With all this positive news about Bitcoin reserves, it’s only a matter of time before we see a company taking the lead on this. It just takes one big player to start, and the rest will likely follow. However, it would be even better if the US government made the first move, having the regulators themselves involved would definitely boost confidence for companies considering it.

But let’s see how that proposal unfolds. It’s still early, so there’s a lot to watch for this year. 

Big fellas are still in the dark regarding the possibilities they are missing, in my opinion.
There is a lot to unpack for them and the ones to be the first would be having a lead  Like Saylor, for example.

Don't be so quick to judge them when we are not them and I believe if one of us had billions of dollars we would also have different thoughts and decisions about bitcoin. Just because they are not rushing to invest in bitcoin, we should not judge them and assume they are making a mistake. If they were people who kept making wrong decisions, they would not be able to become rich, own billions of dollars and become shareholders of a corporation with a capitalization of up to trillions of dollars.

I believe they have their reasons for not rushing to invest in bitcoin and just because they haven't invested in bitcoin doesn't mean they won't invest in it in the future. The rich have their own way of playing, they can invest after us, buy at a higher price than us but they will get better returns than us.

Not everybody will invest in Bitcoin; in the same way, not everybody will invest in gold or real estate or buy the shares of a particular company. There is no need to call people who don't want to invest in bitcoin names, they all have the reason whether it's fear or any other reason.
When you put yourself in other people's shoes, you'll better understand their decisions.
Imagine you're part of the team that's responsible for investments in a company and you're faced with a decision to invest customers' or shareholder's money in bitcoin knowing the risks involved. If it goes well everybody is happy, but if it doesn't, the company takes a hit and that's on you, not the people that advice you to go into the investment.
There are other ways to maximize profit and they have followed those route and taking the risk, if they decide against bitcoin, they have committed no crime against bitcoin.

It will be a nice initiative, they might not be competing on who goes first but any of them who eventually takes lead will certainly do away with massive profits than the other because of purchasing at a low price mark.

The head of Meta, who knows might be holding portfolio of Bitcoin already, in the case of shares it is likely to also be a communal agreement in order to implement the reserve, if it was left for Mark alone he probably would have began the process long time even when Bitcoin was far down the pipeline.

It is true that people opinions about Bitcoin can change time to time. Many big organizations including banks didn't like Bitcoin at first but now they are starting to like this idea. Microsoft and Meta shareholders might also start to like Bitcoin in future. No matter what they decide more and more people are starting to use Bitcoin and it is exciting to see it become more popular and widely accepted.

Isn't it just a single guy? Doesn't seem like there is more than one entity pushing for it.

I'm all for companies to adopt Bitcoin but for companies to hoard more Bitcoin? No thanks. It demonstrates zero utility of what Bitcoin is used for and makes it seem more like a get rich quick scheme. Bitcoin has no value without utility; the closest company that has helped its cause was Tesla when they started to accept Bitcoin, but took a step back after.

Meta is not a company that focuses on risky investments or speculative assets. The board is right to vote against it, no reason for Meta to adopt Bitcoin as part of their reserve when the objective of their cash reserve is to promote growth with reasonable risk.

We sure are in a bull run if these narratives are kept coming. People shouldn't be pushy with it because the more that these ideas are pushed to them, the more that they'll decline the idea. These people are intellects and they know where money is coming and going. We will never know if they're already in or not yet.

From the source sited, this was a submission by a Ethan Peck whose family own share in Meta which means it is a proposal by a single entity and I don't know how this will hold water. I remember that Mark Zuckerberg have never been consistent about his position with bitcoin, maybe he usually align with the policies of any government of the US just like he is trying to do with free speech by disbanding the services of factcheckers. He knew that the incoming administrations might be against some of his policies, so he might be aligning with them and their stance on bitcoin might also be because Donald Trump is perceived as pro bitcoin, so he don't want to be left out.