1. If they become forced sellers because they're not true hodlers but just grifters trying to get a management fee while the going is good. It's fiat behaviour that gets associated with Bitcoin. 2. All these companies are probably storing their Bitcoin with the same custodian, and they're all much more vulnerable to regulatory risk than an individual. This is added centralisation risk. You can't stop it, but these are fair criticisms. Danny wasn't pushing back on businesses using Bitcoin as a tool - i.e. better cash vehicle while they create value in their chosen markets. He was pushing back against companies doing this as their only activity. Saylor was being a dick - he's smart enought to know the nuanced difference.