Polymarket Resolves Strategy Bitcoin Sale Bet as No for May, Yes for June
Polymarket’s UMA-based dispute system ruled that Strategy’s disclosed bitcoin sale did not satisfy a May 31 market, even though the company said the sale occurred in late May. The decision instead counted the sale toward a June contract because the public disclosure came on June 1.
What happened?
Polymarket’s UMA-based dispute system ruled that Strategy’s disclosed bitcoin sale did not satisfy a May 31 market, even though the company said the sale occurred in late May. The decision instead counted the sale toward a June contract because the public disclosure came on June 1.
Why it matters
Polymarket resolved a disputed pair of prediction markets tied to Strategy’s bitcoin activity, marking the May 31 contract as No and the June 30 contract as Yes. The decision followed a vote by UMA token holders after Strategy disclosed on June 1 that it had sold 32 bitcoin between May 26 and May 31.
Polymarket resolved a disputed pair of prediction markets tied to Strategy’s bitcoin activity, marking the May 31 contract as No and the June 30 contract as Yes. The decision followed a vote by UMA token holders after Strategy disclosed on June 1 that it had sold 32 bitcoin between May 26 and May 31.
The ruling matters because it highlights how prediction markets can hinge on the wording of resolution criteria and the timing of public disclosures. In this case, traders were split over whether the relevant event was the actual date of Strategy’s sale or the date when the company publicly revealed it.
According to CoinDesk, those who backed Yes on the May market argued that Strategy’s filing showed the sale happened before the May 31 deadline. Opponents said the market should resolve based on when the information became public, which was June 1, making it a June event for Polymarket’s purposes.
UMA token holders, who help settle disputes for Polymarket’s oracle system, sided with the June-disclosure interpretation. That meant May Yes bettors lost despite Strategy saying the 32 bitcoin were sold during the final week of May, while the June market resolved in favor of Yes.
CoinDesk reported that the vote was heavily influenced by several large UMA holders, including wallets linked to Risk Labs and notable UMA ecosystem participants. Galaxy Research, which had exposure to the May contract, criticized the outcome and argued that the market’s criteria should have focused on when the sale occurred rather than when it was announced.