On The Brink with Castle Island - Weekly Roundup 08/16/24 (Crypto4Harris, stablecoins vs CBDCs) (EP.553)

Episode Date: August 16, 2024

Matt and Nic return for another week of news and deals. In this episode: Fairshake is getting active in Senate Races What's going on with the Harris pivot? Chuck Schumer promises crypto legislation by end of year What's happening with WBTC? The SEC is subpoenaing VC funds over Uniswap Don Jr is launching a crypto project Will CBDCs destroy the stablecoin sector? Will stablecoins have to KYC all holders? Sponsor notes: Withum's Digital Currency and Blockchain Technology Team specializes in crypto-assets, offering accounting, tax and advisory solutions to fortify trust in a dynamic industry. Contact them today to get started. - withum.com/crypto Futures Falter, Funding Flips: In Coin Metrics State of the Network Issue 272, we explore the robustness of decentralized systems and the stability of synthetic financial products within the crypto ecosystem.

Matt Walsh and Nick Carter are partners at Castle Island Ventures. All Vies expressed by them or the guests on this podcast are solely their opinions and do not reflect the opinions of Castle Island Ventures. Guests and host may maintain positions in the assets discussed in this podcast. You should not treat any opinion expressed by anyone on this podcast as a specific inducement to make a particular investment or follow a particular strategy, but only is an expression of their personal opinion. This podcast is for informational purposes. Lockdown by bad mortgage investments, Lehman, which has 25,000 employees will be liquidated.

The federal government loans American International Group, AIG, 85. billion dollars. This is a different kind of market and the Fed is asleep. The federal government is stepping it to stabilize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two mortgage giants that have been threatened by the housing crisis. The Bank of England has pumped 75 billion pounds more into Britain's ailing economy with a new round of quantitative easing. You print a couple trillion dollars and all of a sudden people start to worry. So out of this worry, we have something called the Bitcoin. Bitcoin. Welcome to On the Brink. I'm Matt Walsh. And I'm Nick Carter. And this episode is brought to you by Witham, if you are a regular listener of this show, you know that we take tax accounting and auditing

very seriously. And when it comes to digital assets, building up trust in relationships with your counterparties like custodians, brokerages, and even regulators, is critically important. And that's where Witham comes in. There are top 25 accounting tax and advisory firm, and they have a team of professionals that is 100% dedicated to the digital asset and blockchain industry. They help out some of the highest profile companies with things like tax, advisory, accounting for token sales, stablecoin audits, financial audits, and much, much more. These guys are not just accountants. They're crypto enthusiasts that have been in it since the beginning. They're the first accounting firm to build out a digital asset practice. Witham is passionate about this space. They're passionate about

helping you. So head over to www.witham.com slash crypto to learn more. Go with them. Thank you for sponsoring us. We are investing that money in the podcast, probably. I can't tell you how many companies use with them, though, in the crypto space. They really have been super, super early. I mean, there is a deficit of accounting firms that are willing to tackle the crypto space. That's for sure.

Yeah, and you can really go wrong when you don't have a good one. Well, not a lot happened this week, be honest with you. We're all holding our breath, waiting for November, what is it, November 8, 7? Is that what it is? Sometime in the near future, there will be a new president. We did have a podcast episode, Wyatt sat down with the founder of Oiler Finance, Michael Bentley, talking about D5 financial primitives. That was a good one.

Good job pronouncing that correctly. I call it Euler all the time, but it's, but it's oiler. Yeah, it's oiler. It's one of those names that's just so hard to pronounce. And there were a bunch of deals as well. So there's still deals happening. All right, let's hop into the deals. First one up is Chaos Labs.

This is an on-chain risk management company that raised $55 million from Han Ventures, F Prime, slow ventures, light speed, galaxy, PayPal ventures, and others. Next up we have Sahara Labs, a decentralized AI platform. there is 37 million from Pantera, Polychain, and Binance Labs. Then it's sling money. This is a stable coin-based app for international payments that raised $15 million from Ribbitt, Union Square, and Slow. And the Sling product is very cool,

really, very strong endorsement, I guess, of what stable coins can do in terms of seamless international payments is definitely want to keep an eye on. Next up, we have Ion protocol. called DeFi Lending Protocol. There is 4.8 million from Gumi Cryptos, robot ventures, and bankless ventures. Then it's essential.

This is an Ethereum Layer 2 network that raised 11 million from archetype, iOSG, and Spartan Group. Then you have Parfen, an enterprise blockchain. Remember those. They raised 10 million from Parify and Framework Ventures.

I actually don't know if this is an enterprise blockchain. I think this is a digital asset infrastructure company, actually. So we'll have to dust that up. But you don't want to call someone in an enterprise blockchain. if they're not. Yeah, that's more of a slur these days.

Yeah. It's a blockchain company. The block says they're permissioned ETHL2. Okay, so maybe it's a private public chain or something. Yeah, it's not fully enterprise. I mean, it's on Ethereum. But apparently it's geared towards tokenizations and CBDCs. Big insult to just call someone a straight private blockchain.

Yeah, that's mean. You can't do that. We don't do that. Apologies for that. Next one up is Cam. This is a blockchain-based money transfer app. They raised $3 million from Tether. Then we have Rhinestone, a blockchain account abstraction platform.

There is $5 million from OneKex, coin fund, lattice, and Circle Ventures. Then it's Satsflow in Ordinals and Rune's Exchange that raised $7.6 million from variant, nascent, coin-based ventures, and a number of others. Then we have Rivals Network, that's Rivals with a Z or a Z. as us Brits like to say. They're a decentralized AI protocol. There is 9 million from Delphi Ventures, D1 Ventures, and Gate IO.

Then we have orderly network. This is a Web 3 liquidity protocol that raised $5 million from OKX, manifold, trading, and others. Busy, busy deal week, huh? Yes, the deals, even in the doldrums of summer, are happening. And our second sponsor for this week is Coin Metrics,

of course. Here is your Metrics Minute. We're looking at Crypto's Resilience, amid the market crash last week, despite reported outages at traditional brokerages, stable coins and on-chain infrastructure did remain resilient with USDC transaction activity on eth reaching 30,000 transactions an hour, ETH gas fees spiked to five ETH per block, with mean fees reaching 16 million in the aggregate on August 5th. The network did continue to process trades, of course.

Athena's synthetic stablecoin, USDE, kept its peg within. 30 basis points, even as ETH funding rates flipped negative by up to 60%. The future saw $4.2 billion decline in open interest, indicating a rapid market adjustment as traders' unwound leveraged positions. That is your metrics minute. Good metrics minute. The fallout of the Japanese carry trade just feels like it was eons ago. It was only last week. I feel like the market recovered instantly. Yeah. This market's kind of a wonky market, right? Because you have interest rates haven't come off yet. You have just the flow of crypto here with the Mount Gox distributions and then the U.S. government's selling. It feels like more of a flow story right now. I feel like the Gox distributions are over, right?

Not if they're all over yet, to be honest with you. So the U.S. government is sitting on a horde of Bitcoins and we don't know what they're going to do with it. I think they moved $600 million from into a coin base prime account yesterday. So you would assume that they're selling that. We can call that a gray swan. Germany is done selling. The plus token thing, I think, was a red herring.

So, yeah, I think we're going to be in a range bound holding pattern until the election. That's my prediction. Yeah, interest rates will be interesting here before the election, though. You could see that moving the market. But yeah, let's talk a little bit about the election here. So some crypto political stuff going on. Fairshake, which is the industry's largest political action committee, they announced that they will be putting a combined $18 million into races to support

pro-crypto Senate candidates. A bunch of that is going into Ohio, Bernie Moreno running there. He's a Republican. Then you have Arizona, Ruben Gallego, a Democrat. And Michigan, Alyssa Slotkin, also a Democrat. So Fair Shake starting to put some of that capital to work. Ohio is the big one to me. I mean, Sherrod Brown is just, you know, probably number two antagonist for the crypto industry behind Elizabeth Warren.

So it would be great to see Bernie Moreno get in there. Yeah, that one matters in so many ways. Moreno explicitly pro-Crypto, Brown, very much against it. That also would swing the House, the Senate, rather closer to a Republican majority, which then influences the confirmation process, which is very important. Something that gets overlooked a little bit is, you know, these cabinet members have to be approved by the Senate. So even in the case of a Harris victory,

if it's a Republican Senate, she would have to select more moderate members of the cabinet. So it's not just a presidential story. It's also about the Senate. Great point. So in other crypto political news, this crypto for Harris Town Hall happened last night. We should probably talk about it. Yeah, so I wasn't able to attend.

I don't think there's anything I'd rather less do than go to the Crypto for Harris Town Hall and listen to Scaramucci and Mark Cuban talk. There were some actual real representatives of the crypto industry. Dante Disparte from Circle was there. Sheila Warren, Justin Slaughter, Paradigm. There were also some strange ancillary figures from the crypto space that attended. But there was actually fairly good representation

from high-ranking members of Congress and governors, which was interesting to see. Although some of them had prepared remarks that were just videotaped. So this Alyssa Slotkin who's running in Michigan didn't even show up. She's just like taped something apparently, which is kind of a bad look.

The other question is why is no one from Harris's team actually showing up to these things? So yeah, they didn't show up to their own party. So that's why it's crypto for Harris and not Harris for crypto. But there were some interesting comments and the digital chamber helpfully summarize them for us. So sorry, Chuck Schumer. That's kind of the biggest takeaway.

Obviously the Senate Majority Leader. he did say his goal is to get something regarding crypto passed out of the Senate and into law by the end of the year. And he believes he can make that happen. I mean, that's a big deal. Obviously, we'll have to see what that bill looks like. But if he gets behind a market structure bill, I think a lot of people would be very happy with that. For sure. I mean, it does kind of raise the question.

It's why he hasn't done it already if he is interested in passing crypto legislation. I mean, he is the Senate majority leader. He has a lot of power. But either way, we'll take our victories. Doesn't really say much about Harris's stance on crypto, but it's still a positive. The remainder of the comments were not very edifying, I would say. There was some interesting, an interesting comment from Schumer that I think threw a little bit of a tilt towards Warren here.

He said, sadly, there are a lot of members in Congress nowadays who have built their political brands around creating spectacle and sensationalism instead of putting in the hard work of legislation. Nonetheless, passing legislation this year is absolutely possible even in these divided times. I think that's probably about Elizabeth Warren, don't you think? Yeah, I mean, I was actually pretty happy with Schumer's comments. He said that I should be leading globally in cryptocurrency. And we should avoid pushing the industry abroad. So that's all actually pretty positive.

There were other comments that will briefly run through. So the Colorado Governor Jared Poulos said that Colorado was accepting crypto to pay for DMV fees. Great. So that's cool. That doesn't tell us anything about the Harris campaign. I found Stabenow's comments strange. She said that the Republicans had been blocking. her act to allow the CFTC to regulate digital commodities, which I don't know.

I don't typically think as the Republicans is the holdup for crypto legislation. No, I think it's because she can't get that thing. She can't get enough Democrats on board is the reason why I thought that wasn't going anywhere. Wiley Nichols said he repeated that Trump had in the past called crypto a scam, which is true, but amidst the fact that Trump is now obviously staunchly pro-crypto. He did express optimism around the Harris Crypto Reset, which again, it's strange to have these members of Congress say there's a reset coming, but we haven't heard anything from the Harris campaign at all.

That is strange. I mean, it's beyond strange. It should be troubling. Well, it's not believable until the campaign says anything. Right. Wiley Nickel would be a great member of the cabinet, I think. Yeah, I mean, despite his comments here, he's. excellent advocate for the industry. No doubt about it. Adam Schiff actually had some very

positive things to say about crypto. So that was kind of nice to see. Darren Soto said something very confusing, which is that he thought Harris's tech background could, you know, was, was positive for crypto. And he said that she might actually repeal Sab 1-21, which I find. deeply puzzling given that Biden just vetoed the repeal of Sab 112. Maybe there's some daylight there. I don't know. Maybe there's, maybe Harris was not consulted. Yeah.

Aside from that, it was, yeah, mostly a number of members of Congress saying they're optimistic about a reset. Again, the proof is in the pudding. Let's hear it from the campaign if there is to be reset. All right. So moving on here, there's been some interesting developments just in terms of corporates buying Bitcoin. So Marathon did their offering this week, filed with the SEC to raise $250 million with the purposes of buying Bitcoin with it. We obviously had the micro strategy announcement a couple weeks ago that they were going out to raise $2 billion. Seems like more of a trend.

Another kind of interesting development on the micro strategy side is that there was an ETF launch this week. is actually approved from defiance ETFs, which is for a leveraged long ETF with single stock exposure to micro strategy. So it's kind of a weird market to be in where you can't have an options market on Bitcoin itself listed. You know, the SEC has not approved those, but they just approved a levered long micro strategy ETF.

Yeah, it doesn't make a lot of sense. NICI withdrew their options. Yeah, there was a withdrawal. on the Bitcoin options front. So I think that that decision has been kicked down to May of next year, it seems like, on Bitcoin options. Elsewhere in sort of enforcement news, several venture funds, including Andreessen and USV received letters from the SEC regarding their Uniswap Labs investment.

So it looks like the SEC might be spreading. their investigation to Uniswap to the financial backers of that project. Well, we know that they sent Uniswap a Wells notice, right? So Uniswap came right out and revealed that. So my guess is that they're trying to go after Uniswap for being an unregistered securities broker. I think Uniswap is super well capitalized to fight that. That seems to be the type of lawsuit that would not be decided under a Gensler term, but three, four years in the future. there was a very strange piece of political news this week which is uh i guess trump junior is launching some kind of a crypto project and we don't know what it is but he has launched a

telegram for it called the defiant ones um i don't know if that's a i don't know if that's a really good idea i don't think it's a meme coin i'm if i had guessed it's like some kind of security token or real estate security token. That's my guess. Are there other things to do for the next 90 days other than that, do you think? Yeah, like, eyes on the prize, Don Jr. So I don't get distracted with this crypto stuff.

Yeah, just maybe save that for later, I would say. Perplexity, which is an AI search engine, has partnered up with the polymarket to incorporate live polymarket odds and information into the search engine results. Pretty interesting. The market is really having a moment these days. All right.

So here's a new segment, listener questions. From time to time, we'll get really good listener questions on just what we think about stuff. So someone actually emailed in a kind of a stable coin related question. So the gist of it is, what happens to the stable coin industry, you know, specifically the issuers of these stable coins if the U.S. government were to introduce a digital dollar. backed by treasuries, you know, basically what would a CBDC do to the stable coin market?

Yeah, this is something I hear from central bankers a lot, actually, which is they consider stable coins like an intermediary technology to be supplanted by a CBDC once it comes out. Their belief is that CBDCs will just naturally outcompete stable coins because they'd presumably be a superior product. There's a few ways to answer it. One is actually with a historical analog. So back in the day, banks issued

money kind of privately in the U.S. And eventually there was like a federalization of the dollar. But the belief was that this would just immediately

get rid of all privately issued banknotes, but it didn't happen that way. Actually, they had to be effectively banned in order for those to be crowded out. So I think, you know, as like a free markets guy, I'm always skeptical that the government can create a product that is better than the free market because the free market's obviously competitive. The other answer is, you know, I think stablecoins offer something that a CBDC wouldn't do. which is sort of native global, global interoperability and truly open access on a global basis.

So I'd be very skeptical of the claim that a CBDC or government digital dollar product would have the same qualities as a Sablecoin network that exists today, which is available anywhere to citizens of, you know, any kind of, you know, any kind of. on the planet and they are able to hold it in their smartphone directly. I think stable coins as they currently work offer strong privacy, strong transactional autonomy, and then obviously great interoperability, which is why, you know, they're so powerful. So I don't know, I would be very surprised if we were to see a CBDC network where the federal government was offering digital dollar accounts to Argentines and Nigerians and Indonesians and Turks and so on.

What's your answer? Yeah, I'd agree with what you said. I mean, I think there's certainly a world where you could have the U.S. choose to replicate China's model and just have this overarching surveillance system. And it doesn't even need to be on a blockchain, frankly, at that point where you just have this ledger system that goes straight to retail. That is technically possible. Obviously, the government doesn't have a.

great track record of building technology, you know, over the years, I'd say in certain categories, definitely not with, like, internet technology. I think it's fundamentally incompatible with a liberal democracy to have that level of surveillance at the retail level, though. So I think it would be a major league Supreme Court issue immediately if the government chose to go in that direction, just in terms of the level of surveillance that they would be able to exert on a system like that. Furthermore, it's just, it's super unlikely to happen in the U.S. because the bank lobby is so powerful. And so you would really be kneecapping the commercial banking sector in a meaningful way. If you had just direct cash exposure at the central bank and you didn't need to intermediate through a normal bank.

So I think you would just see the politicians would never let this happen because the banks are so powerful. Well, I mean, it's not just about the lobby. It's also about the prudence of destroying the commercial bank sector. if you were to set up a government narrow bank, I mean, commercial banks, even though they're influencing credit creation is waning relative to non-bank lenders, it's still a very important source of capital

for homeowners and small businesses. So it would be a massive credit destruction event if you were to basically disintermediate the commercial banks, which I don't think everyone wants that. No, I don't think anyone wants that. Now, I do see narrow application for a U.S. CBDC. I think that settling bank-to-bank transactions, doing overnight repos using a CBDC-style instrument that would actually just take cost out of some of these banks, that might be interesting.

And you could see that catching on where it's just moving wholesale dollars between banks or something like that, as opposed to having to navigate the relic of Fedwire. So maybe something like that could take off. but I just don't see it happening at a retail level. Yeah, I mean, banks are also public-private partnerships. You know, they obviously are highly regulated and supervised by the government, but they are meant to be private. So this would, in effect, constitute a nationalization of the bank sector,

which I don't think is in line with the way that America works. Like a sweeping nationalization. Not yet. Not yet. Yeah. So that's our answer. Although tough day to be a supermarket executive, huh? Yeah. All right, here's another listener question.

This one is from Byron on Warpcast. What's the best counter argument to the idea that stablecoins should and probably will be forced to K.YC all holders? And this is in response to a JP Connig stablecoin blog post. Yeah, so I really like JP's blog. I mean, he approaches stablecoins and crypto. from a skeptics perspective, but he's written some really good stuff on it. And this debate goes all the way back to a piece by Anthony Lewis, where I think he coined the term permission pseudonymity.

So that's how stable coins work, of course, is if you are creating or redeeming a stablecoin, you have a relationship with the issue in your KYC, but then as far as the on-network, stablecoin transactions are concerned p-to-p, those aren't. necessarily surveilled, right? So only a small portion of sort of the ultimate user base of a stablecoin product, only a small percentage of those people are known to the issuer. So the question is, will they all have to become known to the issuer eventually? So I guess like if you're using a network like PayPal or Venmo or Zell or something, the issuers are aware of who you, you are. And that's not the case with stibiqu coins. It's also not the case with cash, by the way.

That's the key point. If you go and withdraw cash to the bank or deposit it, yeah, the bank knows you are. And the same with the ATM. Probably there's a record of that. I don't exactly know how ATMs work. But then when you transact with the cash, you don't have to tell anyone about that, right? So that's the question. And, you know, I often say like if cash was invented today, it would be illegal. So the question is, can a cash standard continue to exist in the 21st century? Stable coins contemplate a reinvigoration of the cash standard, especially as we go cashless. That's why I'm so supportive of stable coins. I think as we've digitized the financial economy, we've lost a lot of that autonomy and privacy that comes with cash transactions. And

Stable coins are an attempt to regain that, to regain lost ground. But it's kind of like a tough question to answer because the thing it has to do with, do we continue down the path of creeping surveillance over finance or do we return to, you know, the autonomy that comes to the cash standard. Obviously, I favor the latter, but I don't actually know what's going to happen. So here's a follow-up question. And this is not from a listener, but what would happen? Let's just say that the U.S. mandated that every single stable coin holder is KYC'd on every single hop.

What would be the second order effects there? Like, who are the winners? Who are the losers? I just don't think the defy economy, the crypto economy, works in that case. If you have to determine who all the holders of stable coins are, which, by the way, over 100 million active addresses hold stable coins today. Stable coins are settling trillions of dollars a year. somehow figuring out how to KYC all those people, especially global user base.

I mean, I think that's, you'd require somehow global coordination over IDs and KYC and opting into the standard. I think that would be immensely difficult. And then you wouldn't be able to do any kind of pooled product. So I think defy at that point doesn't work. You basically have lit defy and dark defy, right?

Like that's kind of what would happen. I think the appeal of stable coins, basically vanishes if in order to use the stable coin you have to report your identity and various other types of metadata to the issue or effectively to the U.S. government, I think that kind of destroys the value profit stable coins at that point. Well, you wouldn't have to do this in every jurisdiction, right? So I think you'd just end up in a place where there's two defy ecosystems. There's the one as we know it today, which would exist in places like Singapore and elsewhere.

There would be almost like a regulatory competition to get some of that, you know, activity, I would think. And then you'd have this fully surveilled, like, permission defy, which is just not that interesting. I also wonder if you would have privacy coins catch a narrative in a world like that, where advances in ZK technology could actually play towards the proliferation of just, like, net new primitives to allow people to interact with some of these platforms. Yeah, I mean, I think you need massive international coordination over the new stable coin KYC standard. And I just don't know if you're going to get that in today's world where things are becoming more uncoordinated, where the U.S.'s grasp on all of the sort of like relevant institutions is waning. So, yeah, pragmatically, I just don't see how this would happen. Agreed. So there was something very strange afoot in Miami, which I have to tell you about.

Yeah, you told me a little bit about this, but I can't get over it. Okay, so it's a very bizarre story. It's disturbing but also very funny, so I have to share it with you. So my friend Megan Nyvald, she's actually a sort of a crypto-twitter celebrity. She runs the brand for an exchange called Bingax. she was accosted the other day on the streets of Brickle, which is a neighborhood in Miami, by a young man on a scooter who was insistent on seeing her feet.

What? And as it turns out, this isn't the first time that this man has struck. So he's apparently going around Brickle on a scooter demanding that young women show him their feet. He just walks up to him and says, can I see your feet? Yeah, she even took a video of this guy and he was just repeating feet, feet, feet.

She captured the video of him doing that. And then there's all these Facebook groups where people are saying, yeah, this is a foot guy going around. Bricle asking to see feet. Was he like a 350 pound former head coach of the New York Jets? That's an NFL reference that I don't get. Oh, come on, you don't get that? Rex Ryan with the. foot fetish, come on.

Now, look, this is very serious. Okay, you can't, I think it's a form of harassment. You can't just, you know, ask to see people's feet. He's like a scrawny white guy in his early 20s. Yeah, you can't be, can't be doing that. No, you can't. I don't think it's legal. And local news is reporting on it.

Megan did a, she was interviewed by the local news. So, wow. I have a suggestion on how we can capture the brickle foot bandit. That's what I'm calling him. Okay. I think we should set up a sting operation. Okay. So my idea is put up posters around Miami for a phony, like, a foot pageant and say that there are judges needed.

Great idea. And I think that'll lure him in. and probably other people will show up too but especially this guy it sounds like you're getting ready for a big party yeah there's a lot of weird people down in my I think there's a lot of foot enthusiasts out there and I think we should capture him in like an oversized butterfly

nut and I don't know what we would do with him at that point but is he committing crimes is this any illegal type of behavior I mean it I don't know it seems borderline illegal you can't just go around asking to see people's feet. It seems pretty unsettling. It's very unsettling.

It's very bizarre. Anyway, if you have any information as to the whereabouts of the foot bandit, let us know. You know where that doesn't happen? Where's that? Boston. Like, you know, you're basically living in a colder place, right?

So you're not going to get that element. You don't have the same access to feet. That's right. There's a lot of boots being worn. So anyway, if you know, if you've seen this guy or has he's harassed you Brink Nation you let us know because we're compiling a dossier on this man

it's where you come for the hard hitting investigations this podcast yeah I mean I just like can't stop thinking about it it's so completely bizarre very strange so that's that's your local news update all right so one more here did you say this WBTC

is there's something going on with the signers so like Justin Sun is now getting involved in WBT. It's a whole kerfuffle on Twitter. But, you know, people are looking at that and saying that's probably not the best type of arrangement if you have Justin Sun involved in minting of a product, which tend to agree with. But the other interesting byproduct was a coinbase looks like they're announcing CBBT. So Coinbase Bitcoin, a new wrapped Bitcoin product for Ethereum Defi.

That's actually a great idea for them. That'll be on the base blockchain, you think? Yeah, that'll be on base. Yeah, I mean, I would expect that to instantly win. I mean, if it's Coinbase versus Justin Sun, you know, I don't think it's much of contest. Yeah, Coinbase has obviously a different business model to bring to bear there versus BitGo. And I don't really know what Justin Sun's business model is. But, you know, WBTC was the market leader for a long, a long time.

They really had a huge early lead. and they seem to be wandering it. Now, I don't know if it's the best business per se, right? Because it's not like they capture a custody fee on WBTC, so you could argue it's maybe just more of a headache for them to administer it and maybe they just end up focusing more on the custody business. Yeah, I think there's a redemption fee. That's it, right?

That's it. So, yeah, unless you're, and people tend to redeem in huge, huge size there. So I don't think you make that much money on the redemption fee. Well, congrats to Coinbase on the launch. It's very exciting and we'll be tracking that. So I think that's it for the week. Everybody have a safe and healthy weekend and we will see you on Monday.