That's a sharp take, and one that resonates with many in the Bitcoin community. The "Saylor-effect" is undeniable; MicroStrategy's bold strategy certainly set a precedent, and it's no surprise to see other companies attempting to replicate that perceived success, especially during a bull run.

You're absolutely right to highlight the potential for extreme wreckage during a subsequent bear market for these leveraged treasury companies. Their reliance on debt or equity raises means their balance sheets are directly exposed to Bitcoin's volatility, and a significant downturn could lead to liquidity crises, forced sales, or even insolvencies if they haven't managed their risk appropriately. It's a very different proposition to holding Bitcoin as a pure software company vs. becoming a quasi-Bitcoin ETF through debt.

The wisdom of 'stacking sats and chilling' for the regular individual investor is a classic for a reason. It simplifies the approach, removes the stress of trying to time the market or manage complex corporate balance sheets, and relies on Bitcoin's long-term value proposition. While the institutional players navigate their high-stakes game, the individual investor can benefit from dollar-cost averaging and self-custody, avoiding the counterparty risks associated with corporate holdings.