\n
<\/p>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tCritics say the bank recycled an old MSCI index-exclusion story to spark MSTR selling, calling it a coordinated \u201chit job\u201d on Saylor\u2019s firm.\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n
JPMorgan is facing a growing online backlash after a wave of X posts accused the bank of engineering a targeted hit on Strategy (MSTR) and taking on a huge short position that could backfire if the stock rallies.<\/p>\n
The claims, while unproven, have lit up Crypto Twitter, with some users calling for a boycott of the banking giant and drawing comparisons to the GameStop short squeeze.<\/p>\n
The controversy gained momentum after a recent report from the Wall Street titan warned<\/a> that Strategy faced potential exclusion from major stock indexes like the MSCI. Analysts at the firm suggested this could trigger billions of dollars in automated selling.<\/p>\n However, the crypto community was quick to label this a coordinated \u201chit job,\u201d with influencer Adrian pointing out that the report was based<\/a> on an MSCI consultation document from October 10, claiming:<\/p>\n \u201cThey recycled an expired story to accelerate a sell-off. This isn\u2019t news. It\u2019s a coordinated hit.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The situation intensified when broadcaster Max Keiser insinuated<\/a> that the bank\u2019s short position was so large that a 50% rise in MSTR\u2019s price could potentially threaten it with bankruptcy.<\/p>\n This sparked a wave of dramatic reactions, including from pro-crypto lawyer and Massachusetts Senate candidate John E Deaton, who referenced<\/a> the financial institution\u2019s past legal issues, stating:<\/p>\n \u201cIf JPMorgan\u2026 is short Saylor and $MSTR \u2013 I hope a GameStop rage trade occurs and costs JPM billions.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The call to action was clear, with author Adam Livingston declaring<\/a> a \u201cBOYCOTT JPMORGAN\u201d and urging people to move their accounts. Businessman Grant Cardone said<\/a> he had already done so, moving his entire account to a different bank.<\/p>\n Nonetheless, not everyone bought the idea of a scripted assault. Some users argued the market reaction is \u201cemergent behavior\u201d following genuine concerns about index rules and risk.<\/p>\n The JPMorgan vs. Strategy feud is representative of a deeper ideological conflict between traditional finance and the digital asset economy. The business intelligence firm, under executive chairman Michael Saylor, has pioneered using corporate treasury strategy to hold Bitcoin, now owning<\/a> over 649,000 BTC.<\/p>\n In a statement on November 21, Saylor pushed back against the MSCI concerns, arguing that his company is an innovative operating business, not a passive fund. He later told<\/a> CoinDesk that the bank\u2019s report was \u201calarmist\u201d and that any potential index exclusion was likely already reflected in the stock price.<\/p>\n The community\u2019s anger is fueled by a perception that the legacy institution is attacking a flagship Bitcoin company while at the same time expanding its own crypto services.<\/p>\n As reported<\/a> in October, the company now plans to accept Bitcoin and Ethereum as loan collateral. This apparent contradiction was noted by commentator Simon Dixon, who suggested<\/a> that \u201cJPMorgan and the broader financial-industrial complex are using their old vassalization tactics to control $MSTR.\u201d<\/p>\n For many Bitcoin proponents, this is not just a market dispute but a battle for the future of the financial system itself.<\/p>\n\n
\n
You may also like:<\/h3>\n
A Clash of Financial Worlds<\/h2>\n
\nSECRET PARTNERSHIP BONUS for CryptoPotato readers: Use this link<\/a> to register and unlock $1,500 in exclusive BingX Exchange rewards (limited time offer).<\/b><\/div>\n<\/div>\n