Michael Saylor is once again at the center of Crypto Twitter’s scrutiny after new regulatory filings revealed that Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) recently spent $27 million on a deposit for a corporate aircraft.

The disclosure has fueled a wave of criticism from users who argue that the purchase reflects misplaced priorities during a period of sharp volatility for both Bitcoin and Strategy’s stock.

Shareholders Question Strategy’s Spending Priorities

According to MicroStrategy’s Form 10Q filed on November 3, the company’s net cash used in investing activities rose sharply year-over-year. 

The filing revealed that for the nine months ending on September 30, Strategy made a $27 million deposit on a new corporate aircraft.

It also disclosed $19.38 billion in Bitcoin purchases funded through convertible notes, stock offerings across its STR series, and ongoing ATM programs.

Despite $MSTR being down 55% in the last year, @saylor needs a new jet.

The 10Q notes two major cash uses of cash in their investing activities

– $15.4B used to purchase BTC

– $27M “deposit on a new corporate jet”

I bet it’s gonna be a nice jet and painted orange. #MSTR pic.twitter.com/wxIpqdPwQu

— Novacula Occami (@OccamiCrypto) December 2, 2025

Although companies often use corporate funds for executive travel, critics argued that the context is especially important for Strategy. 

The firm no longer resembles a traditional product-driven software company. Instead, it functions as a vehicle tied to Bitcoin’s volatile price movements. 

With MSTR down about 30% over the past month, some investors questioned whether a multimillion-dollar aircraft aligns with its stated Bitcoin-first strategy.

Investor Confidence Tested

Crypto Twitter reacted sharply, arguing that shareholder capital should focus on increasing the firm’s Bitcoin position rather than expanding executive privileges. 

Users expressed frustration that the jet deposit came alongside billions in financing tied directly to new equity issuances. Others suggested the timing of the purchase undermined confidence in the company’s alignment with its retail investor base.

Strategy supporters countered that corporate aircraft are common for firms with global operations and high-volume executive travel requirements. They also noted that the $27 million deposit represents a small fraction of the capital committed to Bitcoin accumulation during the same nine-month period. 

Ok you named companies that actually have real product and services, and extremely profitable.

Michael Saylor and Strategy are on the verge of bankruptcy, facing major losses from BTC, and about to be forced to sell.

Maybe use your brain for once instead of relying on AI.

— Jacob King (@JacobKinge) December 3, 2025

Still, the dispute reflects a broader disagreement over how a Bitcoin-focused public company should balance its operational needs with public optics.

As Bitcoin continues to fluctuate, the episode highlighted how closely Saylor’s decisions are tied to market sentiment, especially during periods of heightened volatility. 

The debate also revealed how investor expectations shift when a company positions itself almost entirely around a single macro-sensitive asset. 

The post Michael Saylor Faces Backlash Over Private Jet Purchase Amid MicroStrategy Slide appeared first on BeInCrypto.

A lawsuit against Binance is testing the extent to which crypto platforms can be held liable for real-world harm. Filed by families of victims of the October 2023 attacks against Israel, it arrives amid continued backlash over the recent presidential pardon of founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ).

More than a new legal headache, the lawsuit is being watched as a potential blueprint for a shift from regulatory fines to high-stakes private liability tied to terrorism financing.

Terror Financing Claims Hit Binance

The case, brought by more than 70 families in a US federal court last week, accuses Binance of knowingly enabling transactions for Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and other US-designated terrorist groups.

The plaintiffs, mostly relatives of those killed or injured in the October 7 attacks, argue Binance was not merely exploited. They say the platform structurally enabled terrorist financing at scale.

“For years, Defendants knowingly, willfully, and systematically assisted Hamas… and other terrorist groups to transfer and conceal the equivalent of hundreds of millions of US dollars through the Binance platform in support of their terrorist activities. This assistance directly and materially contributed to the October 7 Attacks and to subsequent terrorist attacks,” read the complaint.

Earlier government investigations have focused on Binance’s anti-money laundering failures. However, this lawsuit reframes the narrative, arguing that CZ’s stewardship of the platform has systemically contributed to real-world violence. 

The lawsuit also arrives at a consequential moment for the company.

Last month, US President Donald Trump granted Binance founder CZ a pardon after Binance participated in a multibillion-dollar deal tied to a crypto venture linked to the Trump family. 

The move cleared CZ’s criminal record and could allow him to take on a more direct role at the company.

Just posted: the pardon that Trump issued to @cz_binance on Tuesday.

It wipes away CZ's conviction for failing to maintain an effective anti-money laundering program, which prosecutors said allowed Hamas, Al Qaeda & ISIS to move money using @binance. https://t.co/ptbRCzxhd3 pic.twitter.com/1B9tKnZG6P

— Kenneth P. Vogel (@kenvogel) October 25, 2025

The case also arises two years after Binance’s 2023 settlement with US authorities, which included a $4.3 billion penalty. The company admitted to violating the Bank Secrecy Act and US sanctions laws. CZ pleaded guilty, stepped down as CEO, and served a four-month prison sentence.

While CZ’s pardon suggested Binance was in the clear, the lawsuit shows neither he nor the company is insulated from civil liability.

Despite Criminal Leniency, Civil Claims Intensify

The families’ lawsuit builds on facts already established by US criminal enforcement, giving the plaintiffs a strong legal foundation.

Because Binance has already admitted to sweeping violations of the Bank Secrecy Act and US sanctions laws, the burden of proof is significantly lower. The families argue Binance embedded these flaws in its core operations, not in isolated compliance failures.

Rather than leaning on broad allegations, the complaint reportedly names specific wallets, laundering intermediaries, and transaction flows tied to designated terrorist groups. 

In its structure, the case closely mirrors the way federal prosecutors assemble complex criminal indictments. The difference is that this same evidentiary framework is now being deployed by private plaintiffs under US anti-terrorism statutes.

Those laws allow victims of terrorism to pursue civil damages against entities accused of providing material support, even indirectly. This legal pathway transforms Binance’s past regulatory violations into the foundation of a potentially massive civil liability case.

For years, crypto enforcement followed a cycle: regulators investigated, companies paid fines, executives stepped aside, and markets moved on. Civil litigation tied directly to terrorism financing breaks that rhythm. 

Unlike regulatory settlements, which cap financial exposure and close legal chapters, terror-related civil cases can involve multiplied damages and years of continuing risk.

A New Enforcement Class?

For the crypto industry, the implications extend far beyond one exchange or one courtroom. If the case survives early dismissal and proceeds to discovery, it could lead to new scrutiny of how centralized platforms monitor, flag, and freeze high-risk activity. 

More significantly, a win for the families could establish that private plaintiffs—not just regulators—now pose one of the most serious financial threats to crypto businesses. 

In that scenario, compliance failures would no longer result in fines alone. They would become long-tail liabilities that follow platforms for years to come.

The post Why the Latest Binance Lawsuit Is More Dangerous Than Any Regulator appeared first on BeInCrypto.