What do you all think about the institutionalization of Bitcoin?

[Curious T]

One thing I'm afraid of about all this is when institutions start influencing people on how they store their Bitcoin. People begin to believe that keeping their Bitcoin with a third party is way better and safer. This makes fewer people understand self-custody and more likely to put all their Bitcoin with a third party, which makes institutions stronger because they hold more people's assets. Subtle but surefire methods like these will gradually change people's perceptions of Bitcoin and undermine the fundamental value that Satoshi embodied.

Yeah, this is a problem. I think it's actually the only serious problem. It is increasingly difficult to use Bitcoin without a centralized service. For now, you can hold it without needing an exchange, but when it comes to usage, it's now difficult to use Bitcoin P2P without a centralized service. The more centralized services get created, the more they will market it in a way that will make people continue to use them. CEXs are already convincing people that their Bitcoin is safer with them. People will always use self custody anyway, but the number of those people will be reduced in the future from what I can see.

[Smartprofit]

Frankly, the benefits of institutionalization for Bitcoin aren't entirely clear to me. 🙋

For example, some people write here about Bitcoin's price growth as a result of institutionalization. I wonder: "Has the emergence of institutional players ever led to a rise in Bitcoin prices?" I remember many forum members in 2017 rejoicing at the emergence of Bitcoin futures. "We're not alone! Now we have institutional players! Bitcoin's price is about to skyrocket!" Bitcoin's price did indeed skyrocket (from $19,000 to $3,500)... Then the COVID-19 pandemic hit, institutional players faced other problems (for example, oil began trading at negative prices), and Bitcoin's price began to rise very strongly.

 As far as I can remember, the emergence of institutional players and increased government regulation have always had a negative impact on the Bitcoin price... During the last bull market, Bitcoin's price, thanks to spot Bitcoin ETFs, Michael Saylor, BlackRock, and Donald Trump, barely reached $125,000 before a catastrophic decline. What is $125,000? $125,000 is only double the previous high.

In the past, in my opinion, Bitcoin has performed much better without institutional investors. That's a fact. 🙆

[Crypto Library]

Yeah, this is a problem. I think it's actually the only serious problem. It is increasingly difficult to use Bitcoin without a centralized service. For now, you can hold it without needing an exchange, but when it comes to usage, it's now difficult to use Bitcoin P2P without a centralized service. The more centralized services get created, the more they will market it in a way that will make people continue to use them. CEXs are already convincing people that their Bitcoin is safer with them. People will always use self custody anyway, but the number of those people will be reduced in the future from what I can see.

To be honest, I never like the institutionalization of Bitcoin because the institutionalization of Bitcoin is definitely being done for the benefit of a specific group.

And the decentralized system that Bitcoin has as its main goal is not implemented properly. And also the reason is that these big whales can manipulate the market.

And here you can say that Bitcoin adoption has increased due to institutionalization, but we also have to remember that if those kinds of adoptions come from hype, they will never be good for the network because they can become invisible just as they come from hype as investments.

[Curious T]

To be honest, I never like the institutionalization of Bitcoin because the institutionalization of Bitcoin is definitely being done for the benefit of a specific group.

I've never had any issue with institutions buying Bitcoin. Anybody who wants to buy Bitcoin should be allowed, that is exactly what Satoshi wanted. So we can't select who should and who should not buy. It is not ideal, but that is what Bitcoin is all about. If criminals are able to use Bitcoin, why can't big companies? I also do not believe the "manipulating Bitcoin" narrative. Bitcoin is not a shitcoin that few people can sit down and manipulate. The more it gets bigger, the more difficult it is to manipulate. Manipulating a decentralized asset of about 1.5 trillion dollars is not an easy thing to do.

[Jegileman]

When we talk about decentralization, it means the network is controlled by people and not some particular people. When the government buy Bitcoin, it has nothing to do with decentralization, they only hold like the rest of the people that buy and hold and the same with institutional investors. Everyone that has interest in buying Bitcoin are more than welcome to buy, this will also contribute to Bitcoin growth, it wouldn't be like only few people have Bitcoin.

Imagine that all countries start to bid for Bitcoin, everyone start to do competition with each other, they want to have a particular supply, the impact on Bitcoin price will be so good and Bitcoin will have even more better adoption than it was since the beginning.

Bitcoin adoption has been growing and that has even brought about more institutional adoption and has also changed the way many view bitcoin especially the government. Every government does not like decentralization, if they see that they will not benefit from it, they’ll surely not take part and be part of it. The reason why many countries are yet to still go into full adoption of Bitcoin is because of skepticism, they don’t want to regret doing so when other countries are left out and don’t participate as them.

Bitcoin adoption has been so great, and the interest of the government in them that has grown is a big sign that they have began to see the better part of it. We would see more adoption from the governments also but it won’t be as fast as many wish for it to happen. It will be a gradual process.

[Webutxo]

To be honest, I never like the institutionalization of Bitcoin because the institutionalization of Bitcoin is definitely being done for the benefit of a specific group.

And the decentralized system that Bitcoin has as its main goal is not implemented properly. And also the reason is that these big whales can manipulate the market.

And here you can say that Bitcoin adoption has increased due to institutionalization, but we also have to remember that if those kinds of adoptions come from hype, they will never be good for the network because they can become invisible just as they come from hype as investments.

We may hate them but I don't see anything wrong in institutions been a growth of Bitcoin. They are way better than the government everyone is looking forward to see adopt Bitcoin as reserve. The institution since they started to accumulate Bitcoin, they have never for once rebel against Bitcoin, they are more like the retailers that hold the community, they are even the same people that are lobbying for Bitcoin to be accepted by the government.

I don't think there is any institutional investor that manipulated Bitcoin price for their personal gain since Bitcoin  was created. How about the government, they made everyone feel fool and betrayed, they never accepted Bitcoin like many people expected but look what they are asking now, they say they want another chance that people should give them another 4 years, I just wonder what Trump will ask the Bitcoin community, the reaction will be epic .

[Crypto Library]

To be honest, I never like the institutionalization of Bitcoin because the institutionalization of Bitcoin is definitely being done for the benefit of a specific group.

And the decentralized system that Bitcoin has as its main goal is not implemented properly. And also the reason is that these big whales can manipulate the market.

And here you can say that Bitcoin adoption has increased due to institutionalization, but we also have to remember that if those kinds of adoptions come from hype, they will never be good for the network because they can become invisible just as they come from hype as investments.

We may hate them but I don't see anything wrong in institutions been a growth of Bitcoin. They are way better than the government everyone is looking forward to see adopt Bitcoin as reserve. The institution since they started to accumulate Bitcoin, they have never for once rebel against Bitcoin, they are more like the retailers that hold the community, they are even the same people that are lobbying for Bitcoin to be accepted by the government.

Actually, none of us know what kind of plans are being made or will be made inside any institution. You are talking about the government, it is itself an institution if we are going to explain it. So, if any specific institution or the government itself were to institutionalize Bitcoin, that would not be a positive thing for me. And among those who are in the government, they were also businessmen or owner of institution, as an example, Trump himself is enough.
Actually, if we give our opinions from our personal point of view, we can highlight many more logical points about institutional investment in Bitcoin.

I don't think there is any institutional investor that manipulated Bitcoin price for their personal gain since Bitcoin  was created. How about the government, they made everyone feel fool and betrayed, they never accepted Bitcoin like many people expected but look what they are asking now, they say they want another chance that people should give them another 4 years, I just wonder what Trump will ask the Bitcoin community, the reaction will be epic .

Manipulations will not come to our direct attention, and they also manipulate the market in that way. For example, we already saw the Bitcoin pattern breaking in the last bull season where the market became bullish before the halving. And later, whole things went wrong and had an effect on the altcoin market, which is why we didn't see the altcoin season.
I am not against institutional investment in general, but I am also not in favor of the kind of institutional investment that can manipulate the market.