Michael Saylor Predicts $13 Million Bitcoin Price, Peter Schiff Calls it Nonsense

·

Michael Saylor’s Bold $13 Million Bitcoin Forecast

In a recent appearance on CNBC’s Squawk Box, MicroStrategy executive chairman Michael Saylor doubled down on his long-standing bullish stance on Bitcoin, making headlines with a striking prediction: Bitcoin could reach $13 million per coin by 2045.

The interview, conducted on September 9, came at a time of market volatility, with Bitcoin experiencing downward pressure amid broader macroeconomic uncertainty. Despite the short-term turbulence, Saylor remained unwavering in his conviction, framing Bitcoin as the ultimate store of value in an era of monetary instability.

👉 Discover how institutional investors are positioning for the next crypto surge.

When questioned about the courage it takes to maintain such optimism during market downturns, Saylor acknowledged past challenges—most notably the collapse of Silvergate Bank, which initially threatened MicroStrategy’s operations. Yet, he described the event not as a crisis but as a strategic inflection point. “It turned out to be a benefit for us,” Saylor said. “We made a lot of money.”

Under Saylor’s leadership, MicroStrategy has transformed from a software company into what many now view as a publicly traded Bitcoin proxy. Since embracing Bitcoin as its primary treasury reserve asset, the company has consistently outperformed traditional benchmarks. Saylor emphasized that MicroStrategy’s revenue growth has surpassed every company in the S&P 500 index over the same period—a claim that underscores the financial engineering behind its Bitcoin accumulation strategy.

Saylor’s $13 million price target is rooted in his belief in Bitcoin’s scarcity, durability, and global adoption potential. He views Bitcoin not as a speculative asset but as digital energy and property—an immutable form of sound money resistant to inflation and government manipulation. Drawing parallels to historical shifts in monetary systems, Saylor argues that Bitcoin is undergoing a similar trajectory of recognition and institutional embrace.

His forecast assumes continued halving-driven supply constraints, increasing demand from nation-states and corporations, and long-term currency devaluation trends. While the $13 million figure may seem extreme today, Saylor reminds critics that Bitcoin was once worth pennies—and few foresaw its rise to six figures.

Peter Schiff Counters: “A Bunch of Nonsense”

On the other side of the debate stands Peter Schiff, renowned stockbroker and gold advocate, who wasted no time dismissing Saylor’s projection as delusional. In a series of posts on X (formerly Twitter), Schiff labeled the $13 million prediction “a bunch of nonsense”, accusing CNBC of providing Saylor with an uncritical platform due to its ties to crypto advertisers.

Schiff pointed to MicroStrategy’s stock performance—down 40% from its 52-week high—as evidence that the company’s Bitcoin-centric strategy isn’t delivering the outsized returns Saylor claims. He also challenged the narrative of consistent long-term gains, noting that “all funds have positive returns since inception,” implying survivorship bias in Saylor’s arguments.

Beyond the numbers, Schiff returned to his core thesis: gold remains superior to Bitcoin because it possesses intrinsic value derived from its physical properties and centuries-long role as money. During an interview on The Real Vision Podcast, Schiff argued that Bitcoin lacks the foundational attributes of real money—tangibility, utility outside speculation, and historical trust.

“Gold has real-world uses and has stood the test of time,” Schiff stated. “Bitcoin is just bits in a computer.”

However, his argument met pushback from hosts Ryan Sean Adams and David Hoffman, who questioned whether “inherent value” truly exists outside of collective belief. Adams countered that value is ultimately a social consensus—something societies agree upon over time. By that logic, gold’s status isn’t inherent but constructed through shared acceptance.

Adams also highlighted shifting generational preferences: younger investors increasingly favor digital assets over physical commodities like gold. While gold retains industrial applications in electronics and aerospace, these uses alone don’t justify its high market valuation—just as palladium isn’t considered a viable currency despite its role in semiconductor manufacturing.

👉 See how digital assets are reshaping modern investment portfolios.

Still, Schiff conceded a hypothetical scenario where Bitcoin could gain traction: as a refuge during hyperinflation or systemic financial collapse. “It’s possible people might take refuge in Bitcoin,” he admitted, though he stressed this wouldn’t validate its fundamental soundness.

Ultimately, Schiff advised diversification—urging investors to hedge their bets by holding both gold and Bitcoin. “Even if Saylor is right,” he said, “you’ll still be rich.”

Core Keywords Driving the Debate

This high-profile clash centers around several key themes that resonate deeply with investors navigating uncertain financial times:

These keywords reflect the core search intent behind this topic: understanding whether Bitcoin can truly replace traditional stores of value like gold, and how credible long-term forecasts really are.

Saylor’s narrative hinges on digital scarcity and institutional adoption, positioning Bitcoin as an evolutionary upgrade to gold. Schiff, meanwhile, appeals to monetary history and tangible value, defending gold as the proven apex money.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What did Michael Saylor say about Bitcoin’s future price?

Michael Saylor predicted that Bitcoin could reach $13 million per coin by 2045, based on its scarcity model, growing institutional adoption, and long-term currency debasement trends.

Why does Peter Schiff think Bitcoin has no value?

Peter Schiff believes Bitcoin lacks intrinsic value because it’s not physically tangible and has no industrial utility beyond speculation. He contrasts this with gold, which he views as having inherent worth due to its physical properties and historical role as money.

Is MicroStrategy still buying Bitcoin?

Yes, MicroStrategy continues to accumulate Bitcoin as part of its treasury strategy. As of recent filings, the company holds over 200,000 BTC, making it one of the largest corporate holders.

Can Bitcoin replace gold as a store of value?

While gold has been a trusted store of value for millennia, proponents argue that Bitcoin offers superior portability, divisibility, verifiability, and protection against confiscation—key advantages in a digital world.

Who is right—Saylor or Schiff?

There’s no definitive answer. Saylor represents the digital-native view of money’s future, while Schiff embodies traditional financial skepticism. Investors may benefit from understanding both perspectives before allocating capital.

Should I invest in Bitcoin or gold?

Diversification may be prudent. Both assets serve as hedges against inflation and systemic risk. Some experts recommend holding both to balance exposure to technological innovation (Bitcoin) and historical stability (gold).

The Bigger Picture: Money in Transition

This debate isn’t just about price targets—it’s about competing visions of what money should be. Saylor sees Bitcoin as programmable property, immune to inflation and seizure. Schiff sees gold as proven money, tested through centuries of war, crisis, and regime change.

Both men agree on one thing: fiat currencies are failing. Where they diverge is in their proposed alternatives.

As central banks continue expanding balance sheets and governments pile on debt, demand for non-sovereign stores of value grows. Whether that demand flows into gold, Bitcoin, or both will shape the next chapter of global finance.

👉 Explore secure ways to gain exposure to digital assets without volatility risks.

While Saylor’s $13 million forecast may seem audacious today, so too did predictions of $100,000 Bitcoin just a decade ago. The real question isn’t whether such prices are possible—but whether the world is ready to accept a new form of money built not on atoms, but on code.