Losing $57 million while aggressively buying BTC—what exactly is the Trump family playing at?
Brothers, a news piece yesterday really confused me.
American Bitcoin (ABTC), the mining company under the Trump family, reported a Q2 net loss of $57.2 million, marking the third consecutive quarter of losses.
But the same financial report shows—Bitcoin reserves increased from 7,021 to 8,002 coins, a 14% growth in a single quarter.
Losing money but still buying hard?
Even more surreal—on the same day, Trump Media (TMTG) transferred $165 million worth of Bitcoin to Crypto.com.
Although they later clarified "no sale, just a custodian change," on-chain data shows—2,628 BTC were transferred out, leaving only 4,261 BTC, just enough to cover convertible bond collateral.
Same family, two companies, same day, one is buying, the other is leveraging.
Who do you trust?
Let's first break down American Bitcoin's numbers.
Where did the $57.2 million loss come from?
$71.2 million is the "fair value impairment" of Bitcoin holdings—not actual cash lost, but an accounting mark-to-market loss.
What about the mining core business?
Q2 revenue was $67 million, mining 932 BTC, a single-quarter record.
Mining cost per coin is about $36,500, while BTC's current price is $63,000—gross margin close to 50%.
CEO Mike Ho said: "Bitcoin is a growing capital asset, and we believe its long-term compounding will outperform our cost of capital."
In plain language: the loss is on paper, the profit is real BTC. Paper losses are bearable, BTC cannot stop.
Now look at Trump Media.
$165 million BTC transferred to Crypto.com.
No sale? Fine, I believe you.
But after transferring out 2,628 BTC, the remaining 4,261 BTC exactly equals the convertible bond collateral.
What does this mean?
Those BTC were previously "free holdings," now they are "pledged assets."
Pledging carries liquidation risk—if BTC falls to a certain price, creditors can liquidate.
One buys more as price falls, the other pledges more.
Same father, two different strategies.
Back to your main concern: does this affect my short-term BTC price outlook?
Today (August 4) in Asian morning trading, BTC briefly approached $64,100, up about 2% from the previous day, reclaiming the $63,000 level lost on Monday.
But don't get too excited.
BTC's current price is about $63,150, down roughly 45% from a year ago.
ABTC's stock price? Down about 95% from its peak, forced a 1-for-15 reverse stock split in July just to stay on Nasdaq.
Eric Trump personally holds 6% of shares, with market value shrunk by over $600 million.
A company with a $57 million paper loss, a founder personally losing $600 million—and still buying.
Is this faith or foolishness?
My judgment is simple:
In the short term, these two news items have limited direct impact on BTC price. The market focuses more on macro and liquidity, not a mining company's earnings.
But in the medium to long term, ABTC's choice sends a clear signal:
At a mining cost of $36,500, BTC at $63,000 is "cheap."
Eric Trump himself said: "Our advantage is that we don't buy at market price; our mining cost is about half the market price."
Translation: others buying BTC at $63,000 is speculation; I mine it at $36,500, that's profit.
The Trump family's two companies made opposite moves on the same day—
ABTC is hoarding, TMTG is pledging.
One tells you "BTC is bullish long-term," the other says "I’m pledging BTC first."
Who do you believe?
I believe the data.
ABTC's mining cost is $36,500, gross margin 50%—as long as BTC doesn't fall below $40,000, this company can survive and grow.
TMTG pledging BTC means they need cash and are borrowing.
One is the producer's logic, the other the consumer's logic.
Are you a producer or a consumer?
$BTC$ETH$SOL#特朗普家族矿企亏损仍增持BTC
Disclaimer: OKX Orbit content is provided for informational purposes only. Learn more
