Strategy CEO Highlights Scenarios Where Company Would Sell Bitcoin — Report

bitcoinistPubblicato 2026-05-11Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-05-11

Introduzione

Strategy CEO Phong Le outlined potential scenarios for the company to sell portions of its massive Bitcoin holdings, a departure from its "Never Sell" philosophy. In a CNBC interview, Le stated sales could occur to finance dividend payments for its Perpetual Preferred Stock if doing so increases shareholder value, defined as a rise in "Bitcoin per share." He emphasized a data-driven approach, prioritizing math over ideology. Other reasons include when the company's book value is below market value or to capture tax benefits. As the largest corporate holder with 818,334 BTC (~$65 billion), Strategy has significant annual dividend obligations (~$1.5 billion). Le believes the Bitcoin market's high liquidity (~$60B daily volume) can absorb such sales without major price impact. Bitcoin currently trades around $80,840.

Strategy CEO Phong Le has highlighted scenarios in which the company would offload some of its Bitcoin holdings. This explanation follows the treasury firm’s chairman, Michael Saylor, hinting at the possibility of strategically selling portions of its BTC over the past week.

Why Strategy Could Shed Some Of Its Bitcoin Holdings

In an interview with CNBC, Le analyzed the conditions under which Strategy could sell some of its Bitcoin holdings. While this move would be in stark contrast to the firm’s “Never Sell” strategy, the CEO believes a change in philosophy might be necessary given current market conditions.

The CEO mentioned that the company could sell some of its BTC to finance the payment of the 11.5% dividend yield on its Perpetual Preferred Stock (STRC). Le said that Strategy would sell a portion of its BTC to cover the dividend if it increases shareholder value (defined as a rise in the “Bitcoin per share”).

Source: @phongle on X

Le said in the interview:

I believe in math over ideology, and at the point where selling Bitcoin versus selling equity to pay a dividend is better for our Bitcoin per share, and for our common shareholders, we will do it.

Strategy’s CEO further explained that BTC sales are accretive to shareholder value when the company’s book value is below market value, or vice versa. Le also mentioned the option to sell Bitcoin to capture deferred tax gains (and losses, as in its current case).

As of press time, Strategy is the largest corporate holder of Bitcoin, with about 818,334 BTC (approximately 4% of the cryptocurrency’s supply) on its books. With more than $1.5 billion in annual dividend obligations, Le suggested that its $65 billion BTC holdings are more than enough to cover these payments.

How Could Strategy’s Sales Affect Bitcoin Price?

As expected, the idea that the largest corporate holder of Bitcoin would sell its holdings to meet obligations has not been well received. However, the Strategy CEO believes that the premier cryptocurrency is liquid enough to withstand any major sales by his firm.

In Le’s own words, selling in the open market to fund a $1.5 billion dividend payment is a drop in the ocean of Bitcoin’s daily trading volume of over $60 billion. While admitting that Strategy is a significant player in the market, Le does not believe his firm’s activity has any major influence on price (considering how liquid the market is).

As of this writing, BTC is valued at around $80,840, reflecting a 0.5% price increase in the past 24 hours.

The price of BTC on the daily timeframe | Source: BTCUSDT chart on TradingView

Domande pertinenti

QAccording to the article, what is the primary scenario under which Strategy might sell some of its Bitcoin holdings?

AStrategy might sell some of its Bitcoin to finance the payment of the 11.5% dividend yield on its Perpetual Preferred Stock, but only if doing so increases shareholder value by raising the 'Bitcoin per share' metric.

QWhat are the two conditions mentioned by CEO Phong Le under which selling Bitcoin would be considered accretive to shareholder value?

ASelling Bitcoin would be accretive to shareholder value when the company's book value is below its market value, or conversely, when the market value is below the book value.

QHow does CEO Phong Le justify a potential shift from the company's 'Never Sell' strategy regarding Bitcoin?

APhong Le justifies the potential shift by stating 'I believe in math over ideology,' meaning that a change in philosophy might be necessary given current market conditions if selling Bitcoin benefits shareholders more than selling equity.

QWhat is the approximate size of Strategy's Bitcoin holdings, and how does it compare to the overall Bitcoin supply?

AStrategy holds about 818,334 BTC, which is approximately 4% of Bitcoin's total supply, with a value of approximately $65 billion as referenced in the article.

QHow does CEO Phong Le assess the potential market impact of Strategy selling Bitcoin to cover its dividend obligations?

ALe believes the impact would be minimal, stating that selling to fund a $1.5 billion dividend payment is a 'drop in the ocean' compared to Bitcoin's daily trading volume of over $60 billion, and he does not believe his firm's activity has a major influence on price given the market's liquidity.

Letture associate

GitHub, Transfixed by AI

On the night of February 9th, GitHub suffered a major outage caused by a simple configuration change—reducing a cache refresh interval from 12 to 2 hours—that triggered a cascade of failures. This was not an isolated event, but part of a broader pattern. In early 2026, GitHub experienced at least 8 major incidents, failing to meet its promised 99.9% availability. These outages stemmed from structural issues: explosive growth in load, tight service coupling, and insufficient protection against abnormal traffic. This unprecedented load is driven by AI Agents. In 2025, GitHub handled ~1 billion commits. By 2026, weekly commits reached 275 million, projecting to ~14 billion for the year—a 14x increase. AI tools like Claude Code now contribute 4.5% of all public repository commits, with weekly submissions surging 25x in just three months. AI-generated pull requests jumped from 4 million to 17 million per month in half a year. Unlike human developers, AI Agents work continuously, generating commits at a scale that overwhelms infrastructure designed for human rhythms. The surge also shattered GitHub's business model. Copilot's flat-rate pricing, based on assisting human developers, became unsustainable as Agentic AI sessions consumed resources worth hundreds of dollars for a few dollars in fees. In response, GitHub imposed usage limits and, by June 1st, shifted to a pay-per-use "AI Credits" system. Facing this new reality, GitHub realized a 10x scaling plan was insufficient. It announced a need to *redesign* its architecture for 30x current scale—decoupling services, adding fault isolation, and improving change management to prevent cascading failures. Other platforms like Stripe and AWS are facing similar challenges with AI Agents. Fundamentally, GitHub is transitioning from a human collaboration platform to an "exhaust pipe" for automated AI workflows. Its detailed post-mortem reports aim to maintain trust during this turbulent rebuild. The February outage was not just a technical glitch, but a signal of the software industry's entry into a new, AI-driven era.

marsbit31 min fa

GitHub, Transfixed by AI

marsbit31 min fa

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

Facing massive paper losses exceeding $90 billion each amidst a sharp market downturn, "Digital Asset Treasury" (DAT) giants Strategy and Bitmine find themselves in a precarious position, but with different underlying risks. Strategy, heavily invested in Bitcoin (BTC), faces significant financial strain. Its strategy relies heavily on debt, including convertible notes and preferred stock (STRC) requiring substantial dividend payments. With its cash reserves dwindling and BTC offering no staking yield for cash flow, Strategy's high leverage makes it vulnerable. A continued price decline could force asset sales to meet obligations, potentially creating a negative feedback loop. Its market value has already fallen sharply. In contrast, Bitmine, an Ethereum (ETH) holder, appears on firmer financial ground. It primarily funds its purchases through equity offerings (like ATM programs), avoiding debt pressure. It also generates income by staking a large portion of its ETH holdings. While not immune to market drops and shareholder dilution concerns, Bitmine maintains more flexibility, recently announcing a new preferred share offering to raise further capital. The core divergence lies in their financing: Bitmine uses equity (investor money), while Strategy uses debt (borrowed money). Consequently, Bitmine currently faces less immediate liquidity pressure than Strategy, which must navigate the dual challenge of servicing debt/dividends and a declining core asset (BTC) price.

marsbit38 min fa

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

marsbit38 min fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片