The Wolf Of All Streets - 60 Mins. FUDs Crypto, El Salvador To Back Off Bitcoin? | Crypto Town Hall

Episode Date: December 9, 2024

Crypto Town Hall is a daily X Spaces hosted by Scott Melker, Ran Neuner & Mario Nawfal. Every day we discuss the latest news in crypto and bring the biggest names in the space to share their insight. ►►TRADING ALPHA READY TO TRADE LIKE THE PROS? THE BEST TRADERS IN CRYPTO ARE RELYING ON THESE INDICATORS TO MAKE TRADES. USE CODE ‘2MONTHSOFF’ WHEN VISITING MY LINK.  👉 https://tradingalpha.io/?via=scottmelker  ►► JOIN THE FREE WOLF DEN NEWSLETTER, DELIVERED EVERY WEEK DAY! 👉https://thewolfden.substack.com/    ►► OKX Sign up for an OKX Trading Account then deposit & trade to unlock mystery box rewards of up to $10,000!  👉  https://www.okx.com/join/SCOTTMELKER ►►NGRAVE This is the coldest hardware wallet in the world and the only one that I personally use. 👉https://www.ngrave.io/?sca_ref=4531319.pgXuTYJlYd ►►THE DAILY CLOSE BRAND NEW NEWSLETTER! INSTITUTIONAL GRADE INDICATORS AND DATA DELIVERED DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX, EVERY DAY AT THE DAILY CLOSE. TRADE LIKE THE BIG BOYS. 👉 https://www.thedailyclose.io/   ►►NORD VPN  GET EXCLUSIVE NORDVPN DEAL  - 40% DISCOUNT! IT’S RISK-FREE WITH NORD’S 30-DAY MONEY-BACK GUARANTEE. PROTECT YOUR PRIVACY! 👉 https://nordvpn.com/WolfOfAllStreets    Follow Scott Melker: Twitter: https://twitter.com/scottmelker   Web: https://www.thewolfofallstreets.io   Spotify: https://spoti.fi/30N5FDe   Apple podcast: https://apple.co/3FASB2c   #Bitcoin #Crypto #Trading The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own and should in no way be interpreted as financial advice. This video was created for entertainment. Every investment and trading move involves risk. You should conduct your own research when making a decision. I am not a financial advisor.  Nothing contained in this video constitutes or shall be construed as an offering of financial instruments or as investment advice or recommendations of an investment strategy or whether or not to "Buy," "Sell," or "Hold" an investment.

Morning, everybody. Happy Monday. Obviously, we have a lot to talk about this morning. 60 Minutes obviously did a piece yesterday highlighting Fairshake, Ripple, and crypto's influence on the recent election. Some saying it's positive, some saying it was pure FUD and negative. Definitely worth digging into. Other major news stories regarding Bitcoin, of course, we have MicroStrategy acquiring 21,550 Bitcoins from December 2nd to December 8th. In six days, bought a couple billion more worth of Bitcoin, obviously never stopping and will continue to follow this pattern for as long as

humanly possible. Now owns 2%, I believe, of Bitcoin supply and microstrategy. That's a large number. We can also talk about whether that is a good or a bad thing. There's another similar story that US spot Bitcoin ETF surpassed Satoshi's estimated 1.1 million Bitcoin holdings, which is also astounding considering that they launched less than a year ago. El Salvador to scale back Bitcoin dreams to seal 1.3 billion IMF deal. Definitely an interesting story there. Riot platforms, much like MicroStrategy now, raising a convertible senior note of 500 million to buy more Bitcoin marathon also did that. So a ton of Bitcoin news today. Let's start with 60 Minutes.

Obviously, they interviewed Brad Garlinghouse from Ripple, who has said already that he was edited in a, I guess we'll call it an unfair light to present a narrative. John Reed Stark, who's been on this show many, many times, former head of SEC enforcement, was also highlighted. And let's just say that his clips were scathing. He's called the crypto industry a scurb. Dave Tao, we talked about this this morning on the finance spaces. Maybe just give us the quick rundown on 60 Minutes here. Yeah. Good morning, folks. Good morning. Thanks for having me, Scott.

So, by the way, I don't know if this piece was leaked in terms of it coming prior to. I didn't see any announcement about this. Sometimes you get some advance notice about 60 Minutes pieces that are going to be particularly interesting and kind of drive a stake in the ground. But this, to my knowledge, did not get leaked or we didn't get an advance warning of it. And the piece was, I ahead and throw shade on the crypto industry's influence in the election, essentially that it bought an election. One thing that we didn't talk about, it wasn't a particularly gargantuan amount of money that the industry went ahead and raised or fair shake went ahead and raised and put towards the election, especially if you consider how many races it went ahead and participated in.

But that being said, you know, it had a clear message. I think, you know, everybody on this space agrees that the message is a positive message in terms of what crypto can do for lots of, you know, lots of different businesses, particularly, you know, financially related, payments related. And the, you know, and it's not as if the piece was in any way even-handed in terms of saying lots of industry groups go ahead and raise money and support candidates that they want to go ahead and push forward with an agenda. I think it was selectively edited. Garlinghouse came off as really a prince, I must say, even with the pieces that they edited. You know, he didn't lose his cool at any point in time. Very well spoken, you know, incredibly well credentialed. And the, you know, other than crypto buying an election, which I don't think is

necessarily the case, but crypto did show up for the first time in an election as a major agenda item and did have, you know, an effect or did have success, which I think is, you know, generally great. John Reed Stark, you know, said what he always says, like a broken record. They gave him a lot of airtime to say the same stuff. It was more aggressive even than I guess we hear him sort of in our echo chamber when he comes on. But calling all crypto a scourge and saying it has no utility at all was even an aggressive stance for him, by the way. You know his general refrain better than I do, so I will defer to that. And then the only other backup that the journalist, the host could go ahead and pull was Jamie Dimon once upon a time, you know, going ahead and saying that.

But, you know, no, no, no mention about the fact that Jamie Dimon, you know, hasn't said much lately. And there's been a lot of change since the last time Jamie Dimon went ahead and said something like that. No mention of fact, Jerome Powell recently went ahead and explicitly called it, you know, close to at least Bitcoin, close to gold. So I, you know, it's CBS, 60 Minutes, generally left leaning, you know, owned by Paramount. Paramount recently sold, but not yet closed the transaction to Skydance. Paramount's ownership, Sherry Redstone, not particularly happy with other stuff relating to left-leaning agenda items on CBS-related stations and other Paramount-owned properties.

Skydance, Larry Ellison's son, may go ahead I saw it very much as being a hit piece against the industry, i.e., you know, these money-grubbing folks want to go ahead and influence an election, and essentially they bought an election. And I thought, you know, for folks that watch 60 Minutes other than me, those other folks are likely not particularly educated on crypto, and their takeaway was, you know, crypto went ahead and bought an election, which is not good. Yeah, Dave, we talked about this this morning. I generally agree with that take.

But, you know, on the silver lining side, I mean, crypto was featured on 60 Minutes. And I think that most people who watch 60 Minutes probably already understand that every other industry, including Wall Street and pharmaceuticals and such, all do this exact same thing. And that our elections are driven by fundraising and by industries getting involved. And so they're playing the game, right? The crypto industry, for the first time, to your point, stepped up and had the resources and the motivation to play the political game as that game exists can't change it so to go in and try to make sure that uh fair policy is created shouldn't be a bad thing carlo

you had your hand up yeah i watched it and the frustrating thing from my perspective is yeah i get it that it's hard to get all the nuances of the debate and the complexities of crypto in a 15 minute segment. But I think it is, I just think it is really disingenuous to suggest that the crypto sector has essentially purchased politicians to change policy, when it is so obvious that that is what every other major sector of the economy does. TradFi has been doing this. To not even mention why Bitcoin was born in the first place and what it was a response to is just, frankly, irresponsible journalism. John Stark is John Stark. I respect John. I understand his position. But it's really easy to float that narrative when you say that

courts have made it abundantly clear that these are securities. Well, courts are boxed in by precedent. And if courts are forced to have to evaluate cryptocurrency based on the Howey test, which is an antiquated test for an entirely new asset class, they have no other option but to defer to precedent. The only way that's going to change is if we get meaningful legislation or if we get the Supreme Court to overturn Howey as it applies to digital assets. So it would have been nice to see maybe Paul Graywald up there from Coinbase to maybe bring the other side of the court battle on crypto. And maybe it would have been helpful to sort of balance the approach. But

I agree with you, Scott, a net positive, because there is no denying, and I think it backfired for 60 minutes, there is no denying that digital assets in the cryptocurrency sector are now a policy player in DC, and they are shaping the political narrative. What's good for TradFi is good for crypto. And even in his assault on crypto, John Reed Stark made it very clear that he believes that the American voters have given a mandate to Donald Trump and this administration to take a much more positive view on crypto and to end the SEC's regulation by enforcement. He did say that. And he also said that there is no such thing as a voter who's going to vote anti-crypto or send money in anti-crypto.

And it's just a losing political opinion. So they did slide that in. You have to imagine they spent hours with him and with Garlinghouse. And neither of the things that they chose, you know, they were playing a narrative. But I mean, David, you guys both put it well. They said they wanted to make sure that people knew that crypto influenced the election, and that crypto is bad, because those are the two things that were highlighted in that 12 minute segment. Go ahead. Yeah, I mean, the fact that they didn't acknowledge or talk about

Operation Chokepoint, and you know, what was going on and why crypto felt it's so important to get involved electorally is also i would say it's amusing but it's it's infuriating because the reasons are there the fact that they ignored that uh the ftx you know and and the fact that that the fcc met with ftx and the ftx was offshore yada yada yada effectively proving that that the policy the sec has had has been counterproductive and encouraged a lot of the problems. Ignoring all the relative money laundering and, in fact, recent prosecutions or suits against TD and others, which dwarf the size of what's gone on in crypto. There's just so many things that they ignored. I basically just think of it as 60 Minutes is no longer journalism. It really isn't.

It's infotainment that's agenda-driven. And why should we be surprised? The last time we saw a financial piece at 60 Minutes that was as outrageously bad as this one was Michael Lewis on Flash Boys when he made all sorts of things and all sorts of statements that have been debunked. It made for great fiction. And I think a movie is coming out soon, finally. But, you know, effectively talking about high frequency trading in a way that kicked off an entire wave of mentioning high frequency trading, you know, traders as those dastardly people that are ruining the economy in fiction. Meanwhile, I think at this point, it's pretty clear history shows that the people involved have created a lot of liquidity and a lot of benefit to retail. And, you know, we could talk

about it. And I know a lot of people who listen to this are going to call me crazy for that. And, you know, great. You know, let's get some controversy. I'm happy to discuss that with anybody. But, you know, when you do infotainment and you ignore things and you can bias effectively, you have to ask yourself why. And the agenda is very clear. I mean, you know, there are people who are disrupted by crypto. There's an entire wave of innovation coming. And that wave of innovation is going to be net good for the economy and for the average human being. But it's going to be terrible for people who have made money based on inefficiency in the market. And it really is that simple. And those are the current advertisers for 60 Minutes. So I guess we shouldn't be surprised.

One thing I was going to say, I was actually going to go into some numbers because it's helpful to kind of get some real context. This is part of my orange filling. But if you actually start looking at some data, banks in the United States spent nearly a trillion dollars on advertising last year. That's a lot of money, guys. That's a lot of advertising for a dying industry whose entire business model is arson, as Jon Stewart would say that is that is their bread and butter guys are we really going to ask the poor dying corporate media to fight against the hand that feeds them i think we are asking too much from people that are dying but john is just not done the piece at all then right i mean does that does that at all then? Does that imply that their advertisers said, hey, we need a hit piece on crypto comes, you don't think they know who their

advertisers are? This is how it works. This is the game. It's product placement. They are scaring old boomers away from this because I think they realize, because who else watches it? You know, I was going to make a David Towell joke, but outside of David Towell and the boomers, nobody really watches 60 Minutes anymore. This just made them relevant again for like two minutes. And there's a really well-known effect that some of you youngins, the shitcoiners may not know about. But us old folk, Dave and I know, it's called the Streisand effect. By the way, the Streisand effect is real.

And right now, there's somebody that watched that and said, huh. So it seems like it's growing so fast. And people are so worried about it. Fuck the man. I'm going to bet on this. I'm going to invest in this. And that they get curious about it, they'll learn that the banks control the media. By the way, it's not even controlling directly. It is indirect control through their advertising dollars. And they have a vested interest in crypto staying down, especially Bitcoin. And, you know, John Restark, I don't want to say anything about it, but I bet you that even when he saw the presentation of, cause I've heard him speak before. He was surprised. Yeah. He'll be surprised. He'll be like, you didn't complete my sentences. You didn't let, I would love to hear his thoughts on it because. We tried to get him on the show today, but maybe some another time this week.

But yes, that that was my goal was to get him on just so I can simply say, so how long was your interview? What else did you say? Exactly. Because if you've heard him speak before, he some people will say he speaks from both sides of his mouth. But I consider that nuance. His point is that we need more regulatory clarity.

It's not that we should shut the whole thing down. It's that we need more regulatory clarity. It's not that we should shut the whole thing down. It's that we need more regulatory clarity. And right now, it's a free for all. All kinds of bad things are happening, which is his way of saying that. I just want to, you know, I'm not going to defend the guy because, you know, it's not my place. But I mean, he does tend to be very crypto skeptic. But having been there myself, I understand the thought process, you know, to prevent fraud without having these things deemed as

unregistered securities or without promoting these narratives. Preston, Alex, go ahead, Preston. I mean, the thing about the, can you hear me all right? Yeah, you sound great. Perfect. The thing about the securities point, this was true. Like if you were talking about this in 2018, when Jay Clayton was running the show, the indications were that the courts were going to find that tokens were securities because we didn't have any precedence. The reality now is that that's not the case anymore because we have two big rulings, one out of the District of Columbia or the DDC in the Binance case regarding the secondary sales of BNB, one out of the Southern District of New York in

relation to secondary sales of XRP. And also, there's a guy named Lewis Cohen, he's a partner at Cahill. And he wrote a book length treatment on the subject where he went through every single appellate decision about the Howey test. And he determined that the underlying subject matter wasn't a security in every single case but that the transactions or the transactions themselves at least as primary transactions in those arrangements were capable of being securities so really what to say well it's all securities like john reed stark has done um you know that's not what crypto doesn't crypto doesn't think so the courts currently are kind of split on the question and ultimately where we want to wind up is not this regulatory free-for-all where anyone can do anything at

all times. What we want is a consumer protection framework. I think if you talk to any lawyer who's active in the space, what they want is they want consumer protection. And so the way that we do that is by getting sensible consumer protection regulation. And that's what people have been calling for for years. So there is a bit of dishonesty in the treatment of crypto. And the fact is, the reason crypto got involved in this election wasn't because we weren't regulated, right? It was because we were incorrectly regulated. We were regulated in such a way that made doing business impossible, whereas the rest of the world has regulations, which make doing business very possible, rest of the world has regulations which make doing business very possible right within a regulated framework that has strong consumer

protections alex yeah i mean i think you know we're i think there's a lot of folks and like i'm i'm listening to carlo talk about you know the dying financial industry i think it's a lot of folks and like, I'm, I'm listening to Carla talk about, you know, the dying financial industry. I think it's a little bit of an exaggeration to say that like banks and the trad fi industry are dying or going anywhere. I mean, these guys are doing more and more business. Like the issue is that the overall financialization pie of the entire world, and especially in the U S and the Western world is continuing to grow pretty substantially. So they're not, none of that stuff is going anywhere, but this is definitely like, you know, look, this election was the big blowback push pitch from the industry on it. You're going to see a lot of pushback, but fundamentally, I think when you see these news stories and the million

things, it's less about it being a conspiracy and it's more of just like the fixed mindset of uh institutionalists right like people do not go work for 60 minutes or npr uh or you know any of these like very established especially you know like old trusted brand media orgs because they're interested or because they think that like the institutions that we have now for reporting these kinds of things and like providing structure are bad. Like sure, they're suspicious of the big banks in certain ways, but you know, they understand the type of corruption and problems that those people bring. They don't understand the types of problems and corruption that new people bring. They don't understand the types of problems and corruption

that new things bring. Because at the end of the day, everything has corruption and problems to it, right? This is part of the reason we're such a backlash against tech starting in the mid, you know, 2010s and things is they thought they understood the problems with tech. But then like when they got convinced that it was Facebook that made Donald Trump win the election, all of a sudden it was like, Oh God, there's all these additional threats that we don't understand. It doesn't work in the way that we think it does.

They're comfortable with the existing banking system because they understand how it's fucked up. And so it's really, it's not like this giant conspiracy of things. It's like a deep emotional reaction to stuff. And you see it on the flip side when you have like the disruptor people too right like you have a bunch of fucking people who get rugged in crypto scams and not even just crypto scams that's been going on for years

with gold and all these other things where they get rugged and they get scammed because they are so anti-establishment that they ignore even the good warnings from the establishment, right? It's a brand issue. It's the, well, this is what my identity is. Like, here's how I do anything. So like, if the other side says something, it must be bad. It must be wrong. And I think it's just kind of that exact same thing you see playing out with the institutionalists

and, you know, established media these days. David? Yeah, I don't think – Jen Albin is in our audience. I don't think journalists necessarily see financial stuff as partisan. I don't think it's like other agendas that go on in policy and politics, but I could be wrong. I was just wondering, the reason I raised my hand actually is because I was wondering if you guys spoke last week about Elizabeth Warren's control over the other two picks to the SEC commissioners. I'm just curious, Scott, if you have a thought, Dave Weisberger,

if you have a thought on that that hasn't yet been discussed and what kind of influence, what kind of change that could bring, what kind of acrimony that might go ahead and stir up. I'll let Dave jump on that. I'm sorry, I missed it. I was just trying to, I actually was reading John Reed Stark's post from yesterday. He really wanted you to talk about carolyn crenshaw i think is that right david oh it's like his trigger word it's not a bit of trigger i mean you know when somebody is in a position in government

where her personal agenda is literally supposed to not be there. The SEC is not supposed to choose winners and losers. And they lie, make obvious mistakes, and put out a dissent that had so many flaws in it that effectively basically said, the courts shouldn't matter. Nothing should matter. The data shouldn't matter. What matters is the fact that I hate this. That person is not competent to be in that position. It's that simple. I mean, it's not about her as an individual. I don't know why she decided this was something that she was going to hate so much. But it is what it is. I mean, you know, there's very little that I can say. I was just saying, you know, it's funny that John Reed Stark, I actually agree with a lot of his

stuff. I thought we were convivial. I just found out he blocked me on X. So, you know, take that for what you will. I guess he doesn't like, you know, reasoned, non-name-calling, you know, convictions. But his most recent post where he talks about Paul Atkins, he and I agree on Paul. I think Paul will be a great SEC chairman, and I am looking forward to that. But as far as Carolyn Crenshaw is concerned, there has to be a Democrat. And remember, there will be a Democrat in her spot. That is the rules. So it's not about partisanship. It's just about somebody who's actually competent, who understands that you need to balance and be thoughtful and not pick winners and losers and try to actually get regulation as opposed to counterproductively pushing it all offshore. I wish that were the case. I mean, I and for a long time, I think maybe the SEC was or I

was too naive to know that they weren't. But I think the SEC was not a winners and losers picker regulatory agency. I mean, I've had experiences as an investor and a pretty active investor in other regulatory agencies at the federal government level, and they do pick winners and losers. And they know they have to, in certain instances, pick winners and losers. But, you know, in the case of Warren, you know, this is deeply, I mean, Scott, you're involved heavily in the race, in the election. It is deeply personal for her, maybe existential for her too, as a lawmaker. My history with her goes back, and I don't say that on a personal level, goes back way back. I'm a bankruptcy guy. I'm a distressed guy. So, you know, she was a bankruptcy professor at Harvard Law School many, many, many moons ago.

She will have you believe or her supporters will have you believe that she was a corporate bankruptcy professor, but she was not a corporate bankruptcy professor at all, except for having to teach chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code for part of her class but she was largely a scholar that related to personal bankruptcy so she was really concerned about the plight of whether genuinely or not of people that you know get hammered by medical bills and have to file for personal bankruptcy or other non-dischargeable debts in bankruptcy like student loans. Those were her crusades. She was not a corporate specialist. I think that cryptocurrency and banking and securities matters really is that to her. She

is concerned about the little person. That's where her agenda always starts and ends. Big entities of any kind are always nefarious, I think, in her mind. And so therefore, you know, she just, this is, like I said, I think certainly personal, maybe existential for her. I don't know. We can pivot off 60 minutes on that. And of course, what has taken the regulatory turn here, I think we all agree that regardless of what happens, regardless of what they say, that the regulatory and legislative environment for crypto in the United States is about to improve massively. And we have every indicator that it's nothing but tailwinds. So I write this off as just another sort of a hit piece and that uh it's not going to have i don't think much impact on the

industry i think the next big story is obviously cool could i just say what you need yeah yeah go ahead i don't know if you can see my i didn't oh that's i i see you as a listener so that'll show i thought it was working so i um i just want to say just to close off that topic, because Dave peaked a topic there. If Doge ever gets involved in Bitcoin and crypto companies in Chapter 11, then after all the experience of the different crypto bankruptcies, having intimately been involved from Mt. Gox to Bitfinex, turnaround to all of the different ones. There's actually one simple rule that works. Sell everything as fast as possible to get it

into Bitcoin, distribute everything in Bitcoin, and don't do anything else. Fair take, for sure. I want to talk, and simon you'll be interested and you had some perspective on this as well obviously about this el salvador news uh el salvador to scale back bitcoin dreams to see a 1.3 billion imf deal i think this is really really interesting because when el salvador made bitcoin legal tender obviously the imf and world bank were not particularly happy about it they withheld those loans and said they wouldn't be giving them. We saw the IMF make similar threats to Argentina. Argentina was ready potentially to make Bitcoin legal tender.

And the IMF World Bank came in and said, no, you don't. You don't get a loan if you do something like that. The point I made on the space is this morning, obviously, the difference there is that the currency of El Salvador is the dollar. And that's not the case anywhere else. So El Salvador was in a unique position to make Bitcoin legal tender without the threat of their currency being attacked by the United States or any of these other entities. But regardless, this story being used to say that, of course, you read some of the tapes and, oh,

El Salvador is bowing to the INF. Just to be clear, the only thing I'm reading here regarding Bitcoin is that El Salvador is going to have to not force vendors to take Bitcoin payments, that it will be up to the store. This is a very small concession for a very large loan. And very clear now that El Salvador is in the driver's seat of negotiations with the IMF and World Bank, which they never would have been before. And no country like them has ever been in history. I mean, for those who don't understand the history of the IMF and the World Bank and its relationship to countries like El Salvador all over the world, I recommend you read the book Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein, which explains basically how the IMF and World Bank send in, give predatory loans that they know a country can never pay back and use that to basically keep them beholden to the United States until the end of time. El Salvador may just be the first country in history

to break that cycle. David, you can go ahead. Yeah, I agree. I think Bukele has played the IMF like a fiddle, and I think that that's phenomenal. I really think it shows, listen, regardless of what kind of person he is, what kind of government he runs, country he runs, he did the right thing here. He came out on the right side of this trade. He does not want to be, you know, on an island for forever. He does want to go ahead and eventually integrate back into whatever stupid, you know, traditional world of, you ton of money, needs to go ahead and make some sort of footnote addendum to the policies that he has in order to get back into the good graces of the IMF. But essentially, he's won. He should be laughing all the way to the bank. His trade is still on. His trade will get bigger. And all the power to him. He's

on the right side of history when it comes to this, at least. And I think, you know, the IMF, you know, I've dealt with it in many aspects in my career in terms of distressed and it being a lender of last resort and being a creditor many times. And, you know, it's a pretty weak body, tries to talk really loud, I guess, with the uneducated or the unexperienced, you know, has some important weight. But nevertheless, you know, I think he is definitely one in the situation that he previously was very much on the weaker side, you know, of this back and forth, and he's triumphed. Anyone else have a specific take on what's happening in El Salvador here? I'll come in. Yeah, for those that, you know, the IMF was actually one of the main reasons why I got

into Bitcoin. For those that don't know its background, you know, it was created during Bretton Woods. It took the world off the gold standard in order for the dollar to be tradable for gold and all other currencies to be tradable against the dollar. And then obviously Nixon in 71 reneged on the gold standard and took us to the fiat standard that we're in today. And the IMF, do read the book by John Perkins, Confessions of an Economic Hitman. It is institutionalized terrorism and it files financial weapons of mass destruction and is responsible for many of the covert regime change that we see around the world in cooperation with the CIA. So it is an evil institution inherently. And so Bokele, you know, did a thumbs, you know, a finger up to the IMF.

It's been through the wrong side of the IMF that leads to civil wars, that leads to regime changes, that leads to perpetual debt. And El Salvador was on the dollar standards and bespoke to the monetary policy of the Federal Reserve. The Bitcoin legal tender strategy got a lot of pushback, particularly from the Bank of England and the IMF. I went over to visit Bichelli. And I think one of the real – when the IMF really ratcheted it up is when we were discussing the concept of a Bitcoin bond. And I think that's really symbolic of what we're seeing with micro strategy. When you use the traditional financial products and combine them with Bitcoin, and the world gets to see the impact of some clever financial structuring and Bitcoin. The Bitcoin bond never launched.

It was meant to be a billion dollar bond. There was a lot of predatory action on El Salvador's junk bonds and corporate bonds, sorry, country sovereign bonds around about the time. But we haven't seen the bond, the Bitcoin bonds launched yet. Now, whether we will see it or not is another thing, but that might be part of what the IMF wanted in their negotiation. And the other thing is the ability to force it as legal tender, which actually is a net positive, because when you force a business that has tight cash flows to accept Bitcoin as payment, most of the time they need to cover their expenses, which won't be priced in Bitcoin. And so it leads to a lot of selling pressure on Bitcoin when you force it as legal tender compulsory. And so making it optional,

I think, is actually the route forward. And what are you know what are you going to do arrest businesses for not accepting bitcoin as legal tender um and that takes some of the cell pressure off anyway so maybe the i am the if this is the one thing you had to compromise on uh then this is the one to compromise on um yeah those people were they didn't want to accept it if nobody's coming in and spending anyways it's almost an irrelevance and it's anti-bitcoin ethos anyway so yeah that's right we always talked about that's the most insane thing ever of like i want to force people to accept this thing that's all about having monetary freedom like that's what so yeah if you want to say it's legal if you want to do it great but don't make people do it yeah that makes perfect sense if you want to say it's legal, if you want to do it, great, but don't make people do it.

Yeah, that makes perfect sense. Buzz, you want to take over? Yeah, yeah, for sure. We do have a sponsor today. It's going to be Velo Official. And I just want to put a disclaimer out here before getting started with the AMA, just that Mario's company, IBC, is a company that does incubation, marketing, and advisory for different projects. So not all the sponsors that you're going to see on this show are specifically sponsoring the Crypto Town Hall show. They're working with IBC

specifically, and Crypto Town Hall falls under that umbrella. So with that, I do want to just transition to speaking with Velo here. So Velo, maybe just test your mic and do a little bit of an elevator pitch for exactly what Velo is. Hi, can you hear me okay? Yeah, you sound great. Okay, thanks. Thanks so much for the opportunity to come and share a bit about Velo. Just a short summary of what we do. We're trying to create a financial network that functions as essentially a superhighway

for moving assets seamlessly, focusing on availability of Web3 assets, focusing on speed, affordable costs, and eliminating any intermediaries. We work with different affiliate companies and partners through them, such as Lightnet. We have acquired multiple licenses, including both fiat and non-fiat licenses.

We've introduced innovations approved by global regulatory bodies, such as direct stable point to fiat highways in certain Southeast Asian countries. We're also working with other partners to build virtual banks in several nations, focusing on building an alternative to traditional networks, such as SWIFT or Visa Network, essentially. I love it. And just kicking things off again, can you share your perspective on really what makes this journey with VeloLabs so impactful and kind of how it aligns with your vision specifically on where this fits

into the future of finance? Yeah, just echoing some of the comments that were made earlier in the session, right? I don't think we're envisioning in a, you know, we don't think traditional banks are going to go away anytime soon. But that being said, there are areas, especially within the region that we operate in, that traditional banks fail to serve the market. And that's where we see the solution that we're creating to address some of these issues. That can be both in terms of, for example, moving monies across borders, focusing on the underbanked or underserved banking population within the region. These are something that we're working on.

The other areas that we're focusing is also working with partners who basically tokenize reward assets and bring it into Web3. So those are definitely two really hot topics right now in the sector. Cross-border remittance is certainly one that's come into fold, especially with XRP going crazy the last few weeks. And RWA is definitely a narrative of this cycle. How does Velo actually address the specific challenge of moving assets efficiently? What is the underlying piece there? Yeah, so especially in moving assets across borders, for example, there's a lot of inefficiency that happens.

There's a lot of centralization of what happens. So similar to Ripple, where you have banks that need to have a direct relationship with each other. We provide, basically through our platform ecosystem, provide two parties not to have an existing relationship to move assets through to each other. Specifically, just a real example, right? We're talking about inefficiency in terms of moving,

let's say you want to convert Thai baht into Filipino pesos. You can't do it currently directly between the two currencies. You actually have to convert Thai baht into USD and then USD into Filipino pesos. That obviously basically is two jumps for fees in terms of that and also liquidity. You could have a wide gap in terms of the different exchange rate that happens. we basically provide a way for you to convert directly between the two currencies through our partners license partners that we work with that's one area that we're working in so um i i don't want to kind of go down the path of this, like doing a direct comparison to XRP or Ripple for the entire AMA. But at a high level, how does the remittance product that you guys are working on for cross

border payments differ from what XRP is doing and what Ripple Labs is doing? And is there an improvement there? Or what are the stark differences? I think the main focus that we're doing is not just only remittance, right? It's the end-to-end from remittance to payments as well. So working with, you know, creating an end-to-end supply chain. So remittance is one part, right? So providing sort of FX trading pricing, 24-7 pricing of different assets, not just FX, but also different commodities, including tokenizing gold, for example, they're working with partners. That also allows us to do something, for example, payments, connecting with merchant networks. So

essentially, users can seamlessly move between assets from one currency to another, from one asset to another, and then use that to convert, let's say you currency to another, from one asset to another, and then use that to convert. Let's say you travel to another country, you can convert your assets and then use that for payments in the destination network. Got it. So I assume touching so many assets and sort of end consumer payment networks requires a lot of licensing and a regulatory playbook that you guys are governing by. So can you just kind of touch on the role that licensing is playing with VeloLabs and how you guys are navigating that?

Yeah, so that's actually a very key part. So we're not a new project. We've been working for, you know, several years now, Velo, essentially, through the wider network, we provide essentially a, we act as a technology provider within the ecosystem. And then we have affiliated partners, other companies that acquired these licenses allow us to have that access. So, you know, as I

mentioned earlier, you have this company called Lightnet that we are affiliated with that has all these licenses across that allows them to do all these different services financially. So we are through them essentially have these accesses, you know, cause we envision a world where

every time we touch in terms of traditional finances, you still have to work under the regulatory oversight. And that has been sort of the way we've been tackling this problem. Awesome. And so what I noticed about a lot of your documentation is there's this concept that you guys are writing about called next-gen banking. What would you define as next-gen banking? You know, I think Web3 is a big part of it,

so I don't want to just keep saying the same thing, but essentially what we're trying to do is create this end-to-end, right? So there's a lot of inefficiency that that allows that doesn't allow people to have access to current banking you know for example there's a lot of people um that may have bank accounts but they can't transfer money to other cross-country for example migrant workers in certain countries so having those banking services on your mobile being able to access to credit that doesn't that may not be available to traditional sort of assets based um credit rating so unsecured lending for example could be allowed through our weekly services um you know all these things that use technology uh mobile uh web free um yeah so

for the the end consumer like people who are maybe tuning in, like, like, what are one or two things that this kind of opens up directly for them as in terms of an opportunity? Is it really the the unsecured lending, like stuff that you've already talked about? Or there may be even other larger sort of problems that can solve for the end consumer? So in the short term, we have products in terms of trading. We also are launching through our partners

a merchant network payment option as well. So those are two immediate things that people can come and play with within our ecosystem. In the future, we'll also introduce sort of real-world assets into our network as well. And you touched on a few partnerships that you guys have. Like, can you maybe go into depth on the ones that you've already touched on and perhaps some more partnerships that you guys have? Yeah.

So in terms of blockchain alliances, we've worked with both Stellar and Solana. Solana would be heavily involved in terms of the payment, connecting with merchant networks, allowing people to do payments. We also have real world network, I'm sorry, real assets, such as Securitize,

backed by BackRock, to continue within our network as well. But we also have a partnership in Laos that tokenized gold as well. But we also have a partnership in Laos that tokenized gold as well. Oh, sorry, I was on mute there. I had some issues with the UI here on Twitter. I was in the midst of asking more about the compliance aspect.

So you touched on licenses. Are there other areas of compliance that you guys are looking at while still maintaining a decentralized nature of the product? It's hard to say specifically because different jurisdictions does have different specific regulations that we have to sort of apply to. I don't want to go deep into it, but we do have to work, be creative in terms of solution that we have. We envision with the regime, the government change and potentially a pro-crypto government in the US that might make in terms of the other regulated body within different countries might be more crypto positive.

We may be allowed to be a bit more creative in terms of solution. But currently, there are some limitations. There are some concessions that we have to do in terms of getting product to the market. Got it. And how does the Velo token fit into all of this? What's its utility? What's it used for, etc.? So similar to XRP, it's sort of the asset back within the ecosystem. We also, holders can also get a reduced fee in terms of using product within the ecosystem. So as the ecosystem grows, as we increase more users,

there'll be a natural demand for the Velo tokens. Naturally, they'll push up the natural demand for Velo. And similar, just kind of going back to the Ripple topic, I mean, you mentioned it's relatively similar in terms of the use case of the token is relatively similar to XRP. Is there a stable coin that's being used within the network as well uh we do have our own uh stable credit uh digital credit called usdv

so usd fellow uh within that are used within the ecosystem uh for example if you you come and use our decentralized exchange, that's the pairing that we have with different assets. And is that a stablecoin very similar to USDT, USDC? Is it backed by assets in a bank? What's the structure of that? The way we structure it is digital credit that's backed by assets such as Velo and USDT within the ecosystem. Understood. And when did you guys launch the token? You mentioned that you guys have been around for a while. So the project's been around since 2017. The token was first listed and launched in 2020. Got it. And how has that journey been thus far? Like maybe comment on cycles versus cycles. Like the new government regime really kind of changed the outlook as the run-up with XRP really kind of changed the trajectory of your community.

Like how has it kind of evolved cycle over cycle for you guys? I think with, you know, what we've learned is it just, it's the business that we're in is a infrastructure play. It's a long-term infrastructure play. It takes a lot of patience. So sometimes you have to look through, you sort of have to go through different cycles, but not be too invested into it. You know, we're focusing on building real products.

And that takes time, especially something that touches licenses and working with regulatory bodies. So it's what the learning that we have is just be patient. Some of these products, you know, takes time to build. You're not going to see, and it's complicated. So it does take time. So patience is a key, I think. Eventually, I think there's a lot of benefits that we're trying to bring here. So over the long term, we'll hopefully find some success. And what's an upcoming catalyst? Like we often have a lot of people who are tuning into these shows that are listening to projects and really trying to find the time in their day to really dive into it or look into the token or do some research for themselves. Are there upcoming catalysts for the token or the project that you guys are looking forward to on your roadmap that would really propel people to want to get involved today?

So I think the past few years, we've had a pretty good base of acquiring these licenses that allows us to actually bring products to market and have access to different markets, working, you know, having real partners to work with. I see the past few years as a building block that now has, we now have something that can now go to market and go to market quickly. And as we've demonstrated recently through our partners who have something like a stablecoin to fiat superhighway. So I think the future is quite, you know, I'm quite optimistic about our future. We're now into exciting areas where, you know, there's a wider adoption of crypto or interest in crypto market. Regulatories are more open to work with us.

There's a lot more clarity in certain jurisdiction in terms of licenses that is necessary to operate. We have partners who want to support us. So I think it's working with these partners to come up with exciting new projects to introduce to the market. You mentioned partners again, and there's many partners on your website that we haven't even touched into yet. Two notably that definitely caught my eye were the Stellar Development Foundation and Visa. What are you guys working on with both of those teams, respectively? So in terms of Visa and Stellar, they're both in terms of payments, providing alternative to Swift. I want to say that right now, the exciting part is actually our partnership with Solana.

And that's it in terms of product, in terms of the payment products that we have. I think that within the next few months, that's going to be something that hopefully our community can be excited about. I can't say anything specifically, but definitely within the next few months, you're going to see some big movements in terms of those areas. Well, I won't pry too much on that, but knowing some more details about the payments partnership with Solana would certainly be something I'd be personally interested in. But I'll kind of leave that to your own accord if you'd like to comment further on that. But as we're kind of wrapping up here in the last final minutes, is there any call to action for listeners who are tuning in on what they can get

involved with? Or where can they join the community? What can they do? What do you want to encourage them to get involved in? Yeah, come join our communities to get our latest news. We're definitely at NBL on lookout for the new product that's going to be announced within the next month or so. That can be both in terms of our Twitter page, which is here that I'm using, or you can join in terms of our Telegram group as well.

I'm sure there's a link somewhere that's on the Twitter page as well. Okay, great. Yeah, as we're wrapping up here, I'll try to get something pinned up there where people can find your Telegram. But yeah, I want to thank you guys for joining today. We're wrapping up here. I'll try to get something pinned up there where people can find your telegram. But yeah, I want to thank you guys for joining today.

I'm going to feel free if you wanted to pin anything up as well to pin it up there. But otherwise, I want to thank you for joining. Thank the speakers. I know we still have Dave here as well. So thank you, Dave, for sticking around. And as we're wrapping up, I just want to put out another disclaimer that Mario's company, IBC, has been around since 2017. So they work with some of the best projects and launches while also becoming a namestay for breaking news on acts in politics, Web3, and culture. So if you have a project and you want to be on shows like this, just like Velo, make sure to reach out. You can DM Mario's account.

Mario's in a co-host position here right now if you want to get in touch. The company does incubation, marketing, and some advisory. His team's also hiring for the news team. So all that breaking news that you see on his timeline is done by a professional news team that you can become a part of. There's a new Discord server as well. And I know in there, they're hiring for Discord mods and also some community managers who are a really good opportunity to get involved. But Velo, as we're closing up, any final words?

I'm going to get that pinned post up for you so that people listening in can follow. Nothing new, just come join our community and get excited about what we're doing here within the Web3 space. Excellent. Well, I wish you guys the most success and hopefully we get to speak in a couple months or so

again to see the progress you were able to make. Yeah, thank you for having me here. No problem. Have a great day and everyone have a great Monday. Thank you. Take care, everyone.