TLDR:

• Metaplanet CEO Simon Gerovich rejects anonymous claims of hidden Bitcoin buys and poor disclosure practices.
• Four September Bitcoin purchases were each disclosed promptly via the company’s live public dashboard.
• Selling put options lowers Bitcoin acquisition costs below spot, not a directional price bet.
• Metaplanet’s Bitcoin-per-share KPI surged over 500% in 2025 despite stock price volatility.

Metaplanet’s CEO has gone on the offensive. Simon Gerovich addressed a wave of anonymous allegations targeting the Japanese Bitcoin treasury firm. 

The criticism questioned the company’s disclosure practices, options trading approach, and September Bitcoin purchases. Gerovich pushed back point by point, calling several claims factually inaccurate.

Metaplanet CEO Challenges Claims Over Bitcoin Purchases and Disclosure Practices

The September Bitcoin purchases drew particular scrutiny. Critics alleged the company bought near a local price peak and stayed quiet about it. 

Gerovich acknowledged the timing but rejected the narrative entirely. He confirmed four separate purchases were made that month, each disclosed promptly through the company’s public dashboard.

Metaplanet publishes all Bitcoin wallet addresses openly. Shareholders can verify holdings in real time through a live dashboard the firm maintains. 

Gerovich cited this as evidence the company operates with unusual transparency for a listed entity. He described it as one of the most open corporate structures in the market.

The company’s accumulation approach is systematic, not speculative. Gerovich emphasized that Metaplanet does not attempt to time Bitcoin’s price. 

Every purchase gets disclosed regardless of prevailing market conditions. That policy has remained consistent throughout the firm’s accumulation period.

Gerovich took direct aim at anonymous accounts spreading the allegations. He stated he would not tolerate the distribution of false information to shareholders navigating a volatile market. 

He also noted his personal financial exposure as a major shareholder, having invested his own capital into the company.

Options Trading Strategy and Financial Metrics Addressed Directly

The criticism around options trading reflected a misreading of strategy, according to Gerovich. 

Selling put options is not a directional bet on Bitcoin rising. It is a method to acquire Bitcoin below the spot price by collecting option premiums upfront. He walked through a specific example to illustrate the mechanics.

In his post, Gerovich described a scenario where spot Bitcoin trades at $80,000. 

Selling a put at that strike and collecting a $10,000 premium brings the effective acquisition cost to $70,000. The strategy exploits elevated volatility to lower average entry prices. In Q4, he said, the approach meaningfully reduced Metaplanet’s effective Bitcoin costs.

On financials, Gerovich challenged the use of net profit as an evaluation metric. He pointed to 6.2 billion yen in operating profit, representing 1,694% year-over-year growth. 

Ordinary losses stem from unrealized valuation changes on long-term Bitcoin holdings the company has no plans to sell. He called drawing negative conclusions from that line item a misreading of the statements.

Bitcoin per share, the company’s primary KPI, rose over 500% in 2025. The hotel business generated 437 million yen in sales revenue and 169 million yen in operating profit. Borrowing arrangements were disclosed three times across facility establishment and two drawdowns. 

Specific lender details and interest rates were withheld at the counterparty’s request, Gerovich said.

The White House is pressing ahead with negotiations between crypto industry representatives and banking lobbyists to shape stablecoin provisions within a broader crypto market-structure bill. In the third face-to-face session held in about two weeks, participants attempted to close gaps that have stalled the legislation amid broader regulatory scrutiny. While no deal emerged on Thursday, attendees signaled progress as a White House adviser urged a compromise: allow third parties, such as exchanges, to offer stablecoin rewards only in connection with transaction activity rather than linking yields to customers’ idle balances. The talks followed earlier meetings on February 2 and February 10, underscoring the urgency of delivering a coherent framework for how U.S. regulators would police the evolving crypto landscape.

Key takeaways

• The current round of talks produced incremental language alignment but stopped short of a binding agreement on how stablecoin rewards should be governed under the market-structure bill.
• A prominent proposal centers on tying stablecoin rewards to transactional activity rather than balances, a stance intended to address banking concerns about competitive pressures.
• Participants highlighted the need for clear legislative language to unlock broader crypto-market structure reform, with industry and banking voices urging pragmatism and collaboration.
• Public remarks from executives at Coinbase (EXCHANGE: COIN) and Ripple underscored a constructive and cooperative tone, even as substantive policy divides remain.
• The Senate’s path for the related market-structure bill remains uncertain, with prior House passage of a CLARITY Act variant not yet mirrored in Senate approval.
• Plans for continued negotiations were already on the table, with banks slated to reconvene to decide whether the trade-off could win broader support.

Tickers mentioned: $COIN

Sentiment: Neutral

Market context: The unfolding discussions sit at the crossroads of regulatory clarity, innovation incentives, and risk management as policymakers weigh how to normalize stablecoins within the traditional financial system while maintaining consumer protections and financial stability.

Why it matters

At stake is a path to regulatory clarity that could unlock broader participation in the crypto economy while preserving the safeguards that lawmakers insist are necessary for a rapidly evolving sector. The debate over stablecoin rewards directly touches liquidity, market integrity, and how digitized fiat-backed assets integrate with traditional banking rails. By steering a compromise toward transaction-based rewards rather than balance-based yields, policymakers aim to strike a balance between incentivizing innovative finance and preventing scenarios that could undermine deposit stability or create unfair competitive dynamics for banks.

The discussions reflect a broader tension in Washington: policymakers want to enable responsible innovation without ceding market stability or consumer protection. The involvement of high-profile industry players signals that the issue has moved beyond a narrow policy skirmish and into a cornerstone debate about how stablecoins will function within the U.S. financial system over the coming years. As negotiators press on, the outcome could influence how wallets, exchanges, and other third parties design reward structures and attract user participation in a regulated, compliant manner.

Observers note that the White House is prioritizing a pragmatic, language-driven approach—one that narrows disagreements step by step while keeping the door open to a broader legislative package. The degree of progress achieved in the latest talks—though not a resolution—suggests that a consensus on core concepts may still be within reach, provided sufficient alignment on the role of third-party reward programs and the safeguards designed to protect depositors and the broader financial system.

What to watch next

• Whether banks will sign off on the transaction-based rewards framework and what concessions might be required to gain bipartisan support.
• The timing and framing of the next White House-facilitated session, including any public statements from the involved parties.
• Any movement in the Senate on the market-structure bill or related amendments, following earlier House passage of a CLARITY Act variant.
• Follow-up remarks from Coinbase (EXCHANGE: COIN) and Ripple, and whether new language clarifies the role of third-party reward programs.

Sources & verification

Progress, trade-offs shape White House discussions on stablecoins and market structure

The third formal session between White House policy staff, crypto executives, and banking lobbyists unfolded as part of a broader push to finalize language for a market-structure bill that would redefine how regulators oversee the crypto sector. The gathering, described as constructive but inconclusive, occurred roughly 16 days after the initial February meeting and followed a second discussion eight days later. A central theme was a proposed compromise that would permit third parties—such as exchanges and other service providers—to offer stablecoin rewards only in relation to transaction activity, not as returns on idle balance holdings. This shift aims to dampen potential incentives for large sums to accumulate in wallets simply to generate yield, a factor cited by banks as a competitive pressure that could distort traditional banking models.

During the talks, participants signaled progress in narrowing differences on language that would codify how stablecoins are treated within the broader regulatory framework. The dynamic highlighted the delicate balance between fostering innovation and maintaining financial stability. In a notable development, the session included representatives from the crypto industry who advocate for reward programs that align with transaction-based engagement, balanced by bankers’ concerns about depositor protection and systemic risk. The discussions also foregrounded the practical role of third-party platforms in delivering stablecoin rewards, a line of inquiry that could influence how wallets, exchanges, and payment rails interoperate under a regulated regime.

On the record, executives from the involved crypto firms described the session as a step forward. After the meeting, Ripple’s chief legal officer offered a succinct update: the teams had “rolled up our sleeves and went through language today,” signaling that specifics were being mapped out in detail. In parallel, Coinbase described the tone as constructive and cooperative, underscoring a shared interest in advancing policy that would provide clarity without stifling innovation. A separate note from the Blockchain Association framed the meeting as a productive progression toward resolving outstanding questions about stablecoin rewards and moving the legislation closer to a vote.

The concessions under discussion would have to survive scrutiny from both chambers of Congress and the White House, given the competing priorities that have characterized crypto regulation for years. A point of friction remains the concept of “idle balance yields” versus activity-based rewards, a distinction that lawmakers and industry participants have wrestled with since early discussions. Semafor’s coverage referenced internal discussions and comments from participants indicating that the debate has shifted toward activity-based incentives, while the idea of earning yield simply from holding stablecoins has been effectively sidelined in the near term.

The banking sector has framed its concerns around competitive pressures more than deposit flight, a nuance echoed by some participants who emphasized that the issue is as much about maintaining a level playing field as about liquidity risk. The broader regulatory conversation includes a separate line of analysis around the potential macro implications of widespread stablecoin use, with Treasury authorities having previously estimated that rapid mass adoption could catalyze significant deployment shifts within the traditional banking system. Those considerations underscore why the White House and lawmakers are approaching the negotiation with both urgency and caution, seeking a policy that can be implemented without triggering abrupt dislocations in financial markets.

Looking ahead, observers expect another round of discussions among banking groups to determine whether the proposed language can gain acceptance. The next steps will likely hinge on a mutual willingness to compromise on the reward structure, as well as a clear signal from lawmakers about how quickly the bill could progress through committee and to a floor vote. The ongoing negotiations illustrate the complexity of delivering a unified U.S. stance on stablecoins—one that accommodates the rapid evolution of digital assets while preserving the oversight and safeguards that underpin the mainstream financial system.

Simon Gerovich, CEO of Metaplanet (3350), has responded to online criticism of the Tokyo-listed bitcoin treasury company, as bitcoin is down almost 50% from its October all-time high and now trading near $67,000, while Metaplanet shares have fallen roughly 85% from their 2025 all-time high.

Addressing anonymous critics, Gerovich said, “It’s easy to hide behind anonymous accounts, criticize others, and incite outrage without taking any responsibility.” Gerovich added, “I have no qualms about taking public responsibility for all my statements and Metaplanet’s actions.”

Metaplanet uses options, specifically selling put options and put spreads, to generate premium income and potentially acquire bitcoin below the prevailing market price.

Defending this approach, Gerovich said, “Selling put options is not a bet on bitcoin’s price rising.”

Gerovich explained that the strategy is designed to lower the company’s effective purchase cost and monetise volatility.

On transparency, Gerovich said, “we are one of the most transparent listed companies in the world.” Gerovich pointed to real-time wallet disclosure and repeated announcements of purchases, including those made in September.

Gerovich also acknowledged market timing concerns, he said, “September marked a local peak. I have no intention of denying that.” Gerovich stressed that the strategy is systematic accumulation, not short-term trading.

Lastly, Gerovich responded to criticism of financial results, saying, “Net profit is not an appropriate metric for evaluating a bitcoin treasury company.” Gerovich also rejected claims about the hotel division, stating the business is not in ruins and highlighting its profitability.

Metaplanet shares trade at 307 yen, while the company holds 35,102 BTC.

The White House has reportedly refocused talks between crypto and bank lobbyists on limiting how stablecoin rewards should be paid in the third meeting between the two groups over a crypto market structure bill.

Crypto and banking industry representatives met at the White House on Thursday for the third time in 16 days to discuss stablecoin provisions that have stalled the crypto bill which the Senate is looking to pass.

No agreement was reached on Thursday, but executives at Coinbase and Ripple said progress was made as one of the White House’s crypto advisers urged a trade-off to let third parties, such as exchanges, offer stablecoin rewards only on transaction activity, not balances.

“We rolled up our sleeves and went through specific language today,” Ripple’s chief legal officer, Stuart Alderoty, posted to X on Thursday. Coinbase’s legal head, Paul Grewal, said the meeting was “constructive and the tone cooperative.”

Blockchain Association CEO Summer Mersinger said the meeting was a “step forward” in resolving issues related to stablecoin rewards and ensuring that crypto market structure legislation is advanced.

It’s the third meeting between the three parties, who first met on Feb. 2 and again eight days later on Feb. 10, as the Senate is looking to pass a bill to define how US market regulators will police crypto.

The House passed a similar version of the bill, called the CLARITY Act, in July, but the effort has stalled as the Senate Banking Committee has not yet secured enough bipartisan support to move it forward.

Semafor reporter Eleanor Mueller and journalist Eleanor Terrett both reported that White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt drove the discussion at the latest meeting.

Witt pushed for a previously pitched proposal that would allow third parties to offer stablecoin rewards to customers tied to transactions and activity, and not balances, the latter of which has been a sticking point for banks.

“Earning yield on idle balances, a key crypto industry goal, is effectively off the table,” Terrett said, citing those who attended the meeting. “The debate has narrowed to whether firms can offer rewards linked to certain activities.”

Semafor’s Mueller reported that the banks will start meeting tomorrow to decide whether to agree to the trade-off, and added that discussions would continue in the coming days.

Related: Banks can’t seem to service crypto, even as it goes mainstream 

The Bank Policy Institute, American Bankers Association and Independent Community Bankers of America represented the banking industry, none of which have publicly commented on the latest White House meeting.

Banks fear competitive pressures, not deposit flight risk

Banking groups have argued that stablecoin rewards will compete with and undermine the banking system and lead to bank deposits shifting to stablecoins.