Selling bitcoin at $60k and then buying back later at $80k

[Marvelockg]

So their thinking wasn't simply: “Bitcoin will fall, let me sell.” It was more like: “Right now, BTC is the cheapest/most convenient source of cash for what we need to pay.” Then later: “Now we can raise money through MSTR at favourable terms, so let's use that money to buy more BTC.”

The aspect to also look at is the fact that they have been buying bellow $60k and selling at $60k meant that they still sold at a profit. before you copy an investors strategy, be sure you understand what they are doing fully and wether or not they are even profitable after making that decision. That micro strategy is a big name in terms of listing those that are big players sin bitcoin investment does not mean that every decision they make is correct.

If you are selling your bitcoin bellow the price you bought it, you are selling at a loss and there is no justification for that decision. even if you have an emergency, you should use your emergency fund to take care of such emergency or else, the whole essence of being invested in bitcoin becomes defeated by your poor planning.

[Free Market Capitalist]

Okay, here we go again—another Strategy thread full of nonsense and trivial comments.

That's why their CEO said their Bitcoin decisions are based more on cost of capital and the company's balance sheet than on whether Bitcoin is $60k, $80k or $100k.

The CEO, just like Saylor, is now only deceiving those who lack basic knowledge of capital management. What Strategy has done is create a disastrous strategy, get many companies to copy it, and then watch as they ended up abandoning it, going bankrupt, and being liquidate. ll while selling every change they make to their company as a great idea whenever things don’t work out. Since they have no shortage of Saylormooners cheering them on, they just keep doing their thing.

Important to note they made a profit on the bitcoins sold when you consider the average price they acquired their portfolio at.

No, they didn't. Have a look at that:

https://www.strategy.com/ledger

They sold at $59,256; $60,773; $63,957; $64,262 while the average price they bought at is about $75K.

These threads are full of people making categorical statements like this one that are false. Not only are they false, but it's easy to prove they're false if you take just a minute to visit the Strategy website.

[free-bit.co.in]

Important to note they made a profit on the bitcoins sold when you consider the average price they acquired their portfolio at.

As FMC already said,,,, Strategy has sold three times in total at an average price of around $60k, while their average purchase price was above $75k.
I don't think it's correct to say they made a profit from selling Bitcoin.

Behind their bitcoin exposure there is still business to run and other reserves to balance.

They're no longer a business in the literal sense. At this point, they're basically a leveraged Bitcoin vehicle, and their survival depends entirely on that Bitcoin bet.

Anyone investing in MSTR is pretty much buying leveraged Bitcoin, not really stock of a traditional company.

[drangos]

I believe the opportunity cost is more interesting aspect of this situation. If Strategy had a good reason to raise money, they would have sold BTC at approximately $62k, which would mean they did not capture any of the gains if they had had any. Also, purchasing only 4,603 BTC at $80k means the company is permanently losing some of its BTC holdings unless it buys more in the future. I don't want to assume the motive behind the sale of coins to be money-making or not. The question that really needs to be asked is, did they add more value to shareholders with the liquidity obtained, or would that 6,916 BTC have done the same? It's not easy to answer without knowing what those dollars were used for and used to stop.

[Hazink]

As far as I remember, Strategy has sold three times in total at an average price of around $60k, while their average purchase price was above $75k.
I don't think it's correct to say they made a profit from selling Bitcoin.

This concept has been corrected above and it's also clearly stated on their website, which left us with the question of what they are really playing  at: buying Bitcoin and acquiring it at high value, only to end up selling at a low price, because they need to raise money to balance up their cash reserve, and still come back to buy same volume if not less using almost same amount what type of lose and deceiving game are they playing with their investors' money.

[Nrcewker]

At first, I also looked at this Strategy move and thought, “How would someone sell Bitcoin around $60k and come back to buy at $80k?”

I can see the financial strategy behind this but I still cant fully understand why they chose to do it this way. Bitcoin is a valuable long term asset so selling it at a lower price seems like a bad deal to me. I understand that they needed to manage their balance sheet and that they werent simply trading Bitcoin. But if you ask me, I would rather avoid selling something so valuable just to deal with a short term financial difficulty.

I understand that this strategy might make sense from a corporate or financial perspective but I am still not convinced that it was the best way to manage their financial situation. After all Bitcoin has a fixed supply and is a valuable asset. I am glad they bought back some of the coins again. I still believe that Bitcoin could really help them in the long term.

[snowpega]

What I have noticed about Strategy is that the company only want something from bitcoin which they see bitcoin can achieve it. That is bitcoin to remain as a store of value and they see it as a young asset that still have potential to increase very well in the next few years. So they have the plans that if bitcoin continues to increase, their businesses stay strong and become larger.

This is one side of the story, right? Like they see the potential of having a great return on investment (RoI) ratio in a long time frame. But we really know they can sell anytime they want. As we have seen, the strategy opposes their own statements, where they used to pass statemnet like they will never sell, but the real thing is we, as a community, who rely more on trust and have seen that strategy sell some in history, right?

So, just imagine that time: what kind of situation would it be when they start selling heavily once they reach their target point? This is why it would be better if the strategy stakes their net holdings for a specific period of time. So that they can not inject heavy supply back into the market to maintain the market balance. CMIIW! What do you think about this? This is just my point of view.

[icebar]

At first, I also looked at this Strategy move and thought, “How would someone sell Bitcoin around $60k and come back to buy at $80k?”

Strategy suddenly needed cash for their company, and at that time, they met that requirement by selling Bitcoin. This was certainly not done with the primary intention of trading Bitcoin for profit. Strategy has held Bitcoin for a long time despite making significant gains, they have continued to accumulate it. Therefore, selling a small portion of their total holdings should not be viewed as a move driven by a different agenda. They certainly do not buy Bitcoin for short-term trading purposes. Moreover, selling at $60k and repurchasing at $80k was definitely not done to generate trading profits or losses. Their primary objective is simply to accumulate Bitcoin as part of a long-term strategy.

Strategy sold their assets solely to meet their financial needs, and they resumed purchasing Bitcoin as soon as funds became available. They do not sell Bitcoin based on market timing or opportunistic trading. Had they sold at peak prices in the past, they could have realized much higher profits, but such gains were not their priority. Strategy's decision to sell Bitcoin at that time was purely driven by necessity.

[AgriTrack]

If you look at it not only as a Bitcoin holder but a corporate business, it still is a bad deal, but since they know that they can cover the dent made in this deal over time as Bitcoin goes up, it isn't going to be a big deal for them in the long run, and besides, it is not going to be their last purchase for the season, and since Bitcoin is not yet done with the bear market as it seems, because there is strong resistance at around $80k, and there is a high chance it is going to take a dip again, they might be planning to buy some more as it goes down.

Corporate businesses as institutions don't think like an individual investor, they tend to look at the bigger picture, and since they know that they can make more purchases easily if they get the opportunity, they know their losses are eventually going to be covered. People were calling them out for selling the bitcoins earlier, because Michael Saylor used to say they wouldn't sell but just keep buying, but we all know that the ultimate goal of all this for them is to do business, and that's what they are doing.

[Ziskinberg]

At first, I also looked at this Strategy move and thought, “How would someone sell Bitcoin around $60k and come back to buy at $80k?”

I can see the financial strategy behind this but I still cant fully understand why they chose to do it this way. Bitcoin is a valuable long term asset so selling it at a lower price seems like a bad deal to me. I understand that they needed to manage their balance sheet and that they werent simply trading Bitcoin. But if you ask me, I would rather avoid selling something so valuable just to deal with a short term financial difficulty.

I understand that this strategy might make sense from a corporate or financial perspective but I am still not convinced that it was the best way to manage their financial situation. After all Bitcoin has a fixed supply and is a valuable asset. I am glad they bought back some of the coins again. I still believe that Bitcoin could really help them in the long term.

I guess Strategy isn't actually here to see bitcoin as a real long term investment. Otherwise, they should have avoided selling early because that would only compromised their future profits. Instead, they only invest in bitcoin as a short term financial gains, and what they did is a perfect example for it. They sold bitcoin to pay dividends on preferred stock so obviously, bitcoin isn't their priority, they only buy and hold bitcoin so that their other businesses will continue to stay profitable and sustainable.

But if that kind of strategy works for them, I guess there's no point of debating here.

[freedomgo]

Important to note they made a profit on the bitcoins sold when you consider the average price they acquired their portfolio at. Behind their bitcoin exposure there is still business to run and other reserves to balance.
As a bitcoiner I prefer them actually using their bitcoin holdings and not just locking it up.

They still hold over 840k bitcoins in total.


- Jay -

Yes, at least they sell in profits, not at loss, I think that's also the most important there. After all, there's no rule that says buy bitcoin and hold and never sell your bitcoin. If you are in business, you will always find means to keep your business and other businesses growing and at the same time benefit from its profits from time to time.

However, the good thing is, they always buy back after selling. They really make sure that they can always take advantage of bitcoin whenever their other business are being afloat.

[Sally9256]

What we need to consider to determine whether the strategy is wrong or not is the price at which they accumulated their Bitcoin and the time they sold. If the price was higher than when they bought their Bitcoin, I would say that we can consider that as not a wrong strategy because they were already in profit.Coming down to when they rebought at a higher price than what they sold for, if there is a reason why they sold their Bitcoin, there is nothing wrong with that.

And looking at the post, I see that the company sold for a reason, and when the problem was solved, they came back to accumulate at a higher price than they sold for. They even haven't accumulated up to the number of Bitcoin they first accumulated. That is for now; if they have more funds, they will definitely continue to accumulate more Bitcoin.What people should understand is that we can't forever hold Bitcoin. Selling when we are in profit because we are facing some challenges and then trying to buy back at a higher price is not something I see as wrong.It is only when someone sells at lost and then buys back at a higher price that I see it as a very wrong idea and  I would say that doing that it because fear of losing.

Sometimes it's not always about profit but doing the right thing. Bitcoin investment is a risky investment that we can't predict exactly what will happen next even in a short period that's why we need to apply some sense when investing or selling. What's the point of investing for profit and ending up selling at loss? You've held for a while so why not keep holding just for a little bit longer. Bitcoin has proven itself to always gain value back.

Yes when you invest and sell at profit it's not considered a bad strategy because many are investing for profit but selling off at profit and buying again at a higher price is not a strategy to be proud of.
The company might have made a mistake from the start by not properly planning their investment and it led to selling off. They paid the price already but they can always make the profit back if they are patient and doesn't have a reason to sell early again. Selling might not be the best option but not hesitating to buy back was a good thing, they didn't want to risk 80k price in case Bitcoin keeps rising.

[Juicyhome]

Any decision in bitcoin that's about holding and selling is right, especially when is coming from STRATEGY ,these guys has been in bitcoin business for a long time , any rate they sell today is still profit to them, it might look like a lost to you, but it's a gain to them, we can only rant but they are smiling to the bank with any rate they sell their bitcoin.  Bitcoin investment is not something you stick to buying without selling,  if toue have emergency for fund instead to take loan that will cost you high interest on the run, selling some quantity of your bitcoin won't be a bad idea.

Let's leaden from STRATEGY,  they sell because they have been holding for long,  they didn't buy $60k and sell at $80k,that's could be a bad idea,  he sold at  $60k for the general interest od the country and rebuy at $80k. They know bitcoin investment there is not stage that's no wrong to buy, we're still in dip market,  it's still open to invest.  

[Bigjoe33]

That's why their CEO said their Bitcoin decisions are based more on cost of capital and the company's balance sheet than on whether Bitcoin is $60k, $80k or $100k.
Of course, if you're looking at it strictly as a Bitcoin holder, it still looks like a bad deal: sell lower, buy higher, and you don't even buy back everything you sold, They sold 6,916 BTC and only bought 4,603 BTC back, so I wouldn't call it a brilliant Bitcoin trade, it's better understood as corporate financial management using Bitcoin as a treasury asset, and honestly, this is probably the interesting part of Strategy's model now: they are no longer saying Bitcoin can only go into the treasury, they are showing that, when necessary, Bitcoin can also come out of the treasury to solve a financial problem.

Sometimes, people think that way. They had a problem, and secondly too, they has an alternative option to solve the companies financial need, which was Bitcoin, and they did sell to solve the financial issues. At that point in time, Bitcoin came through for them, and it was great idea for them. It's there Bitcoin, and they decided how to use it. To me, it isn't a bad idea after all since they are still committed to buying and stacking Bitcoin as they can.

If you look at there buying point, you would notice that they are still all in for Bitcoin, been able to sell up to 6k+ and only rebought 4k+ and even in a higher amount. That means that they believe in the increasing power of Bitcoin and surely, if they have some coins, they would still reap it in the future. They are having Bitcoin and there business still running.

[Free Market Capitalist]

As far as I remember, Strategy has sold three times in total at an average price of around $60k, while their average purchase price was above $75k.
I don't think it's correct to say they made a profit from selling Bitcoin.

That's all well and good, except that I just said exactly the same thing in the post right before yours. If you're going to repeat what I say, at least start with: “As FMC says...”

Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with what strategy have done, sometimes you just have to fulfill some financial obligations to stay in the business, you have to do what’s best for business, this people buys a large portion of bitcoin, and we don’t know what price they bought there bitcoin, we only know they sold at $60k, but have we asked ourselves if they made profits or loose from that amount they sold, but I believe they sold in profits and not loose...

You believe? You wouldn't believe so much if you had read a few comments above yours before writing your generic BS. I am going to start tagging all of you.

[abaeze]

Sometimes, people think that way. They had a problem, and secondly too, they has an alternative option to solve the companies financial need, which was Bitcoin, and they did sell to solve the financial issues. At that point in time, Bitcoin came through for them, and it was great idea for them. It's there Bitcoin, and they decided how to use it. To me, it isn't a bad idea after all since they are still committed to buying and stacking Bitcoin as they can.

If you look at there buying point, you would notice that they are still all in for Bitcoin, been able to sell up to 6k+ and only rebought 4k+ and even in a higher amount. That means that they believe in the increasing power of Bitcoin and surely, if they have some coins, they would still reap it in the future. They are having Bitcoin and there business still running.

If the investment or asset is not useful in a crisis, then what is the benefit of that investment/asset, so in my opinion they did not make any mistake. And through this buying and selling, the company's position has become more clear and transparent to the public. And this is certainly an important indication of their long-term position. If a company sells Bitcoin to meet urgent business expenses or liquidity crisis and at the same time buys Bitcoin again in large quantities later, then I would not see it as a direct loss of confidence in Bitcoin, but it could be treasury management, using assets when necessary and increasing exposure again when the situation improves. This is called situational awareness.

[purple_sparkles]

I think that many people here on the forum use bitcoin not only for long-term accumulation but also for various kinds of financial transactions, and they certainly will not stop buying bitcoin simply because it used to be cheaper. Bitcoin is a great asset. We can use it both for saving and accumulation, as well as any other asset when necessary for different financial operations or as a way to solve certain financial problems. The fact that the company has returned to buying bitcoin at a higher price only means that its management, like many people on our forum, believes that bitcoin is a great investment and that it is better to continue accumulating it. Especially now, I believe we may be approaching a time when the market could reverse and move sharply upward. In my opinion, $80K is still not a high price for bitcoin.

[Crakryptvest]

It is possible at the time they sold bitcoin they have made good profit from their hodling. Buying bitcoin at $80k is nothing bad , the reason to buy is to hodl Bitcoin. You cant question anyone why they sell their bitcoin and you csnt question why they are buying bitcoin at a given price. To you it might be a price that is high that you wont be willing to buy but it is a target for someone else to buy at any opportunity no matter the price. Strategy would sell his bitcoin if he thinks it is the right time for him, so you shouldn't be so concern about it.

If we should consider the time strategy started buying Bitcoin, the price then, and the amount they have continually invested in Bitcoin when the price was lower than what it is presently, we won't want to stress ourselves out, trying to know why they sold at $60k and bought back at $80k, strategy are on much profit, they can buy at anytime they want, they understand Bitcoin, that's why they buy when some people see it as an abnormal move, microstrategy are one of the major players in the cryptocurrency ( Bitcoin) space, instead of wondering why they took that step, I prefer emulating them by action with what I can afford, they are really strategists indeed.

[The Founding Titan]

Okay, here we go again—another Strategy thread full of nonsense and trivial comments.

That's why their CEO said their Bitcoin decisions are based more on cost of capital and the company's balance sheet than on whether Bitcoin is $60k, $80k or $100k.

The CEO, just like Saylor, is now only deceiving those who lack basic knowledge of capital management. What Strategy has done is create a disastrous strategy, get many companies to copy it, and then watch as they ended up abandoning it, going bankrupt, and being liquidate. ll while selling every change they make to their company as a great idea whenever things don’t work out. Since they have no shortage of Saylormooners cheering them on, they just keep doing their thing.

You are saying they are intentionally trying to sabotage others by masquerading a bad strategy as something other than that? Why would they do something like that, what's the benefit to them because it will be pointless to do something like this without nothing to show for it at the end.

[Sammye3]

It is possible at the time they sold bitcoin they have made good profit from their hodling. Buying bitcoin at $80k is nothing bad , the reason to buy is to hodl Bitcoin. You cant question anyone why they sell their bitcoin and you csnt question why they are buying bitcoin at a given price. To you it might be a price that is high that you wont be willing to buy but it is a target for someone else to buy at any opportunity no matter the price. Strategy would sell his bitcoin if he thinks it is the right time for him, so you shouldn't be so concern about it.

There is no gain whatsoever selling your bitcoin at $60k and buying back at $80k. What was the purpose of selling the bitcoin? Was it panic selling or funds were withdrawn to settle emergencies? To me, this is a loss because buying at a higher price simply means you will be offered lesser quantity of bitcoin for a higher amount. You could say that whatever profit generated is being liquidated into the market because of an increase in price before purchase, does that look like a good investment strategy?