powell and cut interest rates. The question is: What if the new chairman doesn't get enough votes? The unusually large divisions surrounding a possible December rate cut (which is unlikely to happen unless Powell pushes for it) highlight that this isn't a 2026 scenario. The Fed chairman is like a quarterback in football—he sets the plays, but the rest of the team must execute them. Fed senior figures worry about how the Fed's culture will change if the new chairman fails to meet Trump's desired rate cut targets.

Predicting a December rate cut is extremely difficult; perhaps more information will emerge next week to allow for further speculation. The statement from the mouthpiece suggests it's unlikely to be overly hawkish, otherwise partisan infighting would be too obvious. A 25bp cut or no change are both possible, but even if it remains unchanged, the statement would be dovish. Current FFR forecasts for the end of 2026 are as high as 3.5%, which is unlikely to be sustained. 2026 will definitely be a year of significant quantitative easing, but on the eve of this expansion, the question remains: to what extent will deleveraging actually occur?

The market subsequently rebounded sharply, and the CME's probability of a rate cut was quickly revised upward. Dallas's Logan is a traditional hawk, but she turned dovish last night, explicitly stating her intention to expand the balance sheet, indicating she sees the RRP bottoming out and that the current reserve requirement ratio may not be safe enough.

In a Fox News interview, newly nominated Fed Chair Hassett advocated for interest rate cuts, citing deteriorating employment data, lower-than-expected CPI, and the impact of the government shutdown on GDP. Nick Timiraos (a Fed mouthpiece) tweeted yesterday that the Fed has been swayed by political factors; otherwise, there would be no reason not to cut rates. Williams' comments about a possible rate cut are considered the closest reflection of Powell's true intentions.

The market's attitude towards MSTR and hoarding stocks will not be good until things become clearer; or after things become clearer, a new buying engine will be needed even more.

Appendix: The conversion price of MSTR's convertible bonds is shown. Currently, the stock price is lower than the conversion price of all convertible bonds. If the price of BTC remains unchanged, the company's expected value is zero because it has no cash on hand. Its debt repayment funds will either come from issuing new shares through ATMs or from selling its BTC holdings—either way, common shareholders will be diluted to nothing. There is no reason for MSTR short sellers to close their positions at this point.

Response Regarding MSCI Indices Strategy is not a fund, trust, or holding company. We are a publicly traded operating company with a $500 million software business and a unique money management strategy that uses Bitcoin as productive capital. This year alone, we have completed five public offerings of digital credit securities—$STRK, $STRF, $STRD, $STRC, and $STRE—with a notional value exceeding $7.7 billion. We also launched Stretch ($STRC), a revolutionary Bitcoin-backed money-backed credit instrument that provides institutional and individual investors with monthly floating dollar returns. Funds and trusts passively hold assets. Holding companies hold investments. We are responsible for creating, building, issuing, and operating them. Our team is building a new type of enterprise—a Bitcoin-backed structured finance company capable of innovation in capital markets and the software space. No passive instrument or holding company can do what we are doing. Index classification does not define us. Our strategy is long-term, our belief in Bitcoin is unwavering, and our mission remains the same: to establish the world’s first digital currency institution based on sound monetary and financial innovation.

The ruling on January 15th of next year establishes the framework for the future. Corporate finance departments wishing to gain Bitcoin exposure have two paths: one is to keep allocations below 50% and retain stock index status; the other is to fully convert to dedicated Bitcoin instruments, accepting the liquidity and valuation consequences—there is no middle ground. This means that if this exclusion holds, all DAT company business models will become unsustainable, potentially evolving into the pre-Grayscale structure.

The most alarming information I saw today is the consultation paper released by MSCI on October 10th, titled "Treatment of Digital Asset Reserve Companies in MSCI Equity Indices," which is neither ambiguous nor vague. The index provider explicitly states that it targets companies holding more than 50% of their assets in cryptocurrencies, specifically mentioning Bitcoin and Ethereum. MicroStrategy pre-marked this as a key example on October 29th, and the consultation concludes at the end of the year. The overall market attitude towards MSTR and crypto-hoarding stocks will not be positive until things become clearer; or, once clearer, a new cryptocurrency buying engine will be even more needed.

SK Hynix announced before the market opened today that its 10nm DRAM production will increase eightfold next year, marking the end of the first wave of the memory supercycle. This year, the three main themes in the US stock market were: first, electricity, with Iren, the leader in mining stocks and AIDC (Internet Data Center) driven by power shortages, issuing bonds and receiving a large order from Microsoft on November 5th, signaling the end of the sector's run; second, memory, with today's capacity expansion officially ending the first wave; and third, Google Chain, ultimately only Google itself remains truly powerful—is there a problem with the macroeconomy?