Michael Saylor, co-founder of Strategy, is facing mounting criticism after publicly rejecting the idea of on-chain proof of reserves. His comments have triggered strong reactions from several prominent voices in the crypto space, where transparency remains a core value.
Saylor argued that publishing wallet addresses linked to institutional Bitcoin holdings poses a significant security risk. He compared it to making private bank account details or personal contact information publicly available.
According to him, such disclosures would allow constant tracing of financial activity, which could undermine enterprise security.
Also Read: Market Cap Doesn’t Matter for XRP to Hit $100 – Expert Explains What’s Important
However, many in the cryptocurrency community strongly disagreed. Critics claimed that proof of reserves can be presented without exposing sensitive data. They cited existing systems that offer transparency while preserving wallet anonymity.
Some exchanges and asset managers, like Bitwise, have already implemented these mechanisms successfully.
One of the strongest responses came from longtime Bitcoin advocate Stefan Jespers, known as “Whale Panda” on X. He dismissed Saylor’s justification, calling the comparison to private bank accounts “a major red flag.” Jespers stressed that Bitcoin’s transparency gives it legitimacy and trust.
Community Suspicions Intensify Around Strategy’s Bitcoin Holdings
Saylor’s refusal has reignited old concerns regarding the nature of Strategy’s Bitcoin reserves. Online discussions have resurfaced allegations that the firm may not be holding physical Bitcoin but paper derivatives instead. These doubts have led to calls for greater accountability from one of Bitcoin’s most vocal institutional supporters.
Some also pointed to Saylor’s business history, referencing the dramatic crash in 2000 that cost him billions following an accounting controversy. While the event occurred decades ago, it is being used by critics to question his current stance on financial transparency.
Despite the criticism, Saylor has maintained his stance, insisting that secure storage of institutional Bitcoin requires avoiding surveillance. Even so, some experts still maintain that openness can be ensured without losing security.
The controversy points out that a gap is developing between old financial practices and how many crypto users like to interact with their investments. Since institutions are becoming more active in crypto markets, there will likely be greater pressure for all assets to have reliable backing.
Also Read: Ripple Effect Continues – BitMex New Announcement Excites XRP Traders
