Strategy CEO Phong Le has defended the company’s decision to sell Bitcoin near $60,000 before later resuming purchases around $80,000. He argued that the trades were driven by capital costs and balance-sheet needs rather than an attempt to time Bitcoin’s market price.
In a recent interview, Le described both the earlier sales and the subsequent buys as the “right trade” under the conditions that existed at each time. The company sold roughly 7,000 BTC earlier and later acquired 4,603 BTC at an average price of approximately $80,318.
The Drivers of This Development
Strategy paused significant Bitcoin accumulation for a period while it strengthened its balance sheet, reducing net debt and building substantial U.S. dollar reserves. The earlier Bitcoin sales, representing less than 1% of total holdings, helped fund preferred dividends and support liquidity. Once the company achieved a stronger capital position—with total assets rising and the ability to issue equity at a premium—it resumed buying Bitcoin. Le emphasized that management evaluates the cost of capital and the impact on Bitcoin exposure per share, rather than simply comparing the current price of Bitcoin to previous levels. For perspective, the approach reflects a shift toward a more flexible “two-way strategy” that allows selective sales when financially advantageous while remaining a net long-term accumulator.
It is important to note the fundamental difference between a pure buy-and-hold treasury policy and a capital-structure-driven approach: the former prioritizes never selling the asset, while the latter treats Bitcoin as a balance-sheet tool that can be adjusted to optimize equity value and funding costs.
Impact and Broader Context
The defense aims to address perceptions that Strategy sold low and bought high. By framing the decisions around capital management, Le positioned the moves as consistent with fiduciary responsibility to shareholders. The company continues to hold a very large Bitcoin position (over 845,000 BTC) and has indicated it expects to keep accumulating even at higher price levels. The strengthened balance sheet is presented as increasing flexibility for future equity-funded purchases.
This development sparks important discussions about corporate Bitcoin treasury strategies. Supporters of Strategy’s approach argue that dynamic capital management can enhance shareholder value and sustainability compared with rigid never-sell policies. Critics or long-term holders may view any sales as a departure from the original conviction narrative and question the optics of selling at lower prices. Analysts observe that the explanation highlights how large corporate holders increasingly integrate Bitcoin decisions with traditional corporate finance considerations such as cost of capital, dividends, and equity issuance premiums.
Looking ahead, Strategy’s future transaction activity and balance-sheet metrics will indicate how consistently the cost-of-capital framework is applied across market cycles. This analysis is based on Phong Le’s public remarks and related company disclosures for accuracy and reliability. Actual trading decisions and market outcomes remain subject to ongoing corporate and market conditions.