A pair of prominent Bitcoin adoption leaders gathered on the Nakamoto stage at the Bitcoin 2026 conference, making the case that an unusual industry dynamic — one in which direct competitors are openly collaborating — may be the defining feature of the current institutional push into the digital asset.
The panel featured David Bailey, CEO of Nakamoto Inc., Alexandre Laizet of Capital B, and Dylan LeClair of Metaplanet, moderated by George Mekhail of Bitcoin for Corporations.
Bailey started his speech by framing Bitcoin as something closer to a decentralized corporation, arguing that rising valuations at peer companies elevate the broader ecosystem rather than cannibalize it. He pointed to UTXO Management’s investments in both Capital B and Metaplanet as a concrete expression of that philosophy – a structure that blurs the line between investor and business partner.
LeClair echoed the sentiment, arguing that Bitcoin differs from virtually every other industry in that participants actively share strategies and build on each other’s work. Laizet opened his remarks by thanking his colleagues on the panel and calling them inspirations for driving enterprise adoption — language that would be striking at almost any other industry conference.
Institutional barriers limit bitcoin
Despite the optimism, the panel was candid about the structural hurdles still ahead and made it clear that bitcoin is “still early days.” LeClair offered a striking data point: he estimated that 99% of institutional capital currently cannot access Bitcoin or Bitcoin ETFs due to mandate restrictions that limit many funds to fixed income or specific asset classes.
For LeClair, that limitation is precisely what makes the present moment still early—and why infrastructure, not ideology, is the central challenge.
He described hyperbitcoinization not as a singular breakthrough event, but as a slow build-up process that requires institutional plumbing — custodial solutions, compatible products and regulatory clarity.
He credited Michael Saylor with identifying and beginning to address this gap for traditional finance, pushing back against what he called a paradox: Bitcoiners anticipating extreme price appreciation while rejecting the institutional participation that would make such valuations possible.
Bailey reinforced this framework, noting that only a few hundred companies currently have Bitcoin on their balance sheets and that the strategy is still in the early stages of charting a path that others are only beginning to follow. He argued that every economic actor will eventually have to engage with Bitcoin, and that any view that excludes a subset of participants runs counter to the fundamental characteristics of the asset.
“For us to make hyperbitcoinization happen … every economic agent in the world is going to have to use bitcoin,” Bailey said.
Laizet presented Capital B’s approach as one designed to meet institutional investors where they are. He highlighted BlackRock’s Bitcoin ETP and the firm’s growing list of institutional clients as living examples of European investors gaining meaningful Bitcoin exposure through compliant channels.
For clients unable to tolerate Bitcoin’s volatility outright, he said digital credit products offer an alternative route — structured instruments that provide exposure without requiring full price risk.
Laizet was particularly optimistic about the financial services layer being built around Bitcoin, arguing that holders will increasingly need institutions willing to extend loans against their Bitcoin positions – providing access to capital without forcing a sale. He framed this as a matter of respect for the asset: users, he said, want financial partners who treat Bitcoin as security worthy of safekeeping, not one to be liquidated at the first opportunity.
Bitcoin is infiltrating traditional finance
Bailey offered perhaps the sharpest rhetorical turn of the panel in the discussion of Bitcoin’s relationship with legacy finance. He argued that because Bitcoin’s underlying technology is immutable, no financial institution — including BlackRock — can change its properties. The momentum, he said, runs in only one direction: “Bitcoin is changing BlackRock,” he said.
He acknowledged a growing divide in traditional finance between institutions that embrace Bitcoin and those that oppose it, describing advocates as “barbarians at the gate.”
This divide, he argued, makes it urgent to build a large institutional investor base capable of influencing policy and shaping the rules of the financial system in Bitcoin’s favor.
Bailey suggested that critics of BlackRock’s involvement today will face a more formidable challenge when central banks, including potentially the Federal Reserve, begin acquiring Bitcoin.
Mekhail, moderating, added context to the timeline, noting that Bitcoin for Corporations exists to support companies navigating this entry point — and cautioned that the window to be really early in the corporate adoption cycle is narrowing faster than many realize.