The Wolf Of All Streets - Bitcoin BREAKS $85K As The Bear Market Case COLLAPSES

Episode Date: September 21, 2026

Bitcoin surges to $85K as a massive short squeeze wipes out nearly $648M in bearish bets, while falling oil prices push Treasury yields back below 5%. We also discuss the CFTC moving ahead with crypto rules despite the stalled Clarity Act and what the latest regulatory changes could mean for the broader market. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

New from Nespresso. Blend wellness into your coffee routine with a coffee plus range infused with functional benefits. Choose the coffee you love with added B vitamins, like coffee plus B12 to help support immune function, and coffee plus B6 to keep your day moving. Or go with the flow and choose ginseng delight. Our new double espresso with ginseng extract. Whatever lies ahead, don't change your morning. Let your morning change you.

Discover coffee plus on nispresso.com. Bitcoin is back above $85,000, making a new higher high and closing a week above the 50 moving average. For many technical analysts, these are the signs that the bear market case is dead. And all of this happening in context of a very bad week for news. Of course, the Clarity Act failing and the Fed hiking rates. How is Bitcoin rising in the face of all of this bad news and is the new bull market upon us? We're going to discuss that today and much more with Mike, Dave, and special guest who basically has become a regular. Peter, cheer. Let's go.

Good morning, everybody. Happy Macro Monday. And welcome to the show. We're going to bring everybody on right now. We got Peter, Dave, and Mike, Mike, as usual, before we jump into Bitcoin, let's talk morning meeting. What did you guys discuss today? Good morning, yes. We went over this morning. So that's part of reason we were late.

It was me. Anna Wong was kind of pretty strongly pointed out that she thinks the Fed of Reserve might be acting a little too aggressively. She pointed out the FMC has shifted immediately with urgency to get inflation back below 2%. The next statement says, never mind that core PC is entering near a five-year low and declining. Consumers not as strong as it was. her she basically the Fed lowered their unemployment forecast from 4.3% to 4.1% despite hiking rates, which Ina thought was kind of odd. We've had 100-based point rally and 10-year-note yields, which she says equivalent to basically hiking rates, almost 200 basis points in Fed funds.

And she fully expects the rate market to materially, the labor market, to weaken into next year on the back of rate hikes. And she did point out that the hike did add a lot of decent credibility to the Fed. Ira Jersey agreed. He was quite bullish. He's very familiar to me to say that's on the long end. He thinks the long end and the curve will drop in trade well. The curve will continue to flatten. I think some markets price rate.

He based points of hikes into next year is not going to happen. But still thinks the long end is going to do well in the Fed, the curve flattening. And then he did add the fact the Fed increased rates adds a decent amount of credibility. Not much new on stocks. just about how, you know, earnings are off the chart. Audrey Child Friedman pointed out, she's FX,

pointed out this is probably decent for the dollar, at least for the while. Again, the quote, credibility from the Fed, path to least resistance for the dollars up. She expects the yen is more likely

to head towards 160, and it doesn't expect more rate, additional rate hikes from BLJ who just hiked last week. And then me, I pointed out, we have the world's largest, the 40% of the economy, China and U.S. meeting today.

Both leaders have a vested interest in crude oil going lower. We've seen some pretty substantial peaks for a good reason. So I think that's going to be potentially maybe more solidify that $100 is a decent resistance. And also I pointed out if you look at that price of diesel per gallon price of diesel overlay with the five or 10, you know, it yields basically the same. Right now diesel is about $4.93. Last year, it's high as around 530. And the 10 in notes dropped down to $5.95 or so. And then I point out the key thing is a credibility from the Fed.

In London last week, one of the key themes I heard is a lot of people are just loving the concept of getting that 10%, you know, 10% and that 5% in that 10, you know. And the Fed credibility is wonderful, but it also completely reverses all the things that really made me bullish, things like gold last year. First of all, the Fed reserves are easing when bond yields are telling them to hike. And now we have the Fed hiking. And with, you know, 5% on the 10%. That's a headwind for all metals, particularly gold. silver, platinum, bladium, copper, copper's a sock bucket. And then I lay low a little bit on Bitcoin.

I figured if Dave, Dave, a chance to beat on me on that one. Before we get to Bitcoin, though, let's talk about the Fed, because we haven't had the opportunity to talk about the hike. And Dave, you and I were very, very adamant, no chance that Warsh Hikes, he did. Yeah. I think this is, this may be the most classic case of something I've been saying on this show for years, you know, the old, where all the real stuff's here. And I picked this background for a reason, right?

You know, it's hike the short rate to a level that doesn't really do a whole lot, but be ready to push liquidity out where the hell you need if something breaks. It really is that simple. And the fact, Mike said it twice in that, in that, in that the whole notion is restore credibility in order to keep the yield curve from exploding vertical. And the problem is that the cause for the yield curve going vertical, the real cause is the fact that we have an unpayable back debt burden at the U.S. governmental level. And that is getting worse and worse. And so the real question is, is, you know, practically he added $100 billion to the deficit by raising rates.

That's just a fact. That's the math of $40 trillion and a quarter of a percent. And we are finance on the short end. And so it's not like it's not a direct, it's not like it's a direct thing. And that's really the needle he's trying to thread. I thought that he would understand that it's silly, that Anna Wong is right, and it was a dumb move. But also politically remember something. What's the worst thing that could happen to the Fed?

The Fed chair dissents on an interest rate move, and it wouldn't have just been him. I mean, Waller would have dissented. It probably wanted a dissent as well. but they said we need unanimity because that's the only way that people will believe we are credible. So basically, like anything else, it's a narrative. So what of the markets reacted? Well, they've reacted exactly as if what I'm saying is true. They're saying, yeah, you know, we had the entire, and you can go look it up.

The entirety of the internet bubble from the beginnings to the end where it rates that are higher than are today. The long end was higher. The short end was higher. It's not a big deal. I mean, you can have asset rallies during this period of time. And that is something that is that people always overlook. Now, when you talk about the gold, that's a bit different. Gold doesn't, you know, doesn't, if anything, it's a carry cost, right, for storage, et cetera. There's no, there's no way to loan gold and get lease rates that are,

or can deal with it. So, yeah, there is definitely a marginal drag on gold. Bitcoin's the opposite. You can get yield on Bitcoin and the carry costs are really, really low. You can. I mean, We can talk about how Bitcoin as collateral in the world can be used. It's at least enough to matter. I want to get the UNAs take on the Fed before we move to Bitcoin. No, no, good point. So anyway, the point being that it's all about narrative. It's all about credibility.

And both stories that came out last week were about that narrative. And those narratives are why markets are doing what they're doing. Yeah, Peter, I do want your take. I just want to say it's interesting that we talk about the credibility of the Fed because if you listen to Trump's remarks, it was just hilarious. He said, we talked, and I said it was totally okay for him to vote that way because everybody was going to, but also I expect rates to come down, but also I want the Fed to be independent. I mean, it's just like.

So one of the things I feel this whole notion of credibility is just kind of stupid. It's kind of, I feel like the whole economist community is not credible, right? If you look at this, if you look at other sources of data, you pick up truflation, You can look at other things, right? There is signs that the inflation is not that high. It hasn't been that high, right? A lot of, I think, what's going on is we're still playing catch-up to inflation that was missed back in 2021, 2022, and in the data.

So one, I would look at these alternatives. I'm kind of disappointing the task force. Two, I only see two main sources of inflation. One is because of the war, right? Without the war, we would not have some of the higher oil prices and not have some of the higher diesel. I'm really confused how you do anything to help that. situation by hiking rates. And the other part is the AI and compute bills, right? The compute guys are

coming or people are coming, the companies are coming. They're thinking they're going to make 10x, 20x, 30x, 25 bits, 50 bits, 100 bips is not going to slow them down. I feel like we should have spent more time arguing that the credible thing was to leave rates alone, that we are making traditional economic sort of mistakes by hiking into this. I think they caved in. I think they will regret this. I think it was a dumb move. And I don't think in the end it's going to control the long end of the yield curve. The long end of the yield curve can be completely driven by supply. And if that keeps continuing, it's going to go higher. If I'm right and you get some compute spend slow down because there's a little bit more question about whether they're truly getting

that value, then I think you can see long yields come down. And I'm slightly more optimistic about the war. And I kind of agree with Mike that we're kind of at peak oil prices, probably peak concern about diesel when my mother knows about diesel prices, you know, like, okay, everyone's now talking about this a little bit too much. I think there's plenty of room for this to reverse and the Fed to have to cut rate sooner than, you know, another hike. Well, isn't that the idea is that people are calling it sort of a bullish hike because they left a lot of room for it to just be one hike and then to cut later, right? I just think also with the lack of forward guidance, nobody really knows what to expect

so everybody's guessing, which is probably intentional. Yeah, and I do think he is going to start getting people to focus on other sources of data, like just what else is out there that we can read and look at. Again, I look at Zillow real-time rent, things like. that that are out there, they're available. Just feel like we're stuck in like 1990 with a lot of the data in terms of how we collected, how we process it, how we think about it. And so many other ways have moved on, right? There's so much other potential source of information that we just seem to ignore, at least the Fed seems to ignore. And if they ignore it, then we're all allowed to ignore it. I think they've got to start pulling this in and coming up with more credible information. To be honest, you know, everyone talks about non-farm payrolls. Most people not just close their eyes, right? It seems to be a random guess. Nobody knows what the jobs. I mean, they revised those a month later when you're not looking regardless, right? Yeah.

So I think if we are going to spend any amount of time, energy and effort on stuff at this administration, it's to get better data that we can all react to more, you know, precisely. But so, yes, I don't think they should have hiked. I don't think it's going to do much for anything. Mike, do you think they should have hiked? Well, they had to. That's the key thing. The thing that matters now is whether we like it or not.

It's what's the opportunity from a market positioning trading standpoint? And the first thing I thought is, it was my sense in London from speaking. Actually, some people I used to cover 20 years ago, that 10%, that 5% in the 10 years are just too high. And I just hear people saying, waving that in. It's a question how much leverage and you put on the duration. So they help provide that. But also, remember what they're doing, is they're hiking on the back of something that's typically temporary? Energy crisis.

The difference that's happening with this energy crisis is happening with the world's former a largest demand pool source of energy, now a supply force, in record-setting supply from all the way from Canada, all the way down in Argentina, U.S., and we have a vested interest in this government for prices getting lower. At the same time, President Z has a vested interest in prices going lower, and he's, that country, China was the largest incremental demand source. It was, but they're starting to decline in switching the EB.

So I look at this as the thing I've been wrong on forever, load up on. That's the 10.0.5% that duration. Yes, it's been wrong on it, for a first, But there's certain times that you don't say thank you, but hiking into an environment like this means the next big move is going to be the cut when markets go down. And that's the bottom line. It's nothing really matters. I had to update Mike Outlook right now. We are all stock puppets.

Bitcoin's one of them. It's obviously doing well, but gold's completely stock plucked. But the number one is copper, and that's the same as the stock market. The key thing is we have to, if you put in any position now, you have to say, okay, if you expect bond yields go down, well, stock market keeps going up as a problem. But also, the part of that factor is we have just got to a point for a little while the average, the price of crude oil in this country is running double the cost of production in this country. That's not going to last. It's just the question of how long. And I've seen that in supply flow.

It's just massive surpluses of supply in U.S. Canada. Obviously, a problem in the Middle East, which would be worked on. But these things always cycle down. It's just the fact that we have 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs. This is a sign of what's happening. So to me, this is the opportunity. the bond that's going to kick in. And by the end of the year, that bottom line is for any risk asset, from copper to Bitcoin, the cryptos to gold is a risk asset. The trades two times

of volatile S&B a 500. That stock market has to go up. And I look at the best risk reward opportunity would be that 5% and the 10, you know. So I'm going to push back a bit if I can, Mike. Just and again, I think. Please push back. I want to ask you one question. Then you push back on is. You mentioned the number one issue for long bond is supply. Number one, we have a government in one seal's lower. My history of trade in long bonds is the number one issue is inflation and inflation expectations. So I think right now there's a global issue. I'm not going to completely push back, but I would much rather own long-dated hyper-scale or debt than U.S. Treasuries. So I think that's something Besson has missed a little bit. So I'd rather own LQD, for example, than

TLT. So I think that's one other reason you don't get that same kind of rip effect in the 10-year or 30-year treasury is a lot of clients, I think, especially globally, are saying, I would rather pick up the incremental yield from a Microsoft, a meta, a Google, and Amazon than the Treasury. So I can get six-some-odd percent if I'm going out the curve in some of these, you know, hyperscalers. And again, I don't like the project finance ones, but the ones that are really backed by the Google's, alphabets, Amazon's, you know, Meadows, Microsoft. I would much rather own that to Treasury. So I think that's one thing that you're going to see Treasury yields are up against that supply. I do think that supply will come down, but I think that's where you'll get the most

bang for the buck, because not only will you get overall yields rallying, you'll get credit spreads coming in a lot. So I don't disagree that I want to be nibbling at, you know, fixed income here, but I much prefer owning credit than treasuries. And I think that's kind of gone global, especially as sovereign yields are moving up across the globe. No one in foreign countries needs to own treasury. I think treasuries went from this gold standard of safety to, man, it's just another thing out there. And I think credit can do outperform. So I'm not completely pushing back. I don't mind duration.

I just would express it differently. So I have three points. Point number one, the only sock puppet that was demonstrated last week is the Federal Reserve is a sock puppet to the bond market, full stop. They did what they had to do, et cetera. Second, there's no scenario in my mind that sees the long end of the curve coming in and assets like Bitcoin in particular and probably gold rallying. In fact, the sole reason that Bitcoin was falling was because people are saying, oh, rates are going up. That direction changes. Now all of a sudden, that direction matters quite a bit.

Because remember, the reason that rates were going up in the first place is we're printing more dollars. The third is as the loan, no, I'm not loan because Scott is kind of with, is Scott and I is with me, but the loan of the three of us, monetist on the panel. You guys talk about inflation as if consumer prices are the only thing that you're measuring. That's a bunch of horseshit. Consumer prices are being impacted by the fact that we have the greatest technological revolution in the history of humanity going on, which is a massive deflationary force. And yet prices are still going up.

Why? They're going up because we're printing more and more money. And so is Japan. And so is the EU, and so effectively and certainly so is China. So effectively the entire world is printing more and more money. so the prices of shit is going up in terms of the pieces of paper that they're printing. The only reason we don't see it in consumer prices is because of massive deflationary forces bringing the cost of things down.

And by the way, AI is particularly important here because services is the one thing that could not be affected by technology in the past. But guess what? Many, certainly all knowledge-based services are now coming down in price. And so all of this is a very big deal. If you think that law firms aren't going to get more efficient and doctors aren't going to get more efficient from AI and other things aren't going to get more efficient, now the prices aren't going to come down. Those are printing more dollars. So that's by pushback on inflation and bonds. And in that scenario, assets that have provable scarcity and gold does have provable scarcity until we find an asteroid to mine are going to be a better play.

and ignoring that fact and looking at charts and squiggles, well, you know, you got to understand what's causing the charts and the squiggles. And I think it's very important to understand that. So I will constantly push back on the narrative that scarce assets, the way they trade in this environment is determinative. What's determinative is why people are investing. Now, we will talk about Bitcoin in a second. But before we get to Bitcoin, you also have to understand. You said something else, Mike, in your, you said made an off-air comment, well, corporate earnings are off the charts. That's right. Because of the AI boom, because of a lot of other rooms, corporate earnings are at ridiculously high levels, in fact, highest ever in terms of percent of GDP. That is why the

stock market is not overpriced. Every time you get into these situations, because if you ignore earnings, corporate, you know, all you do is look at market cap to GDP and other charts. I mean, stocks look at their paws to crash. They do. Except for the problem is, is that companies are more profitable now. And that's what people are investing in. So you have to look at the fundamentals also. Yes, in the short run, markets ignore fundamentals. They trade on momentum. Now, the direction of momentum at this point is pretty clear, because you're right. If we do get a break in oil prices, risk markets are going to rip and scarcity markets are going to rip even more. I'm not saying they're going to. I mean, you know, Xi can want prices down, Trump can want prices down, but when the

largest drone strike in world history occurs into the Soviet Union and refining capacities being destroyed there, you know, until both wars are brought under control, there's lots of geopolitical risk. And Peter, that's really for you, you know, what do you make of that? Because to me, that's a large deal in terms of the oil complex. Yeah. So, you know, so one thing I think we're trying to figure out, So again, for those of you don't know, at Academy Securities, I work with like 35 retired generals, admirals, CIA people. So we spent a lot of time on this. I think right now, one thing that's been good is I think the Hooties versus Saudis is kind of a separate war. It's not really an escalation of the U.S. versus Iran. And I think that distinction is important, right? The U.S. is kind of

trying to keep out of this Hootie-S.-Saudi conflict. If anything, they're trying to use it to force the Saudis to do what we want a little bit more than they have been, to use some of their military military equipment. So to the extent that we can keep the hoodies and the Saudis separate from Iran-U-S, that's very good. So far, that's managed to be the case. One thing that I think as a whole we like at Academy is this kind of getting rid of the artificial deadline of the midterm elections. I think when Trump was talking about the midterms and everyone was talking about having oil go down by the midterms, it gave a ransom extra leverage. One scenario we're playing with, so two things come up a lot of this. One people are like, oh, we should just bomb the day,

out of them. We should knock out all their power and everything. That's a really tricky one. There are all sorts of legal ramifications, reputation risk going with that. If you have a clear military, you know, a electrical output generator meant for a military base, that's an okay target. As soon as you have dual use, you can maybe argue about that. If it's primary uses for civilians, it gets really tricky. So I think that argument, and I hear that's touted out a fair bit, especially on social media, I don't think that's the way we go. On the other hand, the one theory that I think is really interesting is you start bringing in some of the Marine Corps, and what you have to watch for is our medical ships. So, you know, the U.S. is really, really, really good and concerned about making sure our troops survive to the best possible extent.

Right now, our medical ships are too far away from the islands that kind of control the strait to attack them. So the one thought process is as we go through the midterms and Trump's willing to take a little bit more risk, we start pushing into those first islands. eventually you could get all the way to card, but there are some islands that are smaller, easier for us to protect that would send the message. So I think you have the economic sanctions, which aren't going to work for months anyways. So post-midterm sounds a little bit better there, maybe if you get G a little bit. So I'm optimistic you're going to come to some sort of, you know, revised MOU that will be a little bit better than the first one. It's not going to be a complete victory for the U.S., but it'll be enough to walk away.

I don't think that's right away, but I think by as we near the midterms, it comes true. And like anything else in kind of game theory, as soon as you start putting those pieces in motion, Iran has to be fond. I think they're more likely to cave at this point, given everything that's going on. It's going to be hard. It's brutal. But I'm kind of fairly optimistic that by December we have something that makes sense for us and reopens the straight pretty well. It blows my mind still that we started the war with the narratives being regime change and nuclear weapons. And now it's can we open the street that was already open?

And the other thing that still kind of cracks me up in a sad way is, and so General Teda, who's the Undersecretary of War for Personnel and Rightness, I worked with him at Academy before he joined that rule. And we were talking about drones before he went through his confirmation process. He was all over drones. He keep waiting to be surprised when we show up somewhere in the world of 500,000 drones and, you know, get rid of this asymmetric arbitrage that they have. And unfortunately, it just seems to take so long to go through appropriations of these other things

that instead of having this kind of drone attack yet anytime soon, because that, again, would have shifted the game. I think we have some great drone companies in this country. We're working towards it. But anything that has to go through DC just takes way longer than kind of makes any sense, especially when you're in a war. Yeah. Before we move to Bitcoin, Mike, I want to ask you if these wars just persist,

how does oil come down? Or do you think that they can pull enough levers and push enough buttons to make that happen? Well, what looks like, it, oil is. It's just a matter of time to go back to its cost of production if you look at the rules of just economics and history. And also, let's look at people claiming this is 20% of world's supply of crude oil and distillates and things. It's really turned out to be 10% or less, just finding ways around it.

The bottom line, look what's happening so far. This is a repeat of what happened in 2022 for much higher prices when Russia and invaded Ukraine accelerated the process of technology replacing fossil fuels, most notably in China. So let's look hacking so far in China. 82% of new sales of electric or vehicles now are electric, and their auto sales have already rolled over. Now the rest of the world is absorbing these vehicle sales. Just look what happened with Volkswagen. They're having more cutoffs.

Most Germany is 45% of their economy is exports, and they're getting crushed by China. It's just taking those markets because they're exporting. So that's a key thing factor. And then look what's happening in incremental supply. The U.S. is just off the charts. We have record supply from U.S., Canada, Argentina, Guyana, and Brazil. just kicking in. Sir, right now, the number of things to remember is prices always make peaks when the

inventories are lows. Remember how high inventories were back in January and February prices got kind of low? It's the opposite. So the key thing also to remember is here's your number one indicator. And I definitely want to show some quickly charges to piss off, Dave. So look at the price of natural gas. And U.S. natural gas right now, that January contract is $3.77 per MBTU. That's down 20 percent on the year.

That's just what it did in 2020. 23, 24. A lot of people said I was in 80 for saying, claiming that China was done demanding extra crude oil. And it's the number one measure of heat, electricity, and fertilizers. That's where energy prices are going. You basically have to have another cold winter for natural gas to go up. Why? Because we create more with less of it every day. So that's where things are going. It's a question of how far goes to break stuff. And we're pretty close to that. Just getting every central bank on the planet to hike rates into what's going to be a temporary issue is going to be a matter of time that things go down. Now, one thing also is, just,

Yes, we've had it. The U.S. military's had a major setback, but so we did in the battle of the bulge. But the ability to repress Iran's offensive capabilities, taken forever, but it's a matter of time. They just won't be able to watch the rhetoric and just ignore, watch the rhetoric and see what they do. So far, now Saudi Arabia is starting to export more from the Middle East. So it's just how much from the Gulf, how much you watch it, but the macro for energy is very negative and normal. And here's one thing I'll end with. The Bloomberg Energy Spot Index, we've going.

that back to 1990, this year it bumped up to a price of it was first traded in 2005. Agriculture Index, Spock Agriculture prices. They're the same as about 10 years ago. The only sector that made a new high this year were metals on the back of precious metals, and now they're facing 5% on the 10 years ago. So I look at it, and in London last week, a bunch of commodity people pointed out, by the way, if you notice, that Bloomberg Commoddy Index is looking like it's probably just made almost a 25-year low versus SB 500 based on one simple thing now. And that is S&P 500, Absalom has to go up. And this is an indication how expensive the stock market it is.

Yeah, we all know earnings are great. But I'll end with another key thing is from Wendy's song. She pointed out, they identified now 33 S&P 500 companies and are now gaining significant ownership in Anthropic and Open IA with pending IPOs. Remember, Karitzu? Dave can remind us what that was. Yeah. And if you read my book, which is coming out in February, you'll learn a lot about it.

That's why I giggled at the same time. Yeah. So I mean, comment on that before we move to Bitcoin. Yeah, I do. I think that first of all, I fully agree with you that five years from now, oil prices will be dramatically lower. And I'm not saying it's going to take five years.

Your point of natural gas is extremely well taken. It applies to the production of oil. The problem now is you can't get oil from where it's produced to the people who need it. That will change. and it's hard to refine it, et cetera. There's some different things going on. But directionally, that's going to happen. But understand that what is an oil shock?

Oil shock is, interestingly, a repression. It represses economic growth because it costs people more to do stuff. It costs it more to transport stuff, which is one of the reasons why hiking makes no sense in the case of an oil shock. But all of that said, it also increases the odds that people are going to need liquidity. and there's a game that needs to be kept going, and that I think is the most important thing to watch. And so, you know, it's when we watch markets,

we have to be aware of that. We have to be aware of liquidity and what's going on because the one thing that we saw is we now have two political parties who are trying to outdo each other and how much money they can spend. And there's just no version of the world, which is different. I mean, I guess if we end up with a Republican Senate, a Democratic House and gridlock in Washington for two years, the market may come to the conclusion

they're not going to spend. And that's really probably the most bullish scenario for all markets. But perhaps that will decrease the need for the Fed to do something, but we'll see what goes on. I mean, look, politics are very hard to benchmark. The beauty is in six weeks, we'll know, and we'll see what we're dealing with. I'm glad you went to before. Just one key thing that's so important to point out, I think, David, is that within a couple weeks, we are going to, now we've seen the Fed pushback in Mr. Trump and the checks and balances kicking in. We're very much likely going to see a split government. We've had two years of prolificate spending from President Trump.

They're not going to let anybody spend anything on anything right now after this midterm, particularly if it tilts the way it's looking right now. And having markets do what they're doing where the number one issue is we're not supposed to get in wars. We weren't supposed to have inflation. and you created all that is an enormous shift away from the party and power, you're going to see those checks and balances. That's already happening, kick in. Let's go to Bitcoin. Can we?

I guess Mike will start here. Has anything changed your opinion as of yet? I'm only asking because from a technical perspective, and we can take a look at the chart, we're now making that high or high, right? Which a lot of technicians look at a bear market as lower lows and lower highs, and that is now broken. We had a close above the 50 MA on the week.

which I think a lot of people view as sort of the bull and bear market line. I know obviously you're not just staring at chart squiggles when you make your decision. At the very least, I think we can say most people who were bears are probably stopped out and might want to short again higher, right? But to me, this is after that huge move that we saw, obviously, on this candle over here that was up 24, 5%ish at one point on the week and now follow through. There's anything changed in your opinion. Yes, that's a good point.

Now, we have stopped out a lot of the bears in the shorts, people like me who are looking for alternatives. Like I pointed out the whole year, to me, Bitcoin was a thing to be shorting on rallies, most notably if you think the stock market some point's going to go down. It's worked that well so far. It's down in the air and stock markets up. So let me show you a few squigglys just to fire up Dave a little bit. And one key thing I need to point out about Bitcoin is, if you can, if I can share screen,

is you just simple chart of Bitcoin divided by the NASDAQ total return. Take it now. you have to go back to 2017, you're still at the same price. Now, this is not picking a point of time. I'm not showing you in second. It's pointing out. Now, how far do we have to go back? We've had the same performance.

The key theme is from a risk manager standpoint, someone who's maybe sat in those desks and had those conversations, it trades two times of volatility. Same performance, 10 years on. This is not an ask if people are looking to buy. Now, this is not just me. I've heard this from other people who are not deeply in the space, say, hey, I get much better return in the NASDAQ than I do Bitcoin

by picking sometimes picking stocks and much better about risk adjusted. So it's also show 100 thing. The thing I've also pointed out is look at 200-day moving averages, put them all in the same scale. I have S&P 500. That's the main one. Copper, Bitcoin divided by 10 and the 30-year. They're all heading higher. They're all the same chart, except one key thing that happened this year is that Bitcoin 200-day moving average.

Let's take the Bitcoin divided by 10. It's below the S&P 500. Now, maybe it's recovery. Maybe that was a buy. Last time that happened was 2022. Yeah, maybe we'll get lucky. The key thing I hear in the Bitcoin chat in the crypto charts is, oh, you got to believe. But key thing is also when people say I'm pointing out a point in time, I like to say, well,

let's just take gold as far back as I can, divided by the S&P 500 total return. It basically sucks, except we've had 27 years. It's been great. That's kind of getting extended. I think we've reached that apex. What I also want to point out is some things that will matter, we'll find out when it's all about earnings, which potentially are like Kiritsu, S&P 500 divided by GDP, year-end basis would be great if we can stay there,

but that's not the one that matters. High since 2008, it's you take the S&P 500 divided by public debt. Now, let's remember assets minus liabilities equals owner's equity. People keep pointing about this liability of $40 trillion debt. I get it. It sucks that we're out of all the spending. That's good for gold and Bitcoin, but look over at the asset. Most notably Bitcoin and gold have a much higher correlation,

to the asset than the library the u.s stock market stock market cap is two times that debt that's your that's your issue right now and if it keeps going up we're great but i also point at the same time i'm looking at that bloommer commodity index it's like it's like it's like it's like it's like it's like it's like it's like it's like it's like it's like it's basically was the stud and now it's still that. But that's why I look at it. It's still like it's like I said, you can go back almost almost 20 years. It's basically was the stud and now it's still trading like a dud. It's having a bounce. Well, I'm looking so on the year, NASDAX up 14% as MP up 12% as of today. This I find interesting. Bitcoin's down 4%. But that could change obviously very quickly and

on the year is a bit arbitrary. But MSTR, by the way, is up 9% on the year. All that strategy had to go to zero. And as of today, being up. I think it's almost 10% on the day at the open. MSTR is up 9%. I'm trying to get a comparison, though, in the past two months, because I think that's more constructive than, you know, January 1st. Dave, I know you're dying. Go ahead.

I mean, look, that was almost Kamala Harris-level word salad, right? You know, look, thematically, you need to look at what's happening. And thematically, we know corporate earnings are off the chart. So the performance of corporate earnings-related assets are going to go higher. As far as the U.S. government is concerned, however, debt of $40 trillion sounds bad. That's not even close to the liabilities, which include unfunded medical care, you know, Medicare and Social Security liabilities, which are probably another $100 billion.

And that is a, excuse me, trillion, you know, billion trillion, I feel like, you know, you know, one million dollars, you know, it's like we keep changing the denominator, but that is a big deal. That's why prices are moving and that, and you need to look at all of those things underlying it. Like commodities, for example, we have technology driving down the cost of creating commodities, not all of them, but certainly quite a few of them. I mean, gold is, has better mining technology than it did 30 years ago, but the order of magnitude is nothing close to what happened with energy, you know, food, et cetera, you know, et cetera. You're right about copper.

Copper, we haven't had better technology, and copper is absolutely almost directly linked to building. And building shovels in dirt is very linked to the stock market. And so, of course, that's going to be there. But when you showed up that chart of Bitcoin versus the S&Ps in 2017, so Bitcoin has gone from 3,000 to 80,000, and somehow it's underperformed the NASDA. I mean, that chart doesn't show what you said it showed. And why you bring it back up if you can?

Because bring the two lines in the beginning down to the same price. I mean, Bitcoin is literally up. If you look, you know, Bitcoin was two when NASDAQ was at six on the left chart. So it's, and now it's, it just, it isn't showing that. I mean, it's not roughly flat since the NASDAQ since 2017, except for maybe at the absolute peak in December, it's only up by a. factor of three, right? You know, but looking at Bitcoin is important. The one thing that never gets talked about on this show, it's something Fred Kruger and I talk about all the time is the power

law is the adoption metrics. Every adoption metric of Bitcoin is up into the right. It's been consistently moving. And what we've seen, and we finally, I think maybe this will be the death of it, probably not, because human nature likes cycles, but we've seen cycles where Bitcoin has gotten well above the adoption metrics and price and then crash to be well below. We are still well below, right? Whether it's the mining adoption, there's different measures of adoption. You know, you have Mark Yesco on here all the time, Scott, on your show. And whether it's 105 to 155, it's somewhere in that neighborhood

would be the median of where adoption would say Bitcoin price should be, right? And generally in cycles when you get to a top, it gets to be significantly above that. And so understanding that and not talking about that and adoption of Bitcoin when you're looking at Bitcoin's price is just, I mean, untethered is the only word I can think of. I mean, it's not silly, but it's sort of like not looking at earnings when looking at S&P prices would be about the same thing. And that's where my problem is. And so, and by the way, that's what the market is saying, because what we've seen is we've seen accumulation by the largest holders. we've seen accumulation by the smart money during this entire fall. I mean, I stuck my neck out and said, you know, very strongly that I thought that sub-60 move was the bottom because of sentiment, a whole bunch of other reasons.

I made sure on it on Yahoo and here, like literally full shows on it. Yeah. No, well, you and I agree, Scott. But, I mean, the point is we're not back to, we are literally not back to fair value. We're not even close to fair value. And so the people who bought it aren't going to sell, except for the momentum traders. Now momentum traders, the hotball of money will move in, they'll move out, whatever. Now, you know, we'll see what happens.

My prediction was a grinding market with periods of fomo. I still think we're in that. We still have to digest this, right? You know, the move, this is a move through the 50 week. And history, I actually thought it would fail here a few times before it moved higher. So it's actually outperforming what I said. That said, the long-term trend to me is new highs. And it's new highs and price discovery.

But that's hard to happen in a world where half the country believes that Bitcoin, if you own it, it means you support Trump. And so, you know, which of course is absurd. But that is literally, it is the last narrative. The narrative on quantum, the reason you're not hearing about it very much anymore, in addition to some of the very interesting papers that have come out, It's no less than two different Bitcoin devs that basically said, yeah, we can make quantum resistance. It's easy.

Here's a BIP. It's already coded if you guys need to get it done. And so it's not nearly what mattered. And a lot of people who look like us in age were staying out of quantum in the first half of this year because of quantum in the first half of this year. I don't think that's going to be a relevant thing. The Clarity Act has no thing to do with Bitcoin. But what does have something to do with Bitcoin is Bitcoin's usability within

in the financial system. And guess what? The failure of clarity means that all of the major regulators in this administration are going to move heaven and earth to do what they have to do in the next two years to entrench crypto assets. And in the case of Bitcoin, Bitcoin has collateral. And people aren't talking about it, but this essentially frees them. The reason that all the hand-wringing and the notion of the WSJ, what they said, is wrong, is because the reason it was brought to a head is we've had about six to eight months of sorts of. stalling, stalling, and that stalling was preventing Atkins and Sealing from doing their regulations, but people aren't talking about the OCC. They're not talking about the bank regulators who also are now

going to be like, okay, well, we should just move ahead with what we need to do. The regulators aren't going to change for the next two years, and they can get a lot of things done. And understandably, those things are going to be bullish. And that matters. What you just showed as a graphics got is very important. People are totally underestimating this. And that's why crypto is moving higher. I mean, the all-coin market is going crazy, right? Everything's going crazy. I mean, which makes sense. So, Peter, I want your take on Bitcoin in one second, but I'll just say to your point about the regulators moving on. You know, they stalled to some degrees, but the SEC pushed forward regardless. I spoke with Hester Purse the other day. It'll come out this week. And she said,

you know, none of this really had to do with clarity. It's just the timing of how fast the SEC was moving on things. They had released their fundraising requirements and all of that weeks ago, if not months ago. And that was reg crypto. Right now, the new proposal, the innovation exemption, this really is a result of clarity and then pushing forward. But now the CFDZ is going to do it. And that's the reason to your point that all coins are moving because nobody cares about clarity. We live in a world where we're all goldfish swimming in a bowl and the Clarity Act consumed everybody's energy for a year and the minute it was over, we're not going to hear about it again in a week. And by the way, before you finish before it goes on, that is why it is almost comically stupid.

And with all due respect to Dennis Porter, who I've been going back and forth on. And I like Dennis. And it's professional. It's, you know, healthy debate. But the reason those seven Democrats, seven Democrats and, and, you know, when there's 49 of them or 47 of them, the reason there's seven Democrats said, oh, clarity. is not dead after this happened is because they realized that voting no was the dumbest possible thing they could have done because it freed the regulators to do what the hell they needed to do.

Also squarely puts them in the crosshairs of Fair Shake and the crypto lobby for the well yeah. I mean because they're they're they're they're they're spineless. You know, they didn't want to vote on the opposite side of Elizabeth Warren even though they didn't need do. They could have easily voted yes and it was still going to fail because of because of equally spineless Josh Hawley. And but they didn't. And that's a mistake. And they realized the mistake after they did it, you know, kind of like as badly as Aaron Glenn is realizing how badly he mismanaged the end of the game for the Jets yesterday.

I mean, you know, it's like. Peter. Okay. So, Peter, you and I shared a lot of, you know, I love to kind of go back in our DMs when we have the shows. And you, you know, you were one of those people who's, I would say, not 100% Bitcoin all the time, but you have other things on your mind who I got a lot of messages from at 60 that said, Looks like a good time to buy. Very casually.

The people who weren't obsessed with this, you're on mute really quick. But yeah, so how are you viewing this now on this move? Yeah, I think, you know, I would agree with Mike that, you know, a few months ago and even a couple weeks ago, people really, there wasn't a buzz around talking to RIA's family offices about Bitcoin. I think that's starting to change again a little bit, partly because, you know, you're starting to hear nonsense, like we're going to revalue our gold at $155,000. I think there is that increased concern about what we're going to dry and do. globally to monetize debt or to get rid of the deficits. So I feel that that's kind of attracted some attention. And then more importantly, I think what we were having for a while when we were coming

down to that 60, we would have good news and Bitcoin would go down. And good news and going down, it's kind of scary, right? And then we kind of bottomed around and now I think we're actually, we've had some bad news and go up, right? There's some bad news and we go down. But it seems like increasingly this market, it's catching this bid, you're starting to see it, You're starting to break through 50DMA. You're going to see some buzz about this asset class again.

I think you're going to start seeing people, hey, you know what? Yes, it's underperformed. Yes, it's had more volatility. But now people are looking at this. I would say, you know, so much of the equity market gains have really come from, you know, the AI, the data center, the compute build out. One thing that does concern me a little bit there is at least five or six companies had big gains on their anthropic holdings, right?

So they're able to mark to market their holdings on their private equity position. So that becomes a little bit circular. What is the quality of earnings when they depend on that? So I think people are going to look for something else. I would not be surprised. I'm probably going to add some more Bitcoin here rather than trying to sell any. I think we get to 100 again. I think you start gaining that momentum.

You get the squeezes. I like how it's responding to news. I think it's all positive. And there's so much else going on in the world, I think it's coming there. And behind all of this, you are hearing a lot more people talk about agentic AI, you know, the growth in that. will they wind up using crypto as the source of, you know, being able to move money around? So I'm positive on it right now. I think, again, and part of it's just I've seen a shift in the conversations I'm having in the last week or two based on, oh, people are kind of perking up to it again.

You know, price action attracts eyes that wouldn't be otherwise to it. You start seeing this. You start thinking, again, hey, what are we going to do if the, you know, Fasson's going to revalue the gold at $155,000, whatever? There's stupid talk about him doing to create $40 trillion a while. So I like this and I like the fact that there's kind of been negative, there's been reasons for it to sell off and it's held in. And if anything, it's rallied. So I'm in right now and I think we're hundreds probably my next under price target. Yeah, I mean, if you think about traders, like I think investors maybe are more interested now. As we know, they always like to buy it higher prices because as you said, there's no better marketing for Bitcoin or any asset than one big green candle.

You know, higher prices but get higher prices to some degree. But there were people, I guess, you know, like some of us who saw an opportunity to buy a bottom or maybe buy a bottom or even if it went lower. We were confident that that, you know, it would go much higher later. So we were comfortable at 60 even if we got 40 if we believed it was going to a million or 200 or whatever. But now this is the area that the technical traders are supposed to start buying. And it's 40% higher with quote unquote confirmation. You're above that 50 or making a higher high. I know a lot of people who are now saying, okay, it's time to buy Bitcoin.

Ultimately, they could be wrong. But the chart right now is saying you've got the confirmation that the bottom is in and you were willing to pay 40% more to buy at that price to confirm that it was going higher. So I agree with you. I think this is a decent time to actually buy. Perfect. Yeah. And again, I think some people are going to move some of their money out of some of the high-flying

equities that have done really well. They're looking for alternatives. And as much as Mike and I might think you're getting good value at 6% or on Al-QU. and 5% on, you know, TLT, I think people want faster money, something that can go up 2x or, you know, in a period of time, I think you are going to see this wave of inflows into the Bitcoin ETFs. You're going to see that pop up. I think it's positive right now. I mean, look, people love to buy the laggards and by, you know, and people look at things at Bitcoin is still down. Well, you know, by the end of today, we'll see if it's still down.

But, you know, Bitcoin down, year to date, NASDAQ up. That's good. That's a helpful. full thing. That's not the zealots. That's not the true believers. That's not the people who are buying it and holding on to it because they think that they see the dollar depreciation as baked in the cake. But it's going to certainly cause the cycle to switch. Once the cycle is fully changed, you have to expect outperformance versus the types of metrics that most of the Bitcoin community are looking at. That kind of means there's kind of like air between here and as you start to approach the all-time high, which is at 126, it's not at 100. And that's a long way.

That's a pretty good return. I mean, we're all jaded in Bitcoin because the volatility is so high. But the truth is that when you can see returns that are forced, towards 40-some-odd percent before there's serious resistance, if in fact your base case and there isn't a crash or the world doesn't end, you know. And by the way, I heartily recommend Bill Maher's rant about the world ending in four years. is it maybe one of my favorites ever. If you didn't see it, the line was, you know,

we're spending like drunk, we're spending, we're spending, we're spending. But, you know, hey, if the world's going to end in four years, why should we, you know, why not just keep doing it? You know, let's let the aliens who come and pick over our civilization, see our credit cards are all maxed out. It was, it was, but all kidding aside. I mean, it's like, are you going to, you're talking about an asset that has,

very clear, easy to understand value proposition. Now, when you look at the rest of crypto, that is really just underperformance versus NASDAQ and it's a technology play. I continue to be skeptical on a lot of crypto assets because they don't provide value through to the underlying holders. But I think that there is a path and you're seeing some of them do very well, right? I mean, obviously all coins now, I've mentioned it, you know, hype is at all time highs. hype, it trades much more like a NASDAQ stock than it does than a crypto asset. It's one of the only charts that it is at all-time highs. You know, Solana is back above my cost basis, which makes me happy.

But, you know, hey, it is what it is. But there's a lot of others that are moving. I mean, Zcash is another one that is, you know, people looking at it. And you can do a whole show talking about why that one is. And when I came out, I got a lot of hate mail because I actually came out with a pro-Z-cash tweet, you know, about 50, well, actually more, like 80% ago. But there's reasons for some of these things. The point is that there's still a lot of crap.

And the one place on crypto that Mike and I agree, and we do agree, is that there's a lot of crap. And that crap, because there's no cost in maintaining it, doesn't go away, unlike internet. The difference is this time it's just going to get hacked. All of it. It is. We've seen it. Like all of these like forgotten protocols that still have, you know,

tens of millions of dollars of, uh, FDV or whatever, they're just slowly getting hacked and extracted for whatever they're worth. There's nobody sitting there worrying about security. That's what's going to happen to all those dead ones if you want the new reality. Mike. I mean, you know, like even if they don't go to zero, somebody's going to hack them and send them them, um, damn close, you know. I appreciate this conversation because as we were speaking,

I fired up another squiggly line just to fire up Dave, but just the facts of, I'm sure there's some fellow FRMs in this conversation, financial risk manager. I got my certificate almost 20 years ago, but I just took the market vectors 100 digital assets index, divided by the S&B 500 total return. It's the same level as 2018, just the fact it used to have that upward bias, not it's down. Good news is it used to trade 14 times of outtily, now it's three times of volatility. As a risk manager, yes, every index has a survivor bias. The problem is that this performance, has been horrible, risk-adjusted for almost six years now. And the bottom line is there is a major issue with Bitcoin, has technology working against it.

Meaning, and just by Jim Bianco mentioned Ethereum last week, means there's so many different types of cryptos now that can fulfill the same role as Bitcoin. Goal has three. And then I just point out the same thing. S&P 500 has a survivor bias, but technology is worth it with it. We just stop right on there. I just want to stop before there's like six things for me to argue with. I want to focus, right, laser focused on that one thing, because that's actually untrue.

The notion of, Bitcoin does not attempt to communicate, does not, although there are zealots who think that it can. They're out of their minds, but whatever. Bitcoin does not compete with Solana and Ethereum to be the backbone of tokenized stocks or the backbone of tokenized real estate or tokenize anything. Solana and Ether are not, despite some Ethereum nut jobs thinking, do not compete with Bitcoin as being the base layer of value. Those are very different things.

The only actual token that competes with Bitcoin because it's actually a fork of Bitcoin in a sense is Zcash. And Zcash is a very specific use case. And that is something that is, if you look at it, is cash. Because cash makes up about 10% of M2. And within that 10%, half of it are $100 bills held overseas. Zcash is really the $100 bills held overseas, the private kind of stacks of money that are there.

So that's the only crypto that incredibly competes with Bitcoin on the store of value thesis. That's it. And so every time you talk about millions, look, when you look at the index that you just said, Mike, most of those components from when it was created are going to hell. Many of them are still way down from their all-time high.

Ethereum is still well less than half its all-time high. despite this, you know, today is a really bullish day. Half, right? You know, big difference. But you got to stop it. It's like gold doesn't have any competition as a store of value for money. That's why gold is double the price of platinum, despite platinum being way rarer. And there's still, still for old people, when you talk about when you measure tiers in every conference or whatever, you still go silver gold platinum because platinum is rarer. But gold is double the price. because gold monetary value. All right.

Time for me, since you're interrupted me. Maybe you should stop. It's okay to be delusional. There was one crypto in 2009. Now there's millions. The number one enduring trend in the space is the proliferation, the tokenization of U.S. dollars. That's a bit of a competition for what people initially use for peer-to-peer cash.

So it's okay for you to be delusional, Dave. And I just point out the facts of when you have things like Dogecoin going down, it pulls everything down, which includes Bitcoin. Once we get through that purge of that low-price cure, maybe we'll be okay. But for now, since October 10th, I've been right. Wait, Joe's going down pulls Bitcoin down? Yes, it all does. Everything does. It's all related. It's just not just one, but they're all in the same space. I point out and that end, I just showed you the chart. Sometimes, you know, that that money actually, I mean, if you look at past cycles of Bitcoin and all coins, there's many times when those all coins can be selling off into Bitcoin when it's, uh, overall. It's correct. But overall, I agree. Bitcoin should can

continue outperform. Like gold continues outperform the other precious metals. But there is unlimited supply of similar cryptos out there. It's just a fact. You can say in Brong, but for now, that's been, I just showed you the index. The index has survivor bias, which is base, which is great. But again, the most enduring trend is a proliferation of tokenization of crypto dollars. Now there is your bull market in terms of assets and management. Again, big points down. It's underperforming now for a couple of years, high volatility. But what you're missing is those proliferation of crypto dollars. dollars is a big trend. That's what the peer-to-peer cash is. Of course, the European Union is coming out with their central bank digital currency. We've had, Scott has had Chris G and Carlos telling you that these

things aren't really safe. But the truth is people still spend in dollars. That's what all the Bitcoin Bulls miss. You know, they go like, oh, these self-custody guys. I mean, I get people on left of me and the right of me. I don't know which one is, which one you are. But, you know, on the other side, they're saying, well, we're going to go to a Bitcoin standard. It's like, great. Well, the government we'll just shut that down, right? They'll just say from a tax point of view, you know, you can't sell dollars. You know, it's like your self-custody Bitcoin, you're not going to be able to go to this peer-to-peer. Governments are not allowing that.

What they are allowing is Bitcoin is a store of value and Bitcoin as an asset. That is absolutely right. But try to get away from the tax man, try to try to tax arbitrage your way around it in the real economy. They're not allowing it. And the crypto dollars case, that's going to expand. It's going to expand massively. Why? Because the Treasury sees it as a way.

to help pay for our debt. Right? So, of course, it's going to expand. You and I are an agreement on that. But the notion that Dogecoin leads Bitcoin, I mean, you're just making my head hurt. I didn't say it leads. I didn't say, but my point if Dogecoins drops 50, 60%, it's a pressure factor on Bitcoin. That's a fact.

We pointed it out a year ago. It's just a fact. You can ignore it all you want with your delusions, but I'm pointing out they're all on the same chain to get it. I'm sorry, on my screen, I see 100 cryptos all on the one screen. At least when I pull up commodities, there's 24 of them. I pull up metals, they're all somewhat related. They're all related.

Why we talk about ALS? Because Bitcoin's up, they'll outperform. Alt go down, Bitcoin and Wendomperform. The point is they all go down together. The correlations we pointed at this out years ago are running 0.90 from like small caps to large caps. Just the way it works from a risk manager standpoint. Yeah, I think at this point, we are going to see the old ones slowly die. We're going to see newer ones with utility or a narrative wildly outperform Bitcoin if we go into a bull market.

And I think we'll see Bitcoin slowly rise and we'll be talking about them in very different buckets moving forward and not as a monolith. I mean, that's kind of how I do it. Peter, you get to sit on the sidelines and giggle at all of this. But I know where you stand on Bitcoin. But actually, let me ask you, I know it's 10. So I want to know, is this in the conversation with your generals? We've seen Bitcoin mentioned as a national security asset and they're testing the network and running nodes. Like, is it even in the conversation?

Are we just screaming in our little echo chamber here thinking we're very sound? I would say the one thing that does come up in our, you know, and one I think, you know, Chris Perkins, he's been a big fan of this, is trying to create some sort of, you know, crypto privateer where we can really go after the countries who are using cryptocurrencies. nefariously. So we can go after North Korea. We can go after Iran and really clean that up. And I think there's a precedent. I think there's been some signs that this administration is moving towards that. So some way that we can harness the resources of, you know, smart American companies to go after this. Again, I focus on a few cryptos. And the one last thing I got to say, Dave,

because you brought up something with Bill Maher. I don't know if you've ever heard the term IBG-YBG. Well, we are looking at this really structured deal way back in the day, really complex, had all sorts of unhedgeable tail risk. And the senior person looked at me and said, IBG, YBG. And like, what the hell do you mean? It's like, I'll be gone, you'll be gone. So, yeah, let's go ahead and do the trade because by the time it blows up,

I'll be gone and you'll be gone. So I think that's kind of Bill Mayer in a summary. But I think from a national security standpoint, I don't see it as a big part of our conversation. When we talk to our AI cyber people, they do see it as part because they're focused on the agentic AI. And I do think there is kind of this increased desire to figure out a way for the U.S. to crack down on the bad actors in the crypto space and

eliminate that, which would be good longer term. And there, I do think the government, it fits well with Trump because he would like to capture some of that Bitcoin and keep some of it for the U.S. Treasury. Yeah, and we didn't talk about the fact that a strategic reserve bill is, you know, actually is getting the House floor. It's not to buy Bitcoin. It's just simply to force them to keep what they have for 20 years. It's basically reiterating the executive order. Right. But it's not trivial for a bunch of reasons.

Yeah. I wish we had another five hours. I'll have to come back and discuss it again, I guess, next Monday. I think Jordy Visser is actually back next Monday as well, so that should be fun. Peter, as always, thanks for joining. Mike, Dave. We're going to be both being good sports. All I can say is it's about to get really, really interesting.

Because, you know, if we're back at 75 or up at 95, we're going to be having very very different conversations over the coming weeks. All right. Well, everybody, thank you so much for tuning in. Appreciate it. Mike, Dave, Peter. Thanks once again. We will see you all on the Daily Wolf at noon.

Thanks. Reaching your audience on Spotify with display ads is easy. Use your existing creative and launch your first campaign in minutes with Spotify Ads Manager.