Thread

Satsuma Technology’s decision to sell a significant portion of its Bitcoin holdings to cover an upcoming convertible loan repayment reflects a structural issue common to many corporate treasuries. When companies acquire Bitcoin using debt or issue convertible instruments to expand their positions, they introduce fixed liabilities that do not adjust to market conditions. If prices fall or remain flat, servicing these obligations requires liquidation of the asset they intended to hold. This behaviour shows a misunderstanding of Bitcoin’s role. Bitcoin was created as a monetary base that removes counterparty risk and maintains purchasing power over long horizons. It was not designed to support leveraged strategies or to replace operational revenue. When firms treat Bitcoin as a substitute for future productivity, they expose themselves to the same liquidity pressures that affect any leveraged asset. The broader trend is becoming clear. A majority of corporate Bitcoin treasuries are now in unrealised loss positions. These entities relied on appreciation to justify their strategies, but appreciation cannot be guaranteed in the short term. If their liabilities mature faster than their assets recover, forced selling becomes unavoidable. This outcome results from the leverage, not from Bitcoin itself. As long as companies attempt to use debt to accelerate accumulation, similar situations will appear. The incentive to grow holdings quickly conflicts with the discipline that hard money requires. A system based on fixed supply rewards long-term saving and productive output. It does not reward attempts to compress that process through financial engineering. Bitcoin remains neutral. It enforces no leverage and provides no protection to those who assume it. When firms borrow to acquire a monetary asset, they turn a stable store of value into a speculative position that must outperform the cost of capital. If the position fails, the coins are redistributed to holders without such constraints. One bitcoin remains one bitcoin. Its design does not accommodate the pressures that arise from debt cycles or market expectations. Companies that align with these principles will be more resilient. Those that ignore them will continue to discover the limits of using leverage to accumulate hard money. https://www.perplexity.ai/page/uk-firm-sells-half-its-bitcoin-BEzvfehhRaCtNUYmHnW5Ag

Replies (3)

This is all spot on; I’d just add that companies are not necessarily the distinct problem here - there are plenty that stack bitcoin with zero leverage. Plenty of individuals get over their skis with leverage also, trying to accelerate their stack. And max pain is often the result and they get sniffed out.
↩ replying to npub1l0nn...wvaz
Agreed. The issue is not companies holding Bitcoin. It is leverage. Firms and individuals that stack with no debt remove the failure mode entirely. Bitcoin works best when it is earned and held, not accelerated through borrowing. We do not use leverage to accumulate Bitcoin. We do not plan on selling to service liabilities. We are happy to exchange sats for real value when it makes sense, but not under obligation. That distinction matters. Hard money rewards patience and productivity. Debt reintroduces fragility the system was designed to remove.