@Free Market Capitalist, ordinary people had plenty of time to accept BTC as what it was actually supposed to be (a cryptocurrency), but for the first 7-8 years they weren't too interested in it, but today they say that BTC is too expensive and that various companies will take all coins. This seems quite ironic to me, because even though BTC is increasingly moving away from what it was created for, its price wouldn't be close to $100k today if it weren't for all those big players who have been buying large quantities of coins for the last 5-6 years.

Some might say "there's a good in every evil", but it again depends on how you look at things - if you're only in it for profit then you don't care who buys and how much, on the other hand those who care about BTC on another level will never be overjoyed about things like this.

Big companies like Cantor Fitzgerald are investing in Bitcoin, hoping that investor confidence in Bitcoin will increase and due to increase in confidence, Bitcoin investment will also increase, and at the same time, the price of Bitcoin will reach to the high. The way Microstrategy is increasing its investment, I think Cantor Fitzgerald will gradually increase its investment in Bitcoin in the same way.

Those who are wise have now been able to understand very well that Bitcoin investment is the best in terms of investment. Those who think of holding their investment for the long term at this time will definitely benefit the most in the long term. Not only these few companies, but many such companies in the future will want to keep their investment only in Bitcoin. Since there is a limited supply, so the demand will increase continuously.

Your point is valid CryptoBuds to the extent that you might be asserting that no one can stop bitcoin participants from buying and/or participating in bitcoin whether individuals, governments or institutions - yet surely some bitcoiners might complain about various aspects of merely holding bitcoin exposure through third parties distracts away from peer to peer transactions and self-custody, and maybe there could also be assertions that a form of co-optation attack is attempting to take place.  It is yet to be seen if any such attack is going to be successful.

Bitcoin's value also comes from its abilities to be able to be transacted directly, yet if bitcoin is being held by third parties and not being transacted directly, then the supply of bitcoin being used for direct transactions would be smaller, and it still can be transacted, even if there are fewer units providing such transaction liquidity.

Saylor's strategy is indeed spreading. It's now copied. There'll be more to come. I'm sure many traditional financial institutions are either silently accumulating Bitcoin or cooking up something.

They have to have exposure to the Bitcoin market. This is the boom that everyone was waiting for. No less than the US president himself is supportive of Bitcoin, and he handpicked personalities who are also Bitcoin supporters themselves to hold high government positions.

They can't miss this. The next administration might be different. Time is of the essence.

Because they see them succeed on their investment on Bitcoin that's why there are industries rise since they got inspired to follow the track what Microstrategy did.

Also for sure there would be more to come especially that we are talking about Billion dollar of investment and provably that there are more institution would follow if they also see the new player succeed on their investment the same as what Microstrategy achieve. Somehow what happen now is really great especially we have government which is supportive on Bitcoin and trying to do good approach so that Bitcoin will get recognize not only by institutional investors but also lots of people globally.