Maartunn(@JA_Maartun):Why not hedge the sale? 😭 As Metaplanet sold the 10,000 BTC, they could’ve gradually opened an equivalent long BTC futures position, remaining roughly delta-neutral. Then close the hedge while buying the BTC back. Using Q3 funding rates, the estimated cost: 1 day~$145K 7 days~$1.0M 30 days~$4.3M 60 days~$8.7M 92 days~$13.3M Even hedging the entire quarter would’ve cost ~$13M vs. the ~$73M price difference they absorbed.

2026.10.05 13:32

Why not hedge the sale? 😭 As Metaplanet sold the 10,000 BTC, they could’ve gradually opened an equivalent long BTC futures position, remaining roughly delta-neutral. Then close the hedge while buying the BTC back. Using Q3 funding rates, the estimated cost: 1 day~$145K 7 days~$1.0M 30 days~$4.3M 60 days~$8.7M 92 days~$13.3M Even hedging the entire quarter would’ve cost ~$13M vs. the ~$73M price difference they absorbed.

Maartunn@JA_Maartun

2026.10.05 13:16

Metaplanet just did something that looks a lot like trading 🥴 They sold 10,000 BTC for ~$789M at an average price of ~$78,925 per BTC, then bought 11,000 BTC for ~$949M at an average price of ~$86,246 per BTC. This is ~9.3% higher. Why? To prove to credit rating agencies and bond investors that their Bitcoin is genuinely liquid and can be converted into hundreds of millions in cash when needed. The cost of that demonstration? Reacquiring the same 10,000 BTC at the higher price cost them ~$73M extra. Then they spent another ~$86M to add the additional 1,000 BTC. It sends two important signals to the market: Metaplanet can raise financing against a highly liquid balance sheet, and, importantly, it has demonstrated that it is actually willing and able to sell Bitcoin when necessary. If that improves their credit rating and gives them access to billions in cheaper capital, the ~$73M could pay for itself.