Saylor's Reframed View of Bitcoin: Institutional Shift by 2025 and Prospects for the Digital Credit Market

MicroStrategy founder and Chairman Michael Saylor emphasized in a recent interview that the true victory of Bitcoin lies not in short-term price fluctuations but in the fundamental redefinition of the institutional framework. Structural changes expected by 2025—such as government approval, integration into the banking system, revival of insurance and accounting systems—have marked a turning point, transforming Bitcoin from a mere speculative asset into a “universal capital of the digital age.”

Structural Changes in 2025: Policy Fundamentally Redefines Bitcoin

The historic shift in 2025 pointed out by Saylor occurred simultaneously across multiple institutional aspects.

First, the number of publicly traded companies holding Bitcoin on their balance sheets surged from 30–60 in 2024 to approximately 200. This is not just an increase in numbers but indicates the full-scale acceptance by institutional investors. Saylor’s own experience highlights the importance of this shift. When he began purchasing Bitcoin in 2020, insurance companies unilaterally canceled MicroStrategy’s insurance contracts. For four years, despite holding billions of dollars in personal assets, they were forced to pay insurance premiums in the hundreds of millions.

By 2025, this situation reversed. The insurance market resumed dealings with Bitcoin-holding companies, and the adoption of fair value accounting principles allowed companies to recognize unrealized capital gains. The government’s official recognition of Bitcoin as a “major and largest digital commodity in the world” fundamentally redefined its social status.

Policy shifts were also dramatic. At the start of the year, only about $1 billion worth of Bitcoin could be used as collateral for loans of around 5 cents on the dollar, but by year’s end, nearly all major US banks had begun offering loans collateralized by IBIT (Bitcoin ETF), with about a quarter announcing plans for direct Bitcoin collateralized loans. JPMorgan Chase and Morgan Stanley also entered discussions on Bitcoin trading and settlement.

Market infrastructure evolved similarly. The Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) advanced the commercialization of Bitcoin derivatives, and a tax-exempt physical exchange mechanism between Bitcoin worth $1 million and IBIT was introduced. These layered changes transformed Bitcoin from a speculative commodity into a financial asset integrated into the banking system.

Why Short-Term Price Movements Don’t Matter: Saylor’s Emphasis on Long-Term Perspective

Saylor expresses strong discomfort with market psychology that reacts emotionally to Bitcoin’s price swings. Many commentators talk about “disappointment” after Bitcoin’s price dropped just 95 days after reaching its peak, but Saylor considers this a fundamental mistake.

“Trying to predict short-term market trends is pointless. You should focus on whether the industry is moving in the right direction,” Saylor states, pointing out that looking at moving averages over four years reveals a “significantly bullish trend” in Bitcoin, rather than short-term views of 100 or 180 days.

This long-term perspective is rooted in Bitcoin’s very philosophy. Drawing lessons from the 10,000-year history of ideological movements, Saylor notes, “People who are truly committed to something typically take about 10 years. Many take 20 or 30 years.” If the goal is to commercialize Bitcoin, success should not be evaluated over weeks or months.

Saylor evaluates the past three months as a “buying opportunity for foresightful investors” and paradoxically argues that short-term selling pressure is an irrational judgment.

Fundamental Redefinition of Bitcoin-Holding Companies: Not Speculation, but a Productivity-Enhancement Tool

Saylor emphasizes the societal redefinition of Bitcoin-holding companies. “For a loss-making company, holding Bitcoin that generates capital gains on the balance sheet can lead to increased enterprise value. So why criticize Bitcoin-holding companies?” he asks.

For example, a company recording $10 million in annual losses but holding $100 million worth of Bitcoin that yields $30 million in capital gains would be overall profitable. Saylor argues that criticism should target “ongoing losses” rather than “Bitcoin purchases.”

An even more critical point is his opposition to defining Bitcoin-holding companies as “purely financial firms.” He likens Bitcoin-holding companies to “factories with power infrastructure,” stating: “Bitcoin-holding companies are not just speculative assets; they use tools to improve productivity. Power is a universal capital that drives all machinery, and Bitcoin is the universal capital of the digital age.”

Why worry about saturation with only about 200 companies holding Bitcoin among roughly 400 million companies worldwide? Saylor suggests that this very question reflects a “lack of understanding of companies making rational management decisions.”

Strategy for the Digital Credit Market: Why MicroStrategy Is Not Interested in Banking

Saylor’s strongest emphasis regarding MicroStrategy’s direction is its stance of “no interest in banking.” This is not merely a business choice but a strategic judgment based on the potential market size.

The potential of the digital credit market could fundamentally redefine traditional financial markets. If MicroStrategy develops a digital credit product capturing 10% of the US Treasury bond market, the market size would reach $10 trillion. “Everyone would want this product,” Saylor states.

Positioning Bitcoin as “digital capital” and MicroStrategy as a “digital credit provider,” Saylor aims to build a business model that leverages dollar reserves while gradually increasing corporate creditworthiness. The reason for disinterest in banking is that the complexity of that business would distract from core focus. “Creating the world’s best digital credit product requires undivided attention. Competing with customers at the same time is the most foolish act,” Saylor asserts.

Holding dollar reserves is a redefinition of corporate creditworthiness from the perspective of credit investors. Stock investors would want to increase Bitcoin holdings to boost volatility, but credit investors seek the highest credit quality assets. To become the largest player in digital lending, “stability symbolized by dollar reserves” is essential.

Saylor emphasizes the essence of business value: “Companies exist to create value, and that value is determined by the core of the business.” He states that if a company can sell digital credit products at a yield of 6%, twice that of other credit markets in Japan, it would become the most valuable company in Japan.

The market for senior credit, corporate credit, Bitcoin-collateralized derivatives, Bitcoin-collateralized exchanges, and even Bitcoin-capital insurance companies offers limitless possibilities. “There are zero insurance companies worldwide using Bitcoin as collateral or capital. This industry is enormous,” Saylor notes, indicating a redefined understanding toward the digital credit market.

Long-Term Outlook for Bitcoin Strategy: Recognition Shift Fundamentally Redefines Market Structure

The core of Saylor’s argument is that societal recognition of Bitcoin and its surrounding industries was fundamentally redefined in 2025. Once regarded as a speculative asset, Bitcoin’s status has been elevated through policy approval, banking integration, insurance revival, and accounting system adaptation into a rational corporate management tool.

Based on this redefinition, the digital credit market pursued by MicroStrategy could also redefine traditional financial markets. Saylor’s disinterest in banking stems from a focus on the broader opportunity of digital credit.

The process of expanding Bitcoin-holding companies from 200 out of 4 billion to even more will serve as an indicator of how market participants’ perceptions are being redefined. For Saylor, who is not interested in short-term price fluctuations, what matters most is tracking this fundamental shift in perception and how it materializes in institutional and market structures over the long term.