The value is decided between the parties involved in the transaction.

Agreed. The decision of how much something is worth is weighed based on a things intrinsic value and it's extrinsic value. Intrinsic value is the value a thing has no matter what a person believes its value is. For example, Silver has value as the best elemental conductor of both heat and electricity. It has value because it does not oxidize in the interior (it creates a patina, a stable oxide layer instead of "rust", an unstable oxide degradation like iron). It also has lustre, sheen, and visual appeal. This means that in industry, for electronics, and in jewelry (along with plenty of other real world use cases) it will always retain its value, no matter what you, or your would be trade partner believes.

No matter what a person is trading for, or what a person values their silver at, the silver never loses these valuable properties because they are a fundamental part of the universe.

BTC has zero such value. It can't be used for anything that would give it meaningful value.

BTC can have extrinsic value, because anything can have extrinsic value, and that is the "value decided" on that you are talking about. You are conflating the idea of extrinsic value (which both silver and BTC have) with intrinsic value of which only silver (in this comparison) has.

Again, in *ANY barter situation where one has a choice to trade for something with intrinsic value or something that has none, no one would EVER choose to trade for the thing with no intrinsic value.

I think the company will see value in accepting that Bitcoin.

Not if there is anything (like silver) that has intrinsic value that they could trade for instead.