Michael Saylor Bitcoin Controversy for the BTC custody, which created a trust in big financial institutions for self-custody, has recently triggered a debate among Bitcoin lovers/enthusiasts.
Michael Saylor, CEO of MicroStrategy, caused a heated controversy within the Bitcoin community. Michael Saylor Bitcoin controversy for recent comments about Bitcoin custody, in which he urged users to trust huge financial institutions rather than themselves, generated a lot of anger.

Bitcoiners, who embrace decentralization and self-custody, reacted strongly to his change of heart.
Introduction to the Michael Saylor Bitcoin Controversy
Michael Saylor has long been a major member in the Bitcoin community. His firm, MicroStrategy, is the largest corporate Bitcoin holder, with approximately 252,000 BTC. Saylor has frequently promoted Bitcoin’s long-term potential, even forecasting that it will reach $13 million per coin by 2045. However, his latest regards triggered the Michael Saylor Bitcoin controversy.
In an interview with financial journalist Madison Reidy on October 21, Saylor indicated that Bitcoin holders would be better off entrusting their Bitcoin to major, regulated institutions such as BlackRock, Fidelity, and JP Morgan rather than attempting to hold it themselves. His views have caused a surge of anger among Bitcoin enthusiasts, who perceive this shift as weakening Bitcoin’s essential ideals of decentralization and personal freedom.
Saylor’s Shift on Bitcoin Custody
Saylor’s position on Bitcoin custody has shifted greatly over the last two years. Following the collapse of FTX in November 2022, he was a strong supporter of self-detention. At the time, he believed that keeping Bitcoin in self-control would prevent strong custodial entities from destroying the decentralized essence of Bitcoin.
In contrast, latest comments on Michael Saylor Bitcoin Controversy imply that Bitcoin is safer in the hands of huge financial institutions, which are regulated and backed by lawmakers and government officials. He argues that institutions such as BlackRock, Fidelity, and JP Morgan offer trust and stability that private individuals cannot match.
According to Saylor, concerns about the government seizing Bitcoin owned by these organizations are overstated. He dismissed concerns about confiscation as “paranoid” ideas held by “crypto anarchists.”
Government Seizure Fears: A Misguided Concern?
During the conversation, there was much talk about the possibility of the government seizing Bitcoin held by huge institutions. Reidy highlighted the US government’s gold seizure under Executive Order 6102 in 1933. Those who advocate self-custody frequently point to this historical incident as a cautionary tale.
However, Saylor disputed the parallel, claiming that because the US is no longer on the gold standard, the government has no motive to take Bitcoin. Saylor went on to claim that Bitcoin owned by regulated institutions is no more vulnerable to seizing than stocks or real estate. He argued that the government would be extremely unlikely to target organizations such as Fidelity or BlackRock because they manage the retirement accounts of many MPs and government officials.
According to him, these institutions are trustworthy and thoroughly interconnected into the financial system, making them reliable Bitcoin custodians.
The Bitcoin Community’s Reaction
Saylor’s comments generated an immediate protests among the Bitcoin community. Many significant players in the sector, who see decentralization and self-sovereignty as essential values, criticized his remarks.
The Michael Saylor Bitcoin Controversy has become a focal point for ongoing discussions concerning the future of Bitcoin custody. Strike’s CEO, Jack Mallers, criticized Saylor’s definition of self-custody as “crypto-anarchism,” claiming that Bitcoin is ultimately about freedom—freedom of speech, property rights, and ownership.
"As a Bitcoiner, you should always expect Executive Order 6102."
— Joe Nakamoto ⚡️ (@JoeNakamoto) October 22, 2024
🎤 @Excellion
This is particularly relevant given Michael Saylor's
recent comments about #bitcoin self-custody and "paranoia" about executive order #6102 👀
What do you think? pic.twitter.com/6c9oo6vGOa
He highlighted that self-custody is critical to maintaining these freedoms, and ignoring it is a dangerous simplicity. Other notable personalities in the Bitcoin community stated these concerns. Sina Nader, co-founder of 21st Capital, accused Saylor of changing his commitment to the government and financial system, warning that institutional custody would reduce Bitcoin to nothing more than a “investment pet rock,” weakening its value as a currency for daily transactions.
Similarly, Samson Mow, CEO of JAN3, expressed concerns that governments may harm Bitcoin by locking custodial BTC in regulated institutions. While Mow admitted that the US government may not have an urgent interest to take Bitcoin, he warned that countries continue to have reasons to undermine Bitcoin’s advantages over fiat currencies.
Saylor’s Optimism About Bitcoin
Despite the criticism, Saylor is still enthusiastic about Bitcoin’s future. He is optimistic about Bitcoin’s long-term potential, predicting that it would reach $13 million per coin by 2045. Saylor believes that institutional custody is the most secure and dependable choice for Bitcoin holders, and that fears of government seizure are exaggerated.
While the Michael Saylor Bitcoin controversy has sparked heated debate, Saylor has maintained his position, arguing that regulated institutions are the ideal caretakers of Bitcoin in a world where stability and trust are critical. Michael Saylor is making some controversy in the Bitcoin market. Follow CoinMozo on X to know his next Bitcoin bullish step!
Michael Saylor Bitcoin Controversy and opinion on decentralized foundations and institutional interest have sparked a split within the community. Saylor favors institutional custody over self-custody, but many Bitcoin users prioritize freedom and independence. The Michael Saylor Bitcoin controversy raises concerns about Bitcoin’s future, its position as a money and store of value, and who should control its destiny.
Also Read: Vitalik Buterin Slams Michael Saylor: Calls Bitcoin Comments ‘Batshit Insane’