Simon Gerovich rejects claims of secrecy, saying the firm is leveraging market swings to accumulate Bitcoin cheaper—not gambling on price direction.
A brewing controversy around Japan-based investment firm Metaplanet has erupted into a public showdown after anonymous allegations accused the company of obscuring details about its Bitcoin accumulation strategy.
Now, CEO Simon Gerovich is pushing back forcefully—arguing that critics misunderstand a strategy designed not to speculate, but to methodically build long-term holdings while lowering acquisition costs.
“We are using volatility, not betting on it,” Gerovich said in a detailed public response, describing the claims as “factually incorrect” and “contrary to reality.”
The dispute began when an anonymous social media user—claiming to hold 50,000 shares—alleged that Metaplanet failed to fully disclose details surrounding several major Bitcoin purchases and derivatives transactions.
Among the key criticisms:
The company allegedly bought heavily during a September 2025 local price peak, funded partly through a share sale.
Four purchases that month were said to lack timely disclosure.
The firm’s use of put options was described as a directional bet that could backfire if Bitcoin prices declined.
Borrowing arrangements using Bitcoin as collateral were criticized for not naming lenders or specifying interest rates.
The company’s legacy hotel business was dismissed by the critic as irrelevant to value creation.
The post accused Metaplanet of “squeezing shareholders” while portraying its options-driven income model as consistently successful.
Gerovich’s Rebuttal: “Everything Is Public”
Gerovich responded by emphasizing that the company’s holdings are verifiable in real time.
According to him:
All wallet addresses tied to the firm are publicly visible.
A live dashboard allows shareholders to track Bitcoin balances continuously.
Each of the four September purchases was announced at the time decisions were made.
He acknowledged the uncomfortable optics of buying near a price high—but rejected the idea that timing invalidated the strategy.
“September marked a local peak. I have no intention of denying that,” he said, framing the purchases as part of a long-term accumulation plan rather than short-term trading.
The Strategy at the Center of the Debate
The most contentious issue is Metaplanet’s use of put options, a derivatives approach critics say exposes the company to downside risk.
Gerovich insists the interpretation is backwards.
How the Company Says It Works
Metaplanet sells put options, collecting an upfront premium from buyers.
If Bitcoin stays above the strike price, the options expire—allowing the firm to keep the premium as income.
If prices fall and the options are exercised, the company buys Bitcoin—but at an effective discount once the premium is accounted for.
In Gerovich’s words, the strategy is designed to:
Monetize market volatility
Lower the real cost basis of acquired Bitcoin
Turn price swings into a revenue stream rather than a threat
He described it as a disciplined treasury-building mechanism, not a leveraged wager on price appreciation.
Revenue Engine, Not Side Bet
According to company disclosures, options premiums represented a significant portion of revenue last year and helped reduce effective acquisition costs during the fourth quarter.
The firm measures success using a “Bitcoin-per-share” metric—a figure Gerovich says rose more than 500% in 2025, reflecting how much digital asset exposure each share represents.
That metric, he argues, aligns directly with shareholder interests.
Questions Over Borrowing and Transparency
Critics also raised concerns about loans collateralized with Bitcoin, suggesting incomplete disclosure.
Gerovich countered that Metaplanet issued three separate announcements detailing:
Credit-line structure
Drawdown amounts
Collateral usage
Strategic purpose
He acknowledged that the lender’s identity and exact interest rate remain confidential—but said that limitation stems from counterparty agreements rather than secrecy.
Skin in the Game
Seeking to counter accusations of misalignment, Gerovich noted that he and his family are substantial shareholders.
That ownership, he said, means leadership experiences the same volatility as investors—both upside and downside.
A High-Stakes Treasury Model
Metaplanet has rapidly positioned itself among the largest public-company holders of Bitcoin, adopting a treasury model that blends accumulation with derivatives-based yield generation.
Supporters view the approach as innovative corporate finance.
Skeptics see complexity that could amplify risk if markets turn sharply.
The truth may ultimately depend on the long-term trajectory of Bitcoin itself.
The Bigger Question: Can Volatility Be Engineered Into an Asset?
At its core, the debate highlights a philosophical divide emerging in corporate crypto adoption:
Traditionalists treat volatility as something to hedge away.
Metaplanet’s model treats volatility as something to harvest.
Gerovich remains unapologetic about which side he’s on.
“When managed strategically,” he said, “volatility becomes an asset—not a liability.”
As more public companies explore digital-asset treasuries, Metaplanet’s experiment could become either a blueprint—or a cautionary tale—for how corporations engage with the world’s most unpredictable financial instrument.