Some users recalled that Bitcoin sales can be carried out for several reasons.
Matt Hougan, Cio de Bitwise, participated in the debate, and encouraged to continue building around BTC.
The analyst Scott Melker generated an intense debate when pointing out the weekend that, although he considers Bitcoin (BTC) a revolutionary technology, to some extent he has been co -opted by those against whom he was originally created as a refuge.
Melker sentenced in X that many of Bitcoin’s first large holders – known as whales— They have lost their confidence in the asset and are selling at current prices.
The comment took place after it was known that an investor sold 80,000 BTC acquired 14 years ago for more than 9,000 million dollars (USD).
«Bitcoin is incredible, but obviously he has been co -opted to some extent by the same people against whom he was created as coverage. Many of the most ardent primitive whales have seen their shaking faith and have been selling at these prices »
Scott Melker, an analyst known for his podcast The Wolf of All Streets.
This statement caused various responses in agreement and disagreementamong them that of the CIO of Bitwise, Matt Hougan, who said who understands his vision, but sees that Bitcoin is still “quite revolutionary” for his intrinsic value.
The specialist stressed that, despite the challenges, BTC remains a unique innovation: “The first form of global money backed not by a state or by the threat of violence, but for mathematical logic and community.”
So, Hougan valued the importance of the first whales although some sell and encouraged to continue strengthening the ecosystemstating that “the world needs Bitcoin more than ever.”
However, Melker clarified, before the comment, that he is only reflecting what he has heard in conversations within the community. He commented that he has had frequent debates with people who have earned a lot of money with Bitcoin and are selling or transferring to companies that manage treasures.
In contrast, the investor Mike Alfred clarified A different opinion. Although he said that he rarely disagrees with Melker, he stressed that this is one of those moments.
Alfred said that Sales decisions are personal and can respond to multiple reasons outside the asset or protocol: «Everyone dies. There comes a time when the profitability of the investment becomes irrelevant ».
But the debate was not there, because a user He did not spare in positioning in favor of whales: «I do not understand how someone can interpret that a long -term investor that obtains a gain of 9,000 million dollars is ‘co -opting’ the system or has ‘lost faith’. There is the term ‘profit not made’ for something … at some point, you just have to take advantage to enjoy life ».
Although Melker He clarified again that I was not referring to any random whalebut to those with which he has direct conversations and who does not necessarily agree with his perspective, the debate continued to generate divided opinions.
Another relevant contribution came from the financial commentator known as Gary Woods, who pointed out that the first buyers who maintained their bitcoin for 14 years were probably Cypherpunks that they believed in the original vision of money peer-to-peer. However, he argued that in his view “there will not be a Bitcoin standard for the world.”
According to Woods, “Bitcoin will exist in reserves and derivatives with the same administrative keys, KYC rules and liquidation processes, something similar to the bank we have had for centuries.” In addition, he added that the ecosystem will continue to grow with new innovations that will multiply the financial opportunities based on FÍAT money, but the idea that cryptocurrencies are the definitive solution for cash peer-to-peer It will be breached.
An example of what is raised in this discussion also lies in the approach of the Strategy company, led by Michael Saylor, which currently has more than 600,000 BTC.
Its massive accumulation strategy has reinforced the legitimacy of Bitcoin in traditional markets, but has also fed uncertainty on to what extent the concentration of large amounts of BTC in the hands of corporations could affect the decentralization and foundational principles of the asset, as published cryptootics.
Bitcoin was born as a proposal to offer an alternative to the traditional financial system, particularly as a refuge against state control and inflation. The first major investors, or whales were key figures in their adoption and valorizationmoved many times by libertarian ideals and a vision of individual financial sovereignty.
However, over time the ecosystem has evolved. Institutional funds, banks and large corporations have entered the market, giving Bitcoin greater legitimacy to the traditional financial system.
This has generated tensions within the community: for some, the institutionalization of Bitcoin is a betrayal of its foundational principles; For others, it is a sample of maturity that will pave the path to its mass adoption.
Beyond the positions, the truth is that Bitcoin has opened a unique space to rethink what money is, who controls it and how economic power is distributed.
