Bitcoin doesn't belong to the institutions

[Orpichukwu]

People need to stop saying that because institutions are now buying Bitcoin heavily, they own bitcoin, or with this, Bitcoin distribution is now a problem on this part, I believe it's not true .

Who are the people saying that? What institutional investors own is the only bitcoin under their possession and not the unmined bitcoin, nor the ones in someone's personal wallet. Neither do they own the network; the only power which they hold with their large volume is the power of manipulating the market negatively to some extent. Aside from that, they are very limited.

[freedomgo]

And even if they continue to buy and hold massive amount of bitcoin, bitcoin will never be completely become their own possession.

But let's be honest, not everyone will have the courage to reserve $100 to invest in bitcoin. They might even be more interested in gold but will stay hesitant with that certain amount for bitcoin. Yes, they'll invest, but most likely starting with a minimal amount first.

So we can't conclude that eventually the whole bitcoin will belong to the institutions. Bitcoin is still decentralized, and no amount of investment can erase that fact.

[o48o]

People need to stop saying that because institutions are now buying Bitcoin heavily, they own bitcoin, or with this, Bitcoin distribution is now a problem on this part, I believe it's not true .

Just because so many people aren't into Bitcoin yet is why it's looking like the truth, we the people own Bitcoin, because let's say each and every humans in the world invest $100 into Bitcoin we will surpass the whole institutions investment in Bitcoin.




Institutions can't win over the public in this case, unless Bitcoin seize to exists, those who don't really understand now will one day see reason why they need to invest in Bitcoin.

And what would it change if people somehow stopped saying that? People have said that institutions were buying bitcoins since i came along in 2013.

Whole idea of bitcoin was that it's permissionless to transfer, so it's supposed to be very inclusive when it comes to buying it. And now we should gate keep who should buy it because it's the wrong people? And why wouldn't institutions interested about an asset that has insanely bullish chart and has made ton of profits for people who hold it over at least one cycle.

[lionheart78]

People need to stop saying that because institutions are now buying Bitcoin heavily, they own bitcoin, or with this, Bitcoin distribution is now a problem on this part, I believe it's not true .

Just because so many people aren't into Bitcoin yet is why it's looking like the truth, we the people own Bitcoin, because let's say each and every humans in the world invest $100 into Bitcoin we will surpass the whole institutions investment in Bitcoin.

The problem in this is when majority of these $100 investment is channel through institutions, it will not surpass the institutions investment but rather will increase the gap held by the institutions and the collective individual.  Another problem is the availability of the needed volume of Bitcoin in the market.  Even though there is enough number of people investing at $100 if the supply is not sufficient to meet the demand order, then the calculation will be different.

Institutions can't win over the public in this case, unless Bitcoin seize to exists, those who don't really understand now will one day see reason why they need to invest in Bitcoin.

Institution not exceeding the collective individual holdings is true if each $100 don't go through the institution channel.   Otherwise the statement would be debatable.

[Ojima-ojo]

Just reading about the claim that institutions control Bitcoin in terms of they total investment size, what I believe is that institutions could lead the mainstream adoption because institutions presence build confidence in the general public to hold Bitcoin.


But controlling Bitcoin, no institutions no matter their total Bitcoin holding can take over the control of Bitcoin market future.