- Microsoft’s BTC investment proposal faces uncertainty amid divided shareholder sentiments.
- Vanguard’s opposition could strongly influence the outcome of Microsoft’s bitcoin investment vote.
- Uncertainty looms as 60% of shareholders remain unknown before the December vote.
Microsoft’s potential entry into bitcoin (BTC) investments has generated both excitement and debate ahead of the company’s annual shareholder meeting on December 10. The tech giant’s board opposes BTC investments, but shareholders have the final say. They will vote on whether to adopt a “bitcoin investment assessment” proposal.
The board plans to vote against proposalbut the influence of key stakeholders like Vanguard and former CEO Steve Ballmer adds intrigue. With significant shares held by both BTC supporters and opponents, the outcome is uncertain.
Confrontation between shareholders: who owns Microsoft?
Institutional and individual shareholders owning more than 1% of Microsoft’s stock have mixed views on bitcoin. Vanguard, one of the largest shareholders, has historically opposed investments in cryptocurrencies, setting a cautious tone.
Vanguard’s position alone could persuade many people to vote against BTC. Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates and former CEO Steve Ballmer have publicly questioned bitcoin, making their support uncertain despite their large holdings.
Also read: Microsoft outage exposes vulnerabilities in centralized systems, crypto remains unscathed
Some shareholders support BTC or hold BTC exchange-traded funds (ETFs). These holders could push for a “yes” vote, but they currently only represent about 17.8% of the stakeholder base.
Although they are in the minority, these pro-BTC investors could offset Vanguard’s opposition, especially as bitcoin gains popularity among institutional investors.
Undecided voters hold the key
The outcome depends on the 60% of shares held by unknown stakeholders. Their voting intentions remain a mystery. This block represents undecided votes that could decide the outcome.
This large number of undecided voters complicates predictions. Additionally, information on the distribution of voting shares among these unknown holders is limited, making it even more difficult to predict the fate of the proposal.
