The question of what makes bitcoin truly resistant to external pressure has once again come to the forefront of the crypto community's attention. A 2021 video surfaced in which Elon Musk, reflecting on the nature of the first cryptocurrency, shifted the focus from the familiar narrative of coin scarcity to the architecture of the network itself. His argument sounds particularly relevant today, as regulatory pressure on the industry only intensifies.
Architecture as a shield: why bitcoin has no "bottleneck"
Speaking at The B Word conference in July 2021, where Jack Dorsey and Cathie Wood also participated, Musk presented an unconventional view of money. He called it "an information system for the allocation of labor" and then criticized the traditional banking infrastructure. According to him, transfers between banks take from one to five business days, and the ACH payment system is hopelessly outdated and insecure. He even compared paying by card to handing over your password to a stranger.
The entrepreneur's key thesis is not about transaction speed, but about the fundamental resilience of the network. Musk emphasized that bitcoin has no single point of failure—that very "bottleneck" that could be "squeezed." There is no boss in the network to call, and no company that can be compelled to act. This makes the system invulnerable to targeted pressure from the state or any other players.
"Bitcoin primarily solves a problem. It has no 'bottleneck' that can be 'squeezed,' it is decentralized, no one can be forced in any way to empty their bitcoin account," Musk stated.
This is a fundamental difference from the fiat system, where control over issuance and capital flows is in the hands of a limited circle of people. Bitcoin has neither a headquarters nor a CEO who can be pressured.
What Tesla and SpaceX ultimately did
Musk, however, does not idealize bitcoin and acknowledges its shortcomings. "Transaction volume is low, fees are high, it's difficult to use, but the potential is enormous," he noted. This duality was also reflected in the actions of his companies.
Tesla bought BTC worth $1.5 billion in early 2021, but by mid-2022 it had sold 75% of its position, netting $936 million. The reason was concerns about the negative environmental impact of mining. However, the company still holds 11,509 BTC on its balance sheet, purchased for $386 million. These coins have not moved since 2022.
SpaceX chose a different strategy. The company has never sold its reserves. Since 2024, 18,712 BTC, purchased for $661 million, have appeared in its reporting. Only their market valuation has changed: $1.75 billion at the end of 2024 and $1.10 billion in June of this year. Even the test transfer of $88 in July, which sparked rumors of a sell-off, was not confirmed—public reporting showed a paper loss of $539 million for the half-year, but the reserve was left untouched.
Together, Musk's two companies hold 30,221 BTC, acquired for $1.05 billion. At the current price of around $78,500, that is approximately $2.37 billion.
My analysis: It is telling that even after Tesla's partial exit, SpaceX demonstrates a restraint rare for public companies, not succumbing to panic during bear markets. This indirectly confirms Musk's thesis: bitcoin is indeed difficult to "strangle" if its holders believe in the technology itself, rather than short-term market conditions. The question is how many more major players will follow this example, turning bitcoin into a truly strategic asset for corporate treasuries.