Notice in those financials that there is a line for digital asset impairment. Because the rules for holding cryptocurrencies on the balance sheet had not yet been established so a company is forced to actually include paper losses from cryptocurrencies as real losses on their financials.
So of the $1.469 billion "loss" they took that year, $1.286 billion of that was bitcoin paper losses. Which means the company actually took a $183 million loss for the year, not $1.469 billion.
Still, not great they took a loss for the year of course, but they aren't losing anywhere near as much as the financial numbers make it sound like.
Notice they made about $300 million the previous year when you account for the bitcoin impairment "loss".
In 2022 you can see their revenue went down slightly, their cost of revenue went up slightly and their operating expenses went up slightly. None of that is too bad. Their interest expense doubled which presumably is from paying interest on loans for bitcoin, remember they just paid off their Silvergate loan so this year their interest expenses should go down significantly.
The main difference is the line called "Provision for (benefit from) income taxes". I have no clue what that is but that went from helping them by $275 million in 2021 to hurting them by $147 million in 2022. That's the main difference between the years right there, though I don't know what that is. If you exclude that they made $20 million in 2021 and and lost $36 million in 2022. But since I don't know what the "Provision for income taxes" is I have no clue why that changed or if that will continue to be a problem in the future or not.
I'm not quite sure why is the Bitcoin holding impairment loss included in the operating results, unless crypto-investing is considered a part of their normal business operations. But that loss is very real - they bought in higher than the current price, so the value is lost and they have less money than they had before. There are no accounting rules that would allow keeping such loss off the records.
And if you propose that BTC impairment loss should be ignored - then, consistently we should ignore the btc asset in the balance sheet, which would increase the Total stockholders’ deficit from ~$383 millions to ~$2.2 billions, making their shares worth less than a toilet paper.
I guess your point was that they could keep going even when bitcoin keeps dropping, but I don't think that's the case. That would only be true if they bought bitcoins with some excess cash that they didn't really need, but currently their total liabilities exceed their total assets by $383m and that's including their $1.8b btc holdings (at 31 Dec 2022).
Link to press release with complete quarterly and annual figures:
https://www.microstrategy.com/content/dam/website-assets/collateral/financial-documents/press-release-archive/microstrategy-announces-fourth-quarter-2022-financial-results_02-02-2023.pdfps. "Provision for (benefit from) income taxes" is just a funny wording for "tax charge/(credit)". It simply represent corporation tax (+ deferred tax), and as it includes multiple elements (i.e. tax losses carried forward, tax reliefs etc) it sometimes can result in credit for the year rather than charge.