there certainly is centralised control

the main funding went to blockstream(brand owner of core) which the split into 3 companies which are blockstream, brink, chaincodelabs
whom are the employers of the main dozen devs whom have ultimate control of the protocol changes (are the github maintainers of core.)

you will see over history, any other wallet brand that wants to set proposals for the protocol level changes got killed off where only core has become the reference client and as said you can find the maintainers of core.

those maintainers are paid by the 3 main companies that received HUNDREDS of millions of dollars to sponsor certain code changes that other corporations wanted but have not helped the general publics access to bitcoin transacting

if you then look at the main moderators that control whats in the release candidate of protocol aspects you will see the lineage that went from satoshi, to gavin andresen to Wladimir van der Laan.. however during the Wlad tenure it was actually gmaxwell(after gavin) and achowe(after gmaxwell) that took the real CTO helm of controlling the project at the higher officer level of what went into core and also who gets to discuss protocol stuff. and Wladimir van der Laan was just a tick box exercise of a last person who signed off on changes after the fact

achowe this year although going through some mental and identity crisis, he is still the one organising what priorities the core devs should concentrate on so he is ultimately this years CTO

..
the whole buzzword of "open source" is not like an open office where any editor can write an artical in a newspaper to be published.. the whole "open source" means the editors are paid and controlled by a small group and choose who to let in the office, mainly only letting in translaters and GUI graphic designers, but still having a mostly closed door editor office holding control of the actual technical content. whilst then after its wrote,  showing the open pages of the newspaper to the public.
in short their version of open source is they show the content to the public. not let the public truly contribute

achowe not only controls the decisions of code priority, but also moderates who gets to help, and also moderates who gets to discuss bitcoin issues//fixes on different platforms. so yes achowe is basically the CTO after gmaxwell took a step back(semi retire) to collect QSL cards from his radio ham hobby

the hierarchy/monarchy and existence of core(centralisation is literally their name) needs to change, we need to become more decentralised where many brands can offer protocol changes and the community vote on best option, without any aggressive practices done by some centralised hierarchy group

i am a bitcoin maximalist and want the best for bitcoin, but i am a realist and speak frank about issues at risk, such as the centralisation risk which we should not pretend does not exist to stay in a day dream of "decentralisation" buzzwords that dont match reality

You mean "brands" like Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin Classic, Bitcoin Cash, etc. that wanted to introduce vulnerabilities into the protocol such as letting miners change the block size anytime they wanted to any value they liked? They got shut down for good reasons.

Nobody likes centralization creeping in through these companies but lets not mix things together...

To be clear, you are talking about the blockstream family of companies being the ones receiving hundreds of millions of dollars from other (presumably crypto) companies, right?

Because the alternative interpretation would be the developers themselves receiving hundreds of millions of dollars, and you know, the only way that would've made sense is if this figure was in BTC.

hang around a little longer and learn more about bitcoin beyond the promoted buzzwords, you will get your mind blown at how deep things go. bitcoin is more then just a "voluntary project" its a whole economy. and yes there is a hierarchy of "power" which we need to defend against if we want to keep bitcoin decentralised, not just let the power players strengthen their grip and just turn bitcoin into another governed currency like fiat

Sure but would be nice to know the service you use whos the creator or owner ceo

I use tons of open source tools that don't have a ceo, cfo, cto, company address, liability,....

In this case, it's true the person who wrote the first versions is gone (but the persons that wrote everyting the last several years are not), but still, even if satoshi left the scene, it's open source: the sourcecode is right there, you can see the repo, find out who made which commits, which pull requests, who made a BIP,... etc,etc,... You can verify every line of code if you wanted to, and if you didn't agree with the code you're free to either not use bitcoin or to create a fork and see if part of the community agrees with you.

It is true that the people writing bitcoin can be employed by a company, and it's possible that this company has some kind of influence over the direction bitcoin takes, that still does not make them the owner of bitcoin, nor it's ceo, nor do they assume liability. It's an open source project, anybody can write a bip, fork, make a pull request, write their own implementation,... (granted, if you'd make a pull request, odds of it being merged into main are very small)

We all know Satoshi is the CEO and Theymos is the company's Vice president, I would say winklevoss twins are the Chief Financial Officer, and Craig Wright is Human Resources (We all hate that area, lol).

Is fun to think about Bitcoin as a company, but as mocacinno mentioned, it's an open-source project, and we have some examples of open-source projects that have a CEO like Linux with Linus Torvalds. But with bitcoin that's impossible because saint satoshi is gone and no one knows his identity.

Pretty sure you brought out your CTO vibes from the Solana meme token charade.
CTO means Consumer Token Offerings. Since when has Bitcoin ever been a token or an offering?

If you are trying to mean Community Take Over, then again Bitcoin has never been abandoned by Developers unlike what you see with those Shitcoins. Its development is open source and anyone can contribute.

Like others have mentioned, consider Bitcoin a project not a company. Yes Satoshi created it but there's no "CTO", like other bogus cryptocurrencies have which truly do operate as companies. Regarding your speculation on Blackrock and market share ownership, I think you'll find the majority supply of Bitcoin is owned by individuals not investment funds.