Who's Paying for the $64 Billion Paper Feast?

marsbitPublished on 2026-06-26Last updated on 2026-06-26

Abstract

"The Illusion of Wealth: Who Bears the Burden of the $64 Billion Paper Bonanza?" Bitcoin recently broke below the critical $60,000 support level, triggering significant selling by major holders. While the price drop itself is concerning, a deeper issue lies with publicly traded companies that have bet their entire balance sheets on Bitcoin, creating a precarious financial link between their stock prices and crypto valuations. Leading the pack is Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy), holding 847,000 BTC at an average cost of ~$75,600, now facing over 20% unrealized losses. Its stock trades at a deep discount to its Bitcoin holdings. Other companies like Japan's Metaplanet (nearly 40% unrealized loss) and Solmate (which fully pivoted to Solana and saw its stock collapse 98%) illustrate the risks of this model without underlying business operations. A key misconception is that these firms face immediate, forced liquidation. Their debt structures provide a buffer. However, the core "financial flywheel" is stalling. Strategy's CEO has even hinted at potentially selling Bitcoin to cover obligations—a reversal of his long-standing "never sell" doctrine. New accounting rules (ASU 2023-08) exacerbate the problem, requiring quarterly mark-to-market adjustments. Bull markets create paper profits, attracting capital. In bear markets, they generate massive paper losses, potentially triggering index exclusions and forced selling by passive funds. The true crisis point is not the current ...

Author | Cathy, Baike Blockchain

$60,000, broken.

Bitcoin breached a key support level held for nearly two years, briefly hitting its lowest point since October 2024. On-chain data shows that institutions and whales holding between 10 and 10,000 Bitcoin sold 45,000 BTC to the market within eight days. U.S. stocks followed suit, with crypto-related stocks collapsing collectively.

But what's truly unsettling is not the price itself.

It's the listed companies that have bet their entire balance sheets on Bitcoin. They have hoarded hundreds of thousands of coins, issued tens of billions in bonds, and tied their stock prices to the coin price through an ingenious financial flywheel. Now, that flywheel is starting to slip.

01 Who Hurts the Most?

First, look at the biggest one.

  • Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy): Holds 847,000 Bitcoin, accumulated at a cost of $64.1 billion, with an average cost of approximately $75,600. With Bitcoin below $60,000, the overall paper loss exceeds 20%. More critically, MSTR's stock price relative to its Bitcoin net asset value has fallen from a hefty premium during the bull market to a deep discount of 0.60 to 0.65 times. In other words, the market now values $1 of Bitcoin held by this company at only 60 cents.

  • Metaplanet: This Japanese company is in an even worse state. With 40,000 Bitcoin and an average holding cost close to $97,600, combined with the yen's depreciation, its paper loss exceeds 37%.

  • Twenty One Capital (XXI): Led by Jack Mallers, backed by a dream team of Tether, Bitfinex, and SoftBank. However, since its first day of listing via SPAC, its stock price has been on a one-way street, falling over 85% from its peak, with its valuation premium wiped out. By May 2026, SoftBank chose to fully transfer its 26% stake at a discount to Tether, withdrawing from the board. The big player left first.

  • Solmate: The most dramatic story belongs to this company. Originally named Brera Holdings, its business involved holding stakes in low-tier football clubs. Inspired by MicroStrategy during the bull market, it announced a complete transformation, raising $300 million to go all-in on Solana. Cathie Wood's ARK Invest even hyped it as part of the "asset treasury revolution." The result? Solana fell 53%, and Solmate's stock price crashed from $249 to $5. Boardroom infighting erupted, major shareholders sued each other for allegedly emptying the company's coffers, and the CEO and chief economist resigned one after another.

This is not the failure of the holding model. It's the logical conclusion of a gambling game with no core business to fall back on.

02 Not a Liquidation, But the Flywheel Is Stalling

A panic narrative is circulating in the market: If Bitcoin falls below $60,000, MicroStrategy will face forced liquidation.

This is a misjudgment of financial instruments.

In 2022, MicroStrategy did borrow $205 million in a collateralized loan from the crypto bank Silvergate, directly tied to Bitcoin collateral ratios, and was nearly liquidated at the time. With the ATM (at-the-market offering) shut down, it had to continue funding interest payments by raising cash through issuing more MSTR common stock. However, with MSTR itself trading at a 0.6x NAV discount, further discounted share issuance would severely dilute the Bitcoin stake represented by each share.

This creates a vicious cycle: Stop paying dividends, and the "digital credit" rating collapses; continue paying, and common stockholders get eaten alive.

In the Q1 2026 analyst meeting, Michael Saylor loosened his stance for the first time. He said that in an extreme funding freeze environment, the company would "most likely proactively sell some Bitcoin" to pay the preferred dividends.

This statement directly contradicts his long-standing public doctrine of "never selling Bitcoin."

03 Accounting Standards Are Making Things Worse

Starting in 2025, the newly effective ASU 2023-08 accounting standard requires listed companies to account for Bitcoin at fair value, with quarterly gains or losses directly impacting the income statement.

  • In a bull market, this is a money printer. Bitcoin rises, creating tens of billions in unrealized profits on the income statement, ROE soars, and quantitative stock selection models and index screens automatically include such companies. Traditional capital floods in.

  • In a bear market, the money printer reverses into a paper shredder.

Strategy recorded a $144.6 billion unrealized loss in Q1 2026, with a GAAP net loss of $125.4 billion for the quarter. This scale of loss exceeds the profits of the vast majority of global blue-chip companies.

Even more critical is the chain reaction. Index providers like MSCI are beginning to assess whether to exclude such "pseudo-industrial companies." Once removed from indices, passive funds and pension trusts tracking those indices would be forced to sell mechanically, creating a "price drop → exclusion → passive fund selling → further price drop" spiral.

This isn't the free market choosing; it's rule-driven mechanical selling pressure.

04 The Real Test Comes in the Fall of 2027

Short-term, Bitcoin-holding companies won't face liquidation. The design of unsecured debt and perpetual preferred stock gives them a buffer to "buy time for space."

But if Bitcoin cannot reclaim the average cost line of $75,000 within the next 12 to 24 months, the convertible bond put option window starting in the fall of 2027 will become a credit reckoning.

The path is clear: Bitcoin lingers at low levels, MSTR stock price stays below the conversion price for an extended period, convertible bondholders exercise their put rights demanding full cash redemption, funding channels freeze, preferred dividends deplete cash reserves, and the final step is being forced to sell hundreds of thousands of Bitcoin to the market for fiat currency.

That would be a true liquidity crisis.

The Bitcoin-holding company model is not immune to liquidation. It merely replaces "price-triggered instant liquidation" with "time-triggered debt payment crisis."

Don't fixate on the $60,000 technical support level. Watch the calendar for September 2027.

Trending Cryptos

Related Questions

QWhat is the core concern of the article regarding the recent drop in Bitcoin's price below $60,000?

AThe article's core concern is not the price drop itself, but the precarious financial position of publicly listed companies (like Strategy, Metaplanet) that have heavily bet their entire balance sheets on Bitcoin. Their models, which link their stock price to Bitcoin's price through complex financial engineering, are beginning to falter.

QAccording to the article, what is the potential long-term consequence for Strategy if Bitcoin's price remains below its average cost of $75,600?

AIf Bitcoin's price remains below Strategy's average cost of $75,600 for 12-24 months, the company could face a debt repayment crisis starting in the autumn of 2027. As convertible bond holders exercise their put options for cash redemption in a frozen financing environment, the company might be forced to sell hundreds of thousands of Bitcoin to raise fiat currency, potentially triggering a severe market liquidity crisis.

QHow has the new accounting standard ASU 2023-08 impacted companies like Strategy during the market downturn?

AThe ASU 2023-08 accounting standard, which requires Bitcoin to be recorded at fair value with quarterly gains/losses flowing directly into the income statement, has turned from a profit engine in a bull market to a shredder in a bear market. For example, Strategy recorded a $144.6 billion unrealized loss in Q1 2026, leading to a massive GAAP net loss. This also risks triggering index exclusions, which would force passive funds to sell, creating a downward spiral.

QWhat major contradiction did Michael Saylor's statement in Q1 2026 reveal about Strategy's business model?

AIn the Q1 2026 analyst meeting, Michael Saylor stated that in an extreme financing freeze, the company would 'most likely actively sell some Bitcoin' to pay preferred dividends. This statement directly contradicts his long-standing public doctrine of 'never selling Bitcoin,' revealing the underlying vulnerability and potential unsustainability of the 'never sell' treasury model under financial stress.

QWhat key difference does the article highlight between a leveraged trader's liquidation and the risk faced by corporate Bitcoin holders like Strategy?

AThe article highlights that the corporate treasury model does not have immunity from liquidation. It simply exchanges an 'immediate price-triggered liquidation' (like a margin call) for a 'time-triggered debt repayment crisis.' The risk is deferred and tied to future debt maturity dates (like the 2027 convertible bond put options) rather than a specific Bitcoin price level.

Related Reads

An Eight-Year Investment Takes a Sharp Turn: Why Did Ethereum Suddenly Abandon Poseidon?

On August 13, Ethereum researcher Justin Drake announced a significant shift in Ethereum's Layer-1 cryptographic roadmap: abandoning the SNARK-friendly hash function Poseidon in favor of traditional functions like SHA2 or BLAKE2. This decision ends eight years of research and investment, marking a major revision to the post-quantum security strategy. Poseidon, introduced in 2019, was highly efficient for zkRollups and zkVMs within SNARK circuits. However, its need for prolonged cryptanalysis and the pressing timeline for quantum resistance revealed limitations. Recent breakthroughs in SNARK design, specifically using binary fields, now enable traditional, battle-tested hash functions to perform as efficiently as Poseidon within SNARKs. Benchmarks show modern laptops can now verify over a million traditional hash calls per second. This change is partly driven by accelerated concerns over quantum computing threats. Reports warn that "Cryptographically Relevant Quantum Computers" could break current blockchain signatures like ECDSA by the early 2030s, risking trillions in assets. Ethereum's response focuses on hash-based post-quantum signature schemes, deemed more quantum-resistant than some lattice-based alternatives under pressure from AI cryptanalysis. Ethereum's updated post-quantum roadmap targets a production-ready "leanVM" for signature aggregation by 2027, with full deployment across consensus, execution, and data layers by 2028. The shift to mature hash functions like SHA2 reduces reliance on newer algorithms and aligns with the goal of using widely analyzed cryptographic primitives. Other major blockchains are also preparing. Solana's core teams have independently chosen the NIST-standardized Falcon signature scheme for its compact size. Starknet plans a phased migration, starting with replacing its Pedersen hash with BLAKE2. Ethereum's move signifies a strategic pivot towards proven security foundations for the quantum era.

marsbit45m ago

An Eight-Year Investment Takes a Sharp Turn: Why Did Ethereum Suddenly Abandon Poseidon?

marsbit45m ago

Programmers Worldwide Are Wasting Money on Anthropic! The Company Can't Stand It Anymore

Anthropic recently published guidelines to help developers using Claude Code reduce unnecessary token costs. The key recommendations include: 1) Clear (/clear) conversations after completing a task to avoid carrying irrelevant file reads and command outputs into the next task. 2) Set the model and reasoning effort level at the start of a session, as switching mid-session invalidates the prompt cache, requiring a full-price recalculation of the entire dialog history. 3) Attach files using @ references instead of typing paths manually to avoid extra tool calls and searches that bloat the context. 4) Add quiet flags to verbose commands (e.g., in CLAUDE.md) to minimize lengthy output in the dialog history. 5) Use /compact while the session cache is still warm (before breaks) to compress the dialog at one-tenth the cost. 6) Offload large-output tasks to a sub-agent, which runs in an isolated context and only returns conclusions, preventing intermediate outputs from polluting the main dialog. The article explains token pricing: input tokens (prefill) are processed in parallel, while output tokens (decode) are generated serially, making output tokens five times more expensive. Caching is crucial for savings—if a request's prefix (system prompt, CLAUDE.md, dialog history) matches the previous one byte-for-byte, reading it costs only 10% of the standard input price. However, cache invalidation occurs when changing models, effort levels, fast mode, compressing dialogs, after cache expiration, or when resuming old sessions. Dialog history also grows quadratically (O(n²)) as file contents and command outputs accumulate, increasing costs per round. Proactive context management—like isolating noisy tasks, using /rewind to trim unproductive turns, and task-based session clearing—is becoming an essential skill for cost-effective AI-assisted development.

marsbit2h ago

Programmers Worldwide Are Wasting Money on Anthropic! The Company Can't Stand It Anymore

marsbit2h ago

Pax Silica vs. WAICO: The US Wants to Prohibit Europe from Using Chinese Artificial Intelligence

The United States is preparing to demand that European and other partners abandon Chinese artificial intelligence initiatives, threatening exclusion from the American-led "Pax Silica" coalition, according to a leaked U.S. State Department document. This ultimatum forces signatories of the "AI Opportunity Statement" to choose between the Western technological ecosystem and alternative frameworks, with China not explicitly named but clearly targeted. Pax Silica is a U.S. strategy for AI and semiconductor hegemony, launched in late 2025. Its European presence expanded significantly in mid-2026. Concurrently, China, Russia, and 27 other nations established the World AI Cooperation Organization (WAICO) in July 2026 as an independent intergovernmental platform promoting AI governance based on UN principles. This situation creates a difficult choice, especially for European nations balancing strategic autonomy with dependence on U.S. tech and security. It also pressures Global South countries with pragmatic ties to both Washington and Beijing. The formation of competing blocks risks fragmenting the global tech landscape, forcing companies to split supply chains, increasing costs, and potentially leading to incompatible standards and protocols. The era of open globalization in AI may be ending, replaced by geopolitical confrontation where technological sovereignty trumps economic efficiency. The decisions made will shape the global digital economy for decades.

cryptonews.ru4h ago

Pax Silica vs. WAICO: The US Wants to Prohibit Europe from Using Chinese Artificial Intelligence

cryptonews.ru4h ago

Robert Kiyosaki Shares His Mentor's Predictions About the Emergence of Bitcoin and AI

American entrepreneur and author of "Rich Dad Poor Dad," Robert Kiyosaki, discussed the influence of futurist R. Buckminster Fuller on his worldview, linking Fuller's past technological predictions to the emergence of Bitcoin and the development of artificial intelligence. In an X post, Kiyosaki also reflected on personal purpose, sharing his journey from the music business—where he worked with bands like The Police and Iron Maiden—to creating the "Cashflow" board game and writing his famous book. He described feeling an inner emptiness despite his success, a turning point that came after meeting Fuller, whom he studied with for three summers. Kiyosaki described Fuller as a "friendly genius" who foresaw world-changing developments like Bitcoin and AI. However, the core of his post focused on Fuller's philosophical impact, particularly a quote about belonging to the universe and finding purpose by dedicating one's life to the maximum benefit of others. The entrepreneur remains a vocal advocate for cryptocurrencies. He regularly advises buying Bitcoin during market panics, viewing it and assets like Ethereum, gold, and silver as hedges against traditional financial system failures. Kiyosaki has predicted a major market crash by 2026, seeing it as an opportunity for prepared investors, with long-term price targets including $750,000 for Bitcoin and $95,000 for Ethereum.

cryptonews.ru6h ago

Robert Kiyosaki Shares His Mentor's Predictions About the Emergence of Bitcoin and AI

cryptonews.ru6h ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

What is $BITCOIN

DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): A Comprehensive Analysis Introduction to DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a blockchain-based project operating on the Solana network, which aims to combine the characteristics of traditional precious metals with the innovation of decentralized technologies. While it shares a name with Bitcoin, often referred to as “digital gold” due to its perception as a store of value, DIGITAL GOLD is a separate token designed to create a unique ecosystem within the Web3 landscape. Its goal is to position itself as a viable alternative digital asset, although specifics regarding its applications and functionalities are still developing. What is DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a cryptocurrency token explicitly designed for use on the Solana blockchain. In contrast to Bitcoin, which provides a widely recognized value storage role, this token appears to focus on broader applications and characteristics. Notable aspects include: Blockchain Infrastructure: The token is built on the Solana blockchain, known for its capacity to handle high-speed and low-cost transactions. Supply Dynamics: DIGITAL GOLD has a maximum supply capped at 100 quadrillion tokens (100P $BITCOIN), although details regarding its circulating supply are currently undisclosed. Utility: While precise functionalities are not explicitly outlined, there are indications that the token could be utilized for various applications, potentially involving decentralized applications (dApps) or asset tokenization strategies. Who is the Creator of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? At present, the identity of the creators and development team behind DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) remains unknown. This situation is typical among many innovative projects within the blockchain space, particularly those aligning with decentralized finance and meme coin phenomena. While such anonymity may foster a community-driven culture, it intensifies concerns about governance and accountability. Who are the Investors of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? The available information indicates that DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) does not have any known institutional backers or prominent venture capital investments. The project seems to operate on a peer-to-peer model focused on community support and adoption rather than traditional funding routes. Its activity and liquidity are primarily situated on decentralized exchanges (DEXs), such as PumpSwap, rather than established centralized trading platforms, further highlighting its grassroots approach. How DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) Works The operational mechanics of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) can be elaborated on based on its blockchain design and network attributes: Consensus Mechanism: By leveraging Solana’s unique proof-of-history (PoH) combined with a proof-of-stake (PoS) model, the project ensures efficient transaction validation contributing to the network's high performance. Tokenomics: While specific deflationary mechanisms have not been extensively detailed, the vast maximum token supply implies that it may cater to microtransactions or niche use cases that are still to be defined. Interoperability: There exists the potential for integration with Solana’s broader ecosystem, including various decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms. However, the details regarding specific integrations remain unspecified. Timeline of Key Events Here is a timeline that highlights significant milestones concerning DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): 2023: The initial deployment of the token occurs on the Solana blockchain, marked by its contract address. 2024: DIGITAL GOLD gains visibility as it becomes available for trading on decentralized exchanges like PumpSwap, allowing users to trade it against SOL. 2025: The project witnesses sporadic trading activity and potential interest in community-led engagements, although no noteworthy partnerships or technical advancements have been documented as of yet. Critical Analysis Strengths Scalability: The underlying Solana infrastructure supports high transaction volumes, which could enhance the utility of $BITCOIN in various transaction scenarios. Accessibility: The potential low trading price per token could attract retail investors, facilitating wider participation due to fractional ownership opportunities. Risks Lack of Transparency: The absence of publicly known backers, developers, or an audit process may yield skepticism regarding the project's sustainability and trustworthiness. Market Volatility: The trading activity is heavily reliant on speculative behavior, which can result in significant price volatility and uncertainty for investors. Conclusion DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) emerges as an intriguing yet ambiguous project within the rapidly evolving Solana ecosystem. While it attempts to leverage the “digital gold” narrative, its departure from Bitcoin's established role as a store of value underscores the need for a clearer differentiation of its intended utility and governance structure. Future acceptance and adoption will likely depend on addressing the current opacity and defining its operational and economic strategies more explicitly. Note: This report encompasses synthesised information available as of October 2023, and developments may have transpired beyond the research period.

1.9k Total ViewsPublished 2025.05.13Updated 2025.05.13

What is $BITCOIN

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of BTC (BTC) are presented below.

活动图片