Why are the Bitcoin treasury companies that promised not to sell now starting to sell their coins?

Author: Gino Matos, CryptoSlate

Compiled by: Deep潮 TechFlow

Deep潮 Briefing: Strategy publicly signals that it may sell coins to pay dividends. MARA sold 15,000 BTC to repay debt. Sequans has used Bitcoin to service convertible bonds for two consecutive quarters. The “never selling” Bitcoin treasury narrative is unraveling—these companies are turning Bitcoin from a “faith reserve” into a “liquidity tool.” When falling coin prices trigger even more selling—and that selling pushes prices down further—the spiral begins.

Saylor loosens his stance: selling can be more cost-effective than issuing more shares

At Strategy’s May 5 earnings call, CEO Phong Le said it plainly: “We will sell Bitcoin when it benefits the company.” Saylor added the second punch: Strategy may sell some Bitcoin to pay dividends, “so the market can get used to it ahead of time.”

As of May 3, Strategy held 818,334 BTC, up 22% year to date, with a market capitalization of $64.14 billion.

What this call truly established is that BTC selling is now officially included in the company’s financial toolbox—and behind it is a set of quantifiable framework.

Management drew a line: when mNAV (market value/net asset value) is below 1.22x, selling coins to pay dividends is more effective at boosting per-share value than issuing common stock. Saylor’s algorithm is: as long as Bitcoin’s annualized growth exceeds 2.3%, Strategy’s existing Bitcoin reserves can “forever” pay dividends; even if Bitcoin’s growth is zero, the reserves are enough to pay for 43 years.

Caption: Strategy’s 1.22x mNAV threshold diagram—when mNAV falls below this line, selling coins to pay dividends is more beneficial to shareholders than issuing stock

The “never selling” slogan gives way to a model: buy when it boosts, issue when it boosts, pay when preferred dividends boost, sell when selling boosts. At their core, these companies are leveraged treasuries plus credit vehicles.

When investors originally bought these stocks, they were buying Bitcoin proxies built on scarcity and a promise of perpetual holding. The 1.22x mNAV threshold and the 2.3% breakeven growth rate are a more honest—yet more complex—version.

When Bitcoin becomes liquidity

Sequans’ quarterly report is even more direct. Revenue fell 24.8% year over year to $6.1 million, and the operating loss was $50.5 million. In Q1, the realized net loss from selling Bitcoin reached $11.7 million; the proceeds from selling were mainly used to repay convertible bonds and repurchase ADS.

As of March 31, Sequans held 1,514 BTC, of which 1,217 BTC were pledged as collateral for $66.2 million in convertible bonds. By April 30, the position had dropped to 1,114 BTC, of which 817 BTC secured $35.9 million of debt (due June 1).

This is exactly the same as what Sequans did in November 2025—then Sequans sold 970 BTC, redeemed 50% of its convertible bonds, and reduced debt from $189 million to $94.5 million.

Two consecutive quarters—same pattern: revenue declines, debt matures, and Bitcoin turns into operating liquidity. BTC held as collateral was already locked into debt obligations before any active decision to sell was made.

Sequans is not on the same scale as Strategy—its underlying operations are weaker and its treasury position more fragile. When Bitcoin has to be used to repay debt, the logic of “inventory management” takes over everything.

In March, MARA did the same thing—on a bigger scale. It sold 15,133 BTC, raised about $1.1 billion, used it to repurchase convertible notes, and slashed the convertible debt balance by 30% in one move, locking in a spread of about $88.1 million.

MARA packaged this move as “balance sheet optimization,” driven by debt structure and financing conditions. This effectively sets a precedent: BTC selling can be an independent capital allocation decision separate from Bitcoin faith. The real question is—under what conditions does selling become the highest-return choice?

Bull-bear divergence: financing conditions decide everything

If Bitcoin rebounds to Citibank’s 12-month baseline expectation of $112,000, or to the bull scenario of $165,000, the equity premium for treasury companies will expand, the share issuance window reopens, and large-scale new purchases would be enough to absorb tactical BTC selling.

Strategy’s 1.22x mNAV threshold will become a technical detail. Companies like Sequans, which can withstand debt pressure during Bitcoin weakness, can also resolve their debt issues—carrying unrestricted BTC into the next cycle.

If Bitcoin falls toward Citibank’s adverse scenario of $58,000 (with Standard Chartered having pointed to a further path down to $50,000), companies trading near or below NAV will lose the benefit of the per-share boost from issuing new shares.

In that case, preferred-share dividend obligations continue accumulating, and BTC selling shifts from capital management to balance-sheet defense. Sequans’ model could spread to all treasury companies with “thin-margin operations + BTC-backed lending”—selling Bitcoin to repay debt, collateral shrinking, reduced free float—becoming the only option.

By then, corporate Bitcoin buying turns into a loop: falling prices trigger more selling, and more selling pushes prices down further.

Caption: Two paths for Bitcoin treasury companies—under bear scenarios ($50,000–$58,000), facing balance sheet pressure; under bull scenarios (above $112,000), with financing pressure easing

Corporate Bitcoin treasury trading is built on the promise of “permanent hoarding,” which leads investors to value these companies as Bitcoin proxies. Once selling becomes an openly acknowledged tool in the model, investors must incorporate everything into their valuation: the debt maturity dates, collateral requirements, dividend obligations, and the management’s mNAV level at which they choose to sell coins instead of issuing more shares.

Saylor’s 2.3% annualized breakeven and the 1.22x mNAV threshold are more candid. In the next phase of Bitcoin treasury trading, the weight of financing conditions won’t be lower than that of Bitcoin faith.

LAYOUT REFERENCE (source): total_lines=57, non_empty_lines=29, blank_lines=28