If institutional money decides it needs to sink Bitcoin, I think it'll be a single party. And the most obvious attack for a single capital-holder is still to build a network-outvoting supercomputer and force repeated chain reorgs until people give up. At current prices and network hashrates, that'd only take, what, $20 million?
LOL, I like this idea, and I would be delightfully entertained if one of them were to try it. The gross incompetence (or perhaps deliberate mismanagement?) of their operations in their own realm of expertise paints a humorous picture of how they might proceed into this new endeavor. I imagine them placing $20 mil in preordered ASICS, and then sitting around waiting for them to deliver, totally oblivious to the fact that when that quantitiy actually ships in it's entirety, it will be 2016 and be nowhere close to 51%. Or the fact that if the community got wind of such a plan, many of us would invest in hardware to preserve the network (I know I don't speak for everyone here). Computer wars!
Alternatively, I can imagine them negotiating a deal with a tech firm for the production of their own units, and getting increasingly furious as production and design get pushed out for all the usual reasons. In the end, they risk *helping* us with their funding instead of crippling us. Then, in an attempt to cut loses, they have to decide between maintaining all the hardware they have aquired and bolstering the strength of the network, liquidating the equipment and bolstering the network, or just throwing it all away and writing down a loss.
I can also see a situation where, as the operation progresses, some of the people involved would be making significant profits (as they do with everything), and an internal power struggle would erupt. There would be people demanding the boat be sunk, while others drag their feet while collecting personal "bonuses", and striking deals with other involved parties. That's what they are best at, right?
