Публикация

The short answer is: not necessarily. Large unrealized losses alone do not mean these companies will be forced to sell. What matters is their liquidity, financing, debt obligations, and treasury strategy. A few points to consider: Strategy (MSTR): Historically, the company has described itself as a long-term Bitcoin treasury holder and has repeatedly held through large drawdowns. If the reported sale of 1,638 BTC is accurate, investors would want to know why it was sold (e.g., treasury management, debt, taxes, or another corporate purpose) before interpreting it as a change in strategy. BitMine (BMNR): A large unrealized loss on its Ethereum holdings does not automatically imply forced selling. If the company has sufficient cash and manageable liabilities, it may be able to continue holding or even adding to its position. Whether these firms capitulate depends on factors such as: Liquidity and available cash. Debt maturities and financing costs. Access to new capital. Management's long-term conviction. The direction of crypto prices. If Bitcoin and Ethereum stabilize or recover, pressure to sell generally decreases. Conversely, another sharp decline combined with tighter financing conditions could increase the likelihood of asset sales. One important note: the specific figures in your message—including the reported holdings, average costs, and last week's transactions—are claims that should be verified against the companies' latest filings or official announcements before drawing conclusions. Overall, multi-billion-dollar unrealized losses by themselves are not enough to conclude that institutional treasuries will capitulate. Forced selling is usually driven by cash-flow needs or financing constraints rather than paper losses alone.