Right, and the only reason he COULD trade them was because he had amassed a sufficient number that another party took the other side of the trade and also thought holding the 10,000 Bitcoin would be worthwhile - they weren’t being traded to flip because there was no market for that. Laszlo had stored up the collectibles in surplus - notice the transaction wasn’t 1 Bitcoin, or 20,000 Sats as the case might be today.. The guy who bought the pizzas was willing to hold a large amount of what was still a collectible at the time because he thought he would be able to also trade them on future - that they would hold value over time… A store of value if you will.. Szabo is the one you need to be reading/listening to:

Fountain

Bitcoin Audible • Reboot - Shelling Out: The Origins of Money [Nick Szabo] • Listen on Fountain

"The precursors of money, along with language, enabled early modern humans to solve problems of cooperation that other animals cannot – including...

I agree with Szabo, but I think his word choice is poor. Collecting isn't essentially "storing value," considering person A is the only one who finds value in it. Trade requires at least two people. Person B needs to find some interest in A's asset to have value outside of their own preference. People want to say "collecting is storing value," but that's just speculation again. As I wrote earlier, if the idea is that because of bitcoins early use as a currency from 2009-2015 was enough to build trust in the asset to store value in it, makes sense and let's use THAT position, using proper phrasing, than the current narrative which is misleading and technically incorrect.