Is the centralized bodies richer than decentralized groups?

[Accardo]

Image from X

These top 100 centralized bodies, groups or corporation now hold close to 1 million bitcoin, and from what I could say they started buying Bitcoin a little less than 5 years ago and look where they're at today. On the side of decentralized users: People who held since 16 years ago, which makes up some whales, and holders, then the lost Bitcoin. I'd want to center on the lost Bitcoin, as the real decentralized bitcoin since most holders and whales are moving back and forth from centralized to decentralized firms. So, we have about 4 million bitcoin allocated to the lost coins, and that has to do with the early adopters who bought at a much lesser rate and weren't lucky to safeguard their private keys.

Basically, lost coins boost the value of Bitcoin, and the centralized bodies are getting close to surpasing that threshold. Now, who is richer, is it the centralized body that may at some point sell their holdings after much accumulations, and affect the standards of Bitcoin price, or the decentralized groups that'll never sell no matter what, including the lost ones which will never be sold, just to keep Bitcoin price enticing for the centralized firms that's well known to sell and covert to fiat.

Richer in this context varies from wealth of money, fulfillments, to people, who owns the most people could go to the centralized body, but the decentralized group holds much Bitcoin mined from day 1, never to be sold. What do you think about this new emerging buying force in contrast to the OGs, and whales who can't access their coins.

[Ojima-ojo]

Investors tend to have more confidence in centralized entities, and for sure most of them just leave their cryptocurrency assets on centralized platforms like exchange and the rest of them which put up to make up to what you mentioned as the total volume of centralized platforms and entities.

What we have to understand is that, statistic and research have been proven not to be accurate as many have just have to use available data instead them to research independently, this makes is hard for us to know the actual number of decentralized groups.

[sunsilk]

IMHO, it doesn't matter who's richer. But the point of having the lost coins forever makes it even more scarce for which the centralized groups understand and that's why they're accumulating for more.

The value sticks to the lost ones and they're there and there will be no more new coins generated until these groups are able to get as much as they can.

We will see how far they're serious into accumulation when there are other groups, institutions that are also on a hurry into having more.

[EluguHcman]

I don't know who need to hear this, it is okay to have your funds stored with the regulatory custody (CEX) while you may be backed to recover your access in terms of loosing your private keys where you can not get to it anymore but how about the other hand that demotes about Bitcoin decentralized potential to enhance security and privilege to Privacies where it totally acts different from the fiats.

Don't we think we are getting it wrong if we have to lean on the CEX regarded that that if you don't have your private keys with you to be fully under your custody, it is not yet yours?
My friend in the outside world of Bitcoin and crypto will always say... Your money in the bank is not yours until you have withdrawn it  and now in your savings wallet or pocket.

There is no essence of making this comparison about who is richer in the both categories of those holding on the Custodian and the non custodian platforms.
The very concerns should be how to stay safe in both physical and online evil attacks and it is only when we activates that security mode of taking control absolute control of our funds without a third party and also enhance a level of privacy that we can enjoy all those paths. Let us call it financial freedom as you have all privilege of at self custody.

However, regarded the processes inclined when trading your digital assets in the short time, yeah it feels stressful to undergoing the processes of sending from your custodian to the Exchange on regular basis. So therefore, those holding their coins just for the short while can hold on the CEX while risk of scamming attacks keep roaming about on who to catch up and steal their funds there where you are not on 100% in charge of your security.
Those holding on the long term can always embrace the self custodian.

[Solosanz]

Not sure what you compare, whether it's a company vs company or just centralization vs decentralization.

If we talk about companies, centralized companies are richer than decentralized companies because many DEX aren't profit oriented and not many people interested to use them. See exchange and casino, the centralized versions are popular in both niche.

If we count holders and whales in decentralized groups, I think for now decentralized groups own more Bitcoin than centralized groups.

[Dunamisx]

Things are fast changing now as we go along with cryptocurrency, unlike when we used to have only the centralized institutions for an investment assets, which eventually has been what many are leaving for cryptocurrency and bitcoin opportunities, to ensure that they invest and take part on what this new trend is bringing with digital offers, which makes it more possible that we use bitcoin in many applicable sectors and if we are yet to get up to the centralized assets, we are gradually moving more closer towards that and even beyond, because bitcoin adoption increases always.

[WillyAp]

richer is not equal to better.
According to the whitepaper having full control is what you need to be after,

[Agbamoni]

You want to tell me that there are people who held their Bitcoin since 2009 over 16 years now.

Not sure what you compare, whether it's a company vs company or just centralization vs decentralization.

From what I understood. Centralized bodies are big institutions like MSTR and 21 Capital, they control large amount of Bitcoins that was invested by private in individuals. While the decentralized bodies are private investors, secret whales. If you search in  the internet, there are whales with huge BTC and the address belongs to one person.

[Zaguru12]

Not sure what you compare, whether it's a company vs company or just centralization vs decentralization.

If we talk about companies, centralized companies are richer than decentralized companies because many DEX aren't profit oriented and not many people interested to use them. See exchange and casino, the centralized versions are popular in both niche.

If we count holders and whales in decentralized groups, I think for now decentralized groups own more Bitcoin than centralized groups.

If we count holders still I still think centralized entities or companies still holds more bitcoin in my opinion. Basically this bitcoin are not even own by centralized exchanges but as longer as the owners do not have control over it then we all can agree they belong to the exchanges or companies, right now let’s actually see, how many bitcoin does top top exchanges like binance even have or hold i think they are top of the chart for bitcoin holders been recorded, then there is the institutions like bitcoin ETF which are the new trend now they are seriously buying bitcoin and we have bitcoins in government possessions again, I think all this bitcoins are just bigger than that which decentralized entities or even individuals hold on their self custody. Although this is sad to me but centralized entities definitely holds more bitcoin than decentralized entities.

In overall case also I don’t even see why this question needs to pump up as to which is richer, the policy in the government today doesn’t even make it an enabling environment for decentralized entities to even get to grow so yes centralized entities are even supported to be richer. And this isn’t even debatable to me

[cabron]

Top 100 only have around 962,xxx it doesn't look like they are richer but who knows among the decentralized group are actually part of these centralized groups. We can't know for sure the people during the time when BTC spiked in 2011 got the interest of those people. They could have bought more than what Strategy could during that time. I can already assume that Jaime Dimon have tons of BTCs or even Peter Schiff..

[Zanab247]

Investors tend to have more confidence in centralized entities, and for sure most of them just leave their cryptocurrency assets on centralized platforms like exchange and the rest of them which put up to make up to what you mentioned as the total volume of centralized platforms and entities.

leaving cryptocurrency in the exchange is not save for investors to practice, because the team of the exchange also have access to their exchange users coins in case you disobey any transaction that will result of anything in the exchange.

Centralized asset investors is richer than decentralized asset investors base on my research, the richest investors on earth got their wealth from centralized assets that make people to rate them among the richest investors on earth. And some of them made their wealth from centralized assets before they discover decentralized asset as a profitable assets to invest.

[Darker45]

1. These centralized companies are certainly richer than individuals. That's expected. They're huge business entities. They have billions at their disposal. Individuals don't have that money. I don't find an issue with it.

2. These are public companies. As such, they're publicly owned, so are the Bitcoin they have. The decisions of the company aren't necessarily made by just one person only, even though a person or two may have the majority voting rights.

3. I don't believe those who have Bitcoin outside centralized firms would "never sell no matter what". Even real Bitcoin OGs have sold. It doesn't mean that since they're mining Bitcoin since day 1, their coins are "never to be sold".

4. These companies owning close to 1 million Bitcoin doesn't bother me. Estimates have it that at least 85% of all Bitcoin in circulation are owned by retail investors. Estimates may vary but they all share the same finding that a huge majority of Bitcoin's available supply is outside the hands of institutions.

[Accardo]

1. These centralized companies are certainly richer than individuals. That's expected. They're huge business entities. They have billions at their disposal. Individuals don't have that money. I don't find an issue with it.

2. These are public companies. As such, they're publicly owned, so are the Bitcoin they have. The decisions of the company aren't necessarily made by just one person only, even though a person or two may have the majority voting rights.

3. I don't believe those who have Bitcoin outside centralized firms would "never sell no matter what". Even real Bitcoin OGs have sold. It doesn't mean that since they're mining Bitcoin since day 1, their coins are "never to be sold".

4. These companies owning close to 1 million Bitcoin doesn't bother me. Estimates have it that at least 85% of all Bitcoin in circulation are owned by retail investors. Estimates may vary but they all share the same finding that a huge majority of Bitcoin's available supply is outside the hands of institutions.

No 4 estimate is real, I came across it on reddit sometime ago, maybe a month or two, someone said it's about 75%, these are mostly guess work but it's close to reality. But as you said in no 3, these public companies with their billions can actually buy Bitcoin off these individuals holders since they'll always be tempted to sell. That is the reason I centered on forgotten Bitcoin or lost ones, which will never get sold and they're in a huge amount. The owners will mainly feel bothered that they can't sell, but deep down they've done the network the kind of favor Satoshi offered to the Bitcoin community.

[TastyChillySauce00]

If their ETF, etc are such a hit, they'd accumulate more bitcoin and possibly surpass the decentralized groups.
We also need to consider the exchange holdings, although the bitcoin should belong to their customer but the private key is owned by the exchange, if you consider something like how much bitcoin held by binance, you'd find out that there are actually much more bitcoin held by centralized group.

Honestly i don't get bothered even if centralized group surpass bitcoin holding of decentralized group as long as the blockchain itself is decentralized.

[Stavri]

its about bitcoin ownership, not decentralization. I think there’s not much that can be done about it. In a free market, whoever spots the opportunity early gains the advantage, and once they start accumulating significant amounts, they unfortunately become a determining force in the market.