Welcome to Slate Sundays, we present new weekly features from Cryptoslate, with in-depth interviews, expert analysis, and thought-provoking enlightenment beyond headlines to explore the ideas and voices that will shape the future of code.
On Wall Street and Crypto Twitter, there are few debates that spark Michael Saylor, his Bitcoin-starved software company, strategy.
The days when MicroStrategy was just a business intelligence software vendor are over. Today, “Strategy” stands as the world’s largest corporate Bitcoin holder, exceeding 638,900 BTC (3% of total circulation supply).
For some Bitcoiners, Saylor’s conviction is a verification of reserve assets as a facility for the arrival of Crypto’s King’s adult.
For critics, that’s a warning. It is surrounded by concentrated risks and stories. So where is the truth and how much supply is too much for a single entity?
Over 3% Rubicon
It was not always clear that this day would come. In its early days, Bitcoin was aimed at nerdy developers, semi-religious Shiferpunks, and early adopters. Today, one Nasdaq registered company sits on a pile of digital gold covered in a combination of BlackRock, Tesla and Coinbase.
It’s not just numbers. Coin Bureau CEO and founder Nic Puckrin points out.
“Having a company registered with NASDAQ that owns such a large allocation of BTC shows that Bitcoin has moved from fringe to the mainstream corporate finance spotlight.
Bitcoin has firmly entered the era of the system. For financial and pension funds searching for cash alternatives, strategy leads act as proof of concept.
But this milestone also brings the conversation back to first principles. Bitcoin is designed as a decentralized network and is exempt from the grip of a single company, country, or billionaires.
What happens when a company not only holds a large position, but also mercilessly targets its target? Saylor implies that 7% of total supply is high on many occasions.
Ecosystem impact: bounty or fortress?
Without a doubt, holding a strategy has changed market dynamics. Supply shock theory is very realistic as floats are tighter and so many supplies are boxed up in the long term corporate finance ministry. And it’s a double-edged sword. Tony Yazbeck, co-founder of Bitcoin Way, comments:
“The micro-tactic of owning more than 3% of Bitcoin is not a threat to the network itself, but it does have an impact on the market. The main concern is influence. As a large owner, he can stir emotions and cause price fluctuations.”
For the facility’s Bitcoin evangelists, the success of the strategy is a green light and a mainstream embrace from the early days of Bitcoin. “The investment veteran and founder of e-Cobalt,” said Mitchell Delaymond.
“Others will catch up and it appears that 3% is just the beginning of a much bigger change in capital.”
Diraimondo considers Saylor’s beliefs to be transformative.
“His approach has always been solid. Stock up your hard money, ignore the noise and prepare for long-term recruitment.”
Paklin also celebrates the achievements of its strategy, but warns that liquidation can be a real threat.
“Despite being proactive, we cannot ignore clear risks here. If, for some reason, even a small portion of the strategy is forced to be liquidated, the impact on market confidence is profound.”
And the risk is not merely theoretical. The past few years have failed when Bitcoin prices fell off the cliff caused by the actions of some uncruel and prudent corporates. ftx someone?
Centralized risk and centralized supply of Bitcoin
What are the other risks of concentrated holdings? As longtime Bitcoin advocate and security expert Jameson Ropp previously said on Slate Sunday:
“If too much Bitcoin is concentrated in too little hands, we risk replicating a highly centralized system inherently.”
So, Lopp has decided to invest in David Bailey’s Bitcoin Treasury Company, Nakamoto, preventing the strategy from moving further.
“That’s not because I think the adoption of the company Bitcoin Treasury is the best since sliced bread. That’s because I felt that a broader and diverse Corporate Treasury group would need to compete with Saylor to slow down how much he can continue to accumulate.”
Bitcoin was built to withstand a centralized attack, but the question is not whether one company can beat Bitcoin. It’s about how market perception changes when a player becomes a story. Wes Kaplan, former Cointelegraph CEO and current CEO of G-Knot, comment:
“Unlike individual holders who sell over time, these entities operate with the fiduciary responsibility to shareholders and creditors. When market stress occurs, these companies may face margin calls and creditor requests regardless of their Bitcoin conviction.
This isn’t just market dramas. It’s about dilution, vulnerability, and interconnected risks.
Matt Mudano, CEO of Arch Network, looks at the bigger picture, questioning how centralising the supply of Bitcoin will affect miners. He should be careful:
“As more transactions move to ETFs, centralized venues and OTC desks, fewer coins actually settle in chains. It sucks up liquidity from the chain market that funds miners. Block subsidies shrink.
Institutional Era: Friends or Enemies?
Macro analyst and Bitcoin advocate Lynne Alden has a different view. She is not worried about centralizing the supply of Bitcoin. It points out that dynamics always go like this. Mt. Gox has exceeded 800,000 coins, with BlackRock and Strategy at a larger percentage than they currently do.
Alden appears to be using it to unravel it as the system’s main perpetrator.
“The micro-strategy has a fairly low leverage compared to Bitcoin. Metaplanet has a relatively low leverage compared to Bitcoin. We’ll see how it comes as others go. We’ll see a lot of Altcoin finance companies being washed away.
Alden’s idea is reflected by OG Bitcoiner, CEO and co-founder of Edan Yago’s Bitcoinos. He says:
“I don’t think the strategy move to buy BTC is a problem. In fact, it reflects long-term alignment with Bitcoin principles. Unlike speculative owners, it places a lot of BTC in the hands of long-term holders.
Mudano’s take is somewhat cautious, reminding Bitcoiner to look at the big picture rather than being blinded to NGU.
“Buyers with cheer convictions like Saylor should look at the plumbing: how those holders are getting in the way, who the custodians are, and whether the share of miners’ revenues is rising.
Buying facilities at Overdrive
2025 is certainly a year of Bitcoin inflections. The strategy remains the largest non-sorber Treasury by rural miles. Japan’s Metaplanet is building up BTC as a “micro strategy for Asia.” Nakamoto has also caught the headlines with the stock’s annihilation, making 96% more scary than the May high.
Meanwhile, government, ETFs and exchanges are currently commanding commands that are close to one-third of all circular Bitcoin supply, and GlassNode’s data shows that only 14-15% of Bitcoin are truly fluid, adding gravity to any movement by key players. risk? Systemic vulnerability when one or two whales face margin calls or liquidity constraints.
Are you building a very vulnerability that Bitcoin is designed to eliminate? Counterparty risk, custody structure, and financial strategies all face moments of truth.
Decentralization and adoption
So is the strategy position good or bad? The answer is still subtle. For some, Bitcoin is the most obvious sign to date. A protected area grade asset suitable for the facility’s balance sheet. For others, staying alert about concentration, transparency and systemic risk is a warning. As Yago points out:
“Bitcoin thrives because it is held by people who understand its rarity and value… Bitcoin cannot be “controlled” by one entity. It is designed to be completely decentralized, and the concentration of ownership does not change it. ”
What is most important? It is not whether a company can purchase the path to control, but whether ownership (and stewardship) is diverse.
The spirit that began this revolution was decentralisation. If corporate and sovereign funds control ledgers, the next chapter of Bitcoin will depend on how they wield their strength and what happens when the tide changes inevitably.
Alex Gladstein, Chief Strategy Officer of the Human Rights Foundation, briefly sums up the mood.
“Remember why we are here
cypherpunks write code
Thank you to the open source developers today
Wall Street was created and not maintained by NGU, Satoshi, and Cypherpunks.
Ultimately, Bitcoin’s resilience is not measured by how well the strategy owns, but how well the ecosystem adapts and expands the supply of businesses, institutions and individuals. That’s what keeps true to form Bitcoin, and it defines whether it remains people’s money or a playground for corporate elites.
