It's not known whether there truly is a small group of people that is able and actively engages in triggering major Bitcoin price shifts. I don't see enough evidence if it, and thus I don't believe it. Distribution is definitely uneven, but that's the way with any kind of wealth in the world, so it's a global challenge. Limiting the amount per person would be dystopian, as it limits the freedom of people to buy however much they want and requires linking all wallets to personal IDs to ensure  one person doesn't simply have several wallets to avoid the limit. I think that a way toward more equal distribution of  wealth, including Bitcoin, shouldn't be as restrictive.

There are no Bitcoin experts and If you're going to give a report, you should include the source of that report.
Firstly, there are no groups of early adopters who own the bulk of bitcoins, the distribution of holders is spread among a wide range of adopters from early to late.
Also, the number of potentially lost bitcoins are unknown, everyone can only make conjectures to the amount.

A supply shock is defined by many as "an unexpected event that changes the supply of a product or commodity". This cannot apply to Bitcoin as the amount of bitcoins in circulation and that would ever be in existence is public and cannot change.

• That's a terrible idea for a decentralized currency. Limiting the amount that people can hold is creating a problem of itself, and would need the entire system to change to achieve that. Why fix something that isn't broken?

• I think we are already on the way to achieving wide spread adoption.

Lack of awareness and knowledge gaps across all levels of society hinder adoption. Admittedly, I think bitcoin experienced a slowdown in popularity at first. Bitcoin has to undergo a natural evolution into a high volatility asset first to get a lot of attention.
The biggest barrier to adoption right now is (regulation aside), not a few people who currently feel like they've missed the train when BTC hit ATH, and some FUD when the market is sick.

Not awareness alone but I guess the world is not ready yet for this technology regarding volatile market value and especially for non-investors. Indeed Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are profitable but it won't always be on upside. There will always be time for downfalls in this market which is not something to be endured by all people. Think of this; salaries are in form of cryprocurrencies. Those who are earning minimum wage would be at risk of having not enough money during bearish market because of losses. And if it would coexist with fiat(which is more likely to happen), businesses wpuld be on the same situation. This dimply points out that people are not ready yet to risk for this industry.

The main hindrance to the adoption process is that people haven't been able to open up to something new and instead say something new is not good for them to do. They tend to spread lies to others who want to learn about that new thing.

The government must change the system but doesn't seem ready to do it because there is still a lack of knowledge about crypto, especially from the top to the lowest level. This makes many people still afraid to learn more about crypto, especially if more lies about crypto are spread to the public. Everyone must change their mindset. We need to open ourselves up to accept something and not immediately judge that it's bad.

The biggest problem is still the government, if the government accepts it as legal and declares that bitcoin is a currency or a worth asset holding, then I believe all other problems will be solved.  Government is the biggest hurdle that bitcoin is facing, just solve the government, bitcoin will be widely accepted. But that possibility is improbable unless the government sees some interest in accepting bitcoin.

Bitcoin adoption is always on the rise. The rate is changing and also the quality of it.
For example during the end of the bull markets when we are close to the peak the adoption is mostly lazy gamblers who think they can make a quick buck (ie. low quality adoption). During bear markets we get more people who believe in Bitcoin's principles rather than profit making (ie. high quality adoption).

Both of these statements are weak guesses since we have no way of measuring either one of these and the fact that everyone makes a guess that is wildly different from others proves these are very weak gueses!

There are many different ways that bitcoin market could be affected and market manipulation is a very real challenge that we face. But it is not a specific set of people and they can't always get what they want. For example during 2017 we clearly saw many occasions where "whales" tried to go against the market (shorted bitcoin thinking it should dump) and lost millions of dollars hence failed to manipulate the market.

You are right that this will hinder adoption (meaning it will prevent it) because people would dump such a currency that puts such a limit on how much of it they can own.

Limits do not apply to true decentralized cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin. Bitcoin adapted massively, but the market crashed incident that occurred. It will take time to regain investor confidence. Only whales can't help Bitcoin adapt. Institutional investors must adapt to Bitcoin. Whales only play with it; real adaptation requires large investors. I don't see any promising signs of a price recovery anytime soon. We'll have to see how the new year affects the crypto market.

It is impossible for BTC to overcome centralized authority since the market is open and free for everyone to buy as much btc as they can afford.
The problem with adoption is not just because the whales or centralized authorities have access to a large amount of btc to manipulate the market but also because the majority of investors (whether small or big) see btc as a speculative asset than an alternative currency. So what needs to change is peoples perception.