The Wolf Of All Streets - Bitcoin RECLAIMS $61K As Trump Made BILLIONS On Crypto + Stocks

Episode Date: July 2, 2026

Bitcoin rebounds after hitting a fresh 21-month low, below its 200-week moving average — but underneath the panic, whales just made THE LARGEST single Bitcoin accumulation spike EVER recorded on chain: 270,000 BTC scooped up at $59K, bigger than the COVID bottom (150K) and the FTX bottom. Cantor Fitzgerald says the bear market is entering its FINAL stretch, projecting a late October bottom based on historical cycles. Metaplanet added 2,823 BTC to push its stack past 43,000. Robinhood just went 24/5 as DTCC's new 24x5 clearing goes live — Wall Street is officially catching up to crypto's 24/7 reality. Meanwhile the biggest stablecoin launch in history just dropped: 140+ giants — BlackRock, Visa, Stripe, Mastercard, Amex, Google, Coinbase, Ripple — launched Open USD (OUSD), a USDC killer that crashed Circle stock 15% overnight. Add June's brutal Marubozu candle (worst month since June 2022), Fed rate HIKE fears from Kevin Warsh, Strategy's $1.25 BILLION sell authorization, and Trump's disclosed $1.4 BILLION in 2025 crypto earnings blowing up Clarity Act ethics negotiations — and we break down whether smart money just called the bottom, or if this is a whale trap before the next leg lower. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

$1,000 after everybody told you it was all over and we had to go to 45 by the end of this week. Also, Trump not only made billions and billions of dollars in crypto while all of his investors lost about 98% of their funds, but he also made about 22,000 trades in a year. Most of them perfectly and coincidentally timed to events that he had probably a lot of control over. what are we doing here? The simulation seems to be trolling us. I've got Josh Frank here from the tide to talk about all of it. Let's go. Good morning, everybody. Welcome to my private island. I hope that you're all having a wonderful Thursday, which will be our last show of the week, because tomorrow is the day that we celebrate America. Fuck yeah. The United States of America won a World Cup match against not one but two countries last night, both Bosnia and Herzegovina. at the same time, which is something that only can happen in Trump's America.

And I'm gonna go ahead and bring on Josh right now. Today is the day that I'm gonna get screamed at for having TDS, because we're gonna once again talk about Trump trades and stuff. But I would like to point out that I- You forgot to mention we actually beat three countries. We also beat the FIFA refs as well. So that red card is the most absurd thing.

The fact that we're gonna have to play without him against Belgium is absolutely not- more absurd than the non-calls on Wemondyama. I mean, this is ridiculous. As an American who watches about one soccer match every 24 months, I'm outraged. I, too, am outraged. And before everybody tells me that I have TDS when we obviously are going to get into talking about Trump, I would like you to know that I am fully convinced that both Trump and Nancy Pelosi have the same stockbroker.

So it's fine. I'm equally critical of both sides that aggressively trade on inside information. We'll talk about this briefly because I did a show on it. but obviously right don't forget rocana as well he also uh crushing crushing uh trump filing shows he took in about 1.2 billion that's a crappy ap he had lies it's about 1.4 the family made about 2.3 in 2025 obviously that was on uh assets that retail lost badly on there's nothing illegal here right unless of course they could prove that he was taking it as bribes from foreign nationals which I don't think anybody's accusing him of at this point.

But, I mean, the bottom line here is that Trump made a lot of money and mostly exited the ventures already, right? He sold out of his interest in USD1, sold out of his interest in World Liberty Financial. And, you know, the crypto market's not looking too great at the moment. Is Josh frozen. I got nothing to add. I don't know what to add to that.

I mean, I agree with it. Yeah. How about this? How about this? He made more than Coinbase himself, not just, the family. He made more than Coinbase last year. And then now there's these amazing accounts that are starting to dig into all of the 927 pages of disclosures. And there's so many of these. The day before Trump paused tariffs and sent the S&P 500 up 9.5%. His investment accounts about

327 stocks worth up to 12.8 million. And he actually got penalized $200 for not making that disclosure, $200,000. Donald Trump declared making more than 22,000 stock transactions. This is like, I mean, Biden made 13 in four years. Not that I care about that, that stat particularly. But I mean, this is like tens a day. Well, when you, I guess, you know, if insider trading is, is legal for him or in his mind, why not do it and why not do more of it?

So, yeah, I guess. Okay, let's not, okay, I don't want to, you know, we're going to. No, no, I agree with you. It's just I know where this is going to go and it's going to just end badly for me. Because I like, I just don't see how you can be accused of this. I want to see. I want to see all the, I want to see, you know, the real thing is I want to see the entire family's P&L. Because like who is the best insider trader trader? Barron probably started with the least money. So what did Barron end up? Like did Barron 10,000 X's portfolio? How did Eric do? Like, I want the, and the estranged children like go down the list.

you know, like how, you know, how good of a trader is everyone? We got to get their copy trading live on one of these, you know, copy trading AI apps. Yeah, we need a copy trading Trump account. What are we doing here? Oh, man, we can be so rich. But let's talk about all the other things. Okay, first let's start with the market really quickly. We got Bitcoin at $61-ish,000.

I think, what, $61,400. It was 600. It was all over. But now we're so back. we did get non-farm payroll this morning, which came in soft, which because we live in the upside down when job numbers are bad, it means that the Fed might cut, which means that markets tend to go up. So bad news is good news. We all got that. What I actually find really interesting is I've now actually been looking at Kalshi quite a lot for kind of people's to gauge sentiment,

you know? And I keep looking at Bitcoin price at the end of 2026 and like less, I think in total About 15% of the market believes Bitcoin can even be over 85,000 by the end of the year. I mean, that's nothing. I feel like if people are so bearishly positioned in the 60s, 50s, this is where all the clusters are. I mean, it seems like a pretty, the problem is obviously here you have to bet on a certain $5,000 window to be right. There are other bets that are kind of above and below. But like it feels like people don't believe there's any chance that we go up, which to me means there's a very high. high chance we go up.

Yeah. I mean, look, the industry has always been narrative driven. And right now the narrative for Bitcoin is hard. I mean, I'm not saying anything groundbreaking here, right? But obviously, Saylor is in a tough spot, tough spot, which he put himself in. I think he's done more harm to Bitcoin now at this point than he's done good. Not from a price perspective, because I think all of the buying is certainly sustained the market. I don't know if we'd be where we were without his bids, but from a narrative perspective at the very least.

Because now the narrative is all about Michael Seller. You know, Bitcoin was never about one person. It was always about being a hedge, you know, against the government and infinite money printing. And now, you know, everyone talks about Bitcoin. And the first thing that anybody brings up is what is Seller doing and what's happening. I mean, I think the good thing is he's kicked that can down the road. But I do think he needs to, you know, be more cognizant, which is he's a lot. I think he is trying to be of how his actions are impacted the market.

Yeah, I think he did that this week. Personally, like my take is that we won't be taught for, which is a good thing. I think he did enough to stop being the main character for a few weeks, which is exactly what we do. I agree. I agree. I think in three or four weeks from now, we probably stop talking about him. I think we still talked about him and then we stop.

But also, look, right now, you know, there's just a lot of places that people can put their money. I mean, go, go, have you looked at my friend show me, have you seen the sense? Korean stock market. Yeah, of course. I talk about it all the time, like H.K. H.K. Hynix and Samsung and like 2X leverage GTFs that retirees are filling like their insurance policies to get into. It's insane.

Yeah. So look, at the end of the day, you know, during COVID and at different points in time, you know, everything else was crashing and crypto was holding up and was a great place to diversify and put your assets in right now. You know, if I asked you to make the case for Bitcoin, I think you'd have somewhat of a difficult time making that case. And I think that's the challenge, right? Or at least it's not as clear as it once was. And I say this is somebody that, by the way, continues to hold Bitcoin. I'm not buying more Bitcoin. But I also haven't sold any Bitcoin. I'm buying more.

Happily. So we got that. So listen, there's two stories that actually think are really good for you and I to probably discuss today that we can unpack. So first of all, obviously, we were kind of waiting for this yesterday. There was nothing to report. But Robin Hood rolls out public blockchain as it expands deeper into crypto. So they announced their layer two on Arbitrum, I believe is where this is being built. They announced an earned product, but I guess the TLDR is that on top of being a centralized exchange,

it's an everything app. They're building a really full stack, defy protocol and platform here. And I don't know if you saw what I thought was the most interesting part of this news. And I can't, DYDX rebranded to Arcus. So some are saying they, launched Arcus and are at which implies they're keeping DYDX. Some say they rebranded, which I think means like entirely changing. But DYDX, one of the most, you know, like kind of the early hyperliquids

perpetual exchanges, rebranding as I understand it and going strictly to Robin Hood chain here, which I thought was a big part of the announcement. So the answer to why do you rebrand as a token is you go on coin market cap or coin gecko. You look at your price chart and it's straight down. down and it's red. And the hope is that by rebranding, you get a new token page and then the token starts and doesn't look like it's down 99%. I mean, the reality is DYDX has lost so much market share is no longer the same company that it once was, no longer has the same demand that it once had and needed to pivot and find something else. And that's normal and that's natural, but I think a lot of times rebranding in crypto is purely to try to change the trajectory

of the price chart. Because if you look at it, I mean, pretty much anything in crypto, I mean, the price chart is down. Yeah. So my gut on this is they made a lot of money. They have a lot of money because of all the money that they made. That hasn't accrued to token holders necessarily, right? I mean, they printed hundreds of millions in fees. I think if I had to guess the token is probably somewhere around a couple hundred million market cap or less.

I haven't looked, but that would be my gut. And now they got to, you know, they got to figure out what next for them. And I think it's just a matter of, you know, the demand for what they were doing is not there. Here's a new opportunity. Here's where the market's going. And the reality is that's the right thing to do. And crypto, you don't move so fast. You have to pivot because the narratives of last week are often no longer relevant.

Yeah. I'm digging into kind of the takeaways from their announcement. So obviously their own block. chain here, as I said, which is called Robin Hood chain and arbitram base layer two, which now users in 120 plus countries can trade tokenized stocks 24-7 and use them across D-5 for lending and collateral. So that's sort of that full, full stack. Can get 7% APY on USDG staple coin. Is that their stable coin, I believe? I think that's with, is that with maple? Oh, no, that's global dollar. I'm not sure.

I'm not the one that's... I think that's Paxos. Okay. There you go. Yeah, Paxos, Digital Singapore, which clearly, whatever that is, is going to probably become Robin Hood's staple coin in context of this.

And then this is sort of a major global expansion. Expans perps into Europe, beyond crypto, into commodities, ETFs, and FX. And they're planning a UK crypto launch, Canada with WonderFi and launching brokerage services in Singapore.

So, I mean, this is maybe the bigger story is this is sort of the another example of the Everything app, right? I mean, Coinbase had their announcement a couple weeks ago where they announced like 11 new things they were going to do, right, to offer it. And it seems like Coinbase and Robin Hood are just kind of competing, one coming from the crypto side, one coming from the stock side and converging in the middle. Yeah. Yeah, look, I mean, I think it's obviously, I think it's a sign that.

crypto actually built infrastructure that works, right? And that and that works for, you know, there's a reason that Robin Hood is choosing to do this on chain because they can now go 24-7, you know, low fee trading for their customers, which I think is really exciting. I think the question is like, what is this being for crypto? And the reality is like, you know, is it bullish for the projects and tokens involved? I'm not sure it is. I don't know. I mean, Robin Hood is operating all the sequencers behind the scenes. It's their chain. They're controlling everything.

It's not like Arbitrum is being used for transactions in any sort. I think there might be some revenue share that goes back to them. But I think as we saw with base and optimism, you know, loyalty is not necessarily a real thing. But obviously, they saw something in Arbitrum and Arbitrum's technology, which they really liked. They thought was valuable. And so I think that's a good sign. They like the Arbitrum stack. And so maybe that's bullish broadly for arbitram.

But I think the question of like, what does it mean for crypto? I think is yet to be seen. Does this get to create more demand for trading tokens? I'm not sure. I think the reality is it probably creates more demand for trading tokenized equities 24-7. And maybe D-YDX or some of these other platforms that are offering tokenized 24-7 equity trading that are able to generate fees and generate revenue back to token holders

because of that, maybe bullish for them. But my overall read is not like, I think a few years ago the crypto market would have reacted to this and Arb would have been up 70% on the day. And, you know, this would have been, and the whole market would have been ripping. But I think this is just, you know, picks and shovels kind of play. Yeah, I mean, this would have been a much more interesting crypto announcement if they announced a layer two that had a token. Yeah, yeah. And we had Robin Hood coin. You know, like that that would be interesting.

And curious that they didn't do that. It kind of just shows that most of these things don't need a token. I mean, you need a gas token. I'm assuming Arbitram will be the gas token. No, Ethereum. Oh, Ethereum. Right. So, yay.

Like you said, so Arbitrim is just a, it's a, you know. There's some revenue that goes back to Arbitrum. I don't know what it is. And I don't know how or if it occurs to token holders. So I can't comment. but it is Ethereum that's the gas token. Okay, well, you just gave us the perfect bridge to the next story by saying, how does it accrue to token holders?

Because we can't have heroes or like people in crypto yesterday's big announcement. Venice AI becomes a unicorn with 65 million Series A as its privacy first AI platform takes off. So, of course, this is the kind of decentralized AI championed and led by Eric Voorhees, who's a early Bitcoin Bitcoiner who created ShapeShift and really a pioneer for decentralization. And of course, when this was announced, which was led by Dragonfly,

we've had a Seabon here quite a few times, the community freaked out because it was a unicorn raise at $65 million at a billion valuation, but it was an equity raise. And once again, leaving the debate, does any value accrue to the token

or do we all just want to be equity, holders in the platforms. Yeah. I mean, I, I, I'm not an expert at the exact VVV situation, but I can, I've had a lot of conversations with founders in crypto about converting from token to equity. There has not been any conversation that I've been having recently. So this is very unique to see somebody go that the dual token equity model because I feel like that's kind of been dying.

I actually think what you're going to see is a lot of tokens. converting into equity, especially tokens that have been around for a while. I mean, the reality is in some instances, tokens are basically equities without investor protections, right? And they create really misaligned incentives. You know, like, for example, for example, you know, we're a startup, right? And we've raised a little bit of money, but we've also had years in which we've, the last years we've been profitable. We've taken that profit into reinvesting in the business, acquiring things, expanding the team, bringing on, you know, bringing on more customers because ultimately my, you know,

my obligation is to maximize value for my shareholders. In crypto, there's kind of this misaligned incentive of like, let's take every single dollar of profit we have and plow it back into the token. But like I was talking to a founder of a top DFI project that, you know, I'm sure all your listeners know. And he's like, the reality is if I took, you know, 40% of our revenue and I plowed it back in, And then the business is negative and we're actually out of pocket money and we can invest in growing.

And the other challenge too is if you want to raise capital to invest in growing, it's very difficult to do that now. Right. Like you know, people kind of just assume like you raise money, you launch a token and then you never need to raise money again. But like if the business is imp profitable, you need to raise money again or else you're going to run out of runway, right? It's kind of a weird thing.

It's a, yeah. Right. And so like, like I feel like totally. tokens raise $30 million. And then they're like, okay, launch the token, but then like what happens in six or seven years once you've blown through the $30 million, right? Like, especially if, if, you know, it's not generating revenue. And so I think it creates like a weird and weird situation for them. Like, imagine, imagine you are the founder of a project that's now trading at $100 million market cap. The foundation has 15% of the token, but you want to do a $15 million raise. As an equity business, you can do the 50, even if the founders only have, you know, 15%, you can do the $15 million raise and dilute all of the equity holders equally and introduce like a PEP to bring in the investors. With a token, you can't really do that. It puts you in like a weird situation because, I mean,

I guess theoretically you could increase the supply, like there's things that you can do. But ultimately, these things are much easier with equities. And I think as you think about in the long term building out your business, I think you have to ask the question, does it make sense to this is an equity or token? And also, what is the multiple that I'm getting at with a token? Because the reality is, tokens don't give you the full suite of investor protections that an equity would give you. And so ultimately, they're probably not going to trade at the same multiples that an equity would trade at. And so I think it's creating conversations that projects are starting to have about what do we do. I think there are obviously cases for tokens still.

Like, for example, I think this is much more relevant to like defy and the, RWA space that it is to like in layer one or layer two just because of how it works and revenue and stuff like that. Your Gap tokens, right. Yeah. Yeah. So, like, I think it's more, I think it's more the utility token, right? The utility token is now more like, okay, you know, does this make more sense?

And ultimately, you know, a lot of the way that tokens were structured was because it was a way easier way to raise capital back in the day. Investors wanted tokens because ultimately, tokens. were amazing for VCs because they put money in and then get liquidity in a year. Like I started my company almost 10 years ago. I haven't sold any secondaries. I don't have any liquidity still. But if I had a token, I would have had liquidity on day one or on year one.

But I think it creates a short term liquidity mechanism, but potentially longer term problems. And when you have a dual token equity mandate, that's when it becomes really weird because who gets what and who's responsible for what and what benefits and what value do you you get out of each thing. And ultimately, I think it ends up being worse for both. I almost agree with everything you just said. So, you know, Mike Eppolito from Blockworks, he kind of did this rant. Tocons with equity do not work. I think historically, he's absolutely correct. There was one take here that I thought was also really interesting, kind of

aligns with this. Except for Ripple. I was, we should talk about that in a second. But I use Venice quite a lot, big fan of the service, but this is probably the worst thing they could have tweeted while trying to preserve the perception that VVV is a business growth-lined asset. I mean, it says here, tokens considered a junior investment class, right? Whether it's their intention or not, it's now obvious to token market participants who are not, who are no strangers to equity derived M&A soft rugs. BVVV is not a first-class citizen in the Venice capital stack. And I think that that always is the question. You're basically creating, you know, like the guys listening to the orchestra on the Titanic and

jack down below deck, right? And the token holders tend to feel like steerage. I think in this case, who are the down below deck, where's the value going to accrue? And why do you need both of which one would you rather hold? I actually, and I get so much hate for it, but whatever, I actually think Ripple XRP is probably the best example of this, even though you kind of quipped about it. But I actually have gotten in trouble with XRP people for saying I would rather hold Ripple equity if I had the option choice, then the XRP token. Oh, 100%, a million percent. Like XRP people get mad at me, and I'm like, they own the most XRP.

You should support what I'm saying. Like, I want to own the people that own the thing. Yeah, 100%. They own it, and they're able to use it to invest and grow and diversify their business, and they're doing so many different things because of the token. I mean, I think they have 40% or whatever of the supply, whatever the number is. No left. I think it's 30.

I don't remember. It was 30, 40-ish. It started much higher. It was gifted. you know, it was gifted to the, to ripple the company. Right. And so, I mean, they're able to invest and grow and, and, I mean, at one point, I was talking to a couple of funds. XRP, a ripple equity was traded massive, like 90% discount to the value of the XRP they had in

their balance sheet. So if you bought Ripple equity on the secondary market, obviously, if Ripple went and sold 100% of the token, the thing is crashing, right? There's no way they could do it. They wouldn't get back 100% of the value. But still, obviously, they could have sold 10% of it over some period of time to recoup the value. And ultimately, that's turned into an amazing trade as they've been able to acquire Hidden Road. You know, they acquired. Yeah, I think it's for their credit.

They were able to effectively, like, create money. And they didn't exit rug. Like most people who were able to do the same thing, they actually reinvested that money to build, hopefully, a viable business. Now, it doesn't mean I agree that they should have been, you know, like, I don't think in general, non-specific to them. But listen, if you had had a token at the tie, right, in the 2020 cycle, I guess for you, it would have been like the 2017 ICO title. You probably, I know you personally, it wouldn't be you while use a theoretical example of someone like you. 99% of people in your situation would have already exited the token, be rich, and there'd be no product here in 2026. The fact that you did it with equity and couldn't get liquidity gives a hell of a lot of motivation

to actually build something of meaning and of value. So they may be actually doing that. 99% of the people from those early days just to get liquidity in the token. A lot of people launch tokens as a get-rich-quick scheme, right, as opposed to trying to build something of substance and value. And look, ultimately, a lot of people were very, very rich on paper at some point in time and are no longer very, very rich on paper or even in reality, right? And so, I mean, I mean, even most tokens are down 70% since the beginning of the year.

But what I will add is just because tokens don't always make sense does not mean that crypto doesn't make sense. I am very excited about the concept of taking a token and converting it into a tokenized equity and allowing people that were previously token holders to participate in the upside of the projects, right? Like in the U.S., you know, obviously there's accredited investor laws and quib laws and stuff like that that limit retail participation in participating in private, you know, private placements and private equities before they go public. There's obviously ways in which that's, you know, like now people could put could, you know, participate in like pre-stocks and stuff like that. So that's starting to change a bit. I think ultimately, like, what would be really cool is like, imagine instead of being a uniswap token holder, you could be a uniswap equity holder and there could still be additional incentives and benefits. Because ultimately, and I had an argument, I think with some of your guests kind of about this, I think with Tillman potentially about this a couple of months ago. Like, ultimately, equity is better because it gives you investor protections.

And you like, you have a claim to a lot more with the token. You don't really have a claim to anything. And it was designed that way. Yeah, I mean, I agree. So like there's the, you know, libertarian, I love Bitcoin, half of me that says, you know, great. Like, you know, we should be, and, you know, we don't need the accredited investor laws. And your average person should be able to invest in these things. The problem is if they don't know what they're investing in.

If we had a situation where, you know, token back to- today and lose 90% and have no protection. So, ultimately, if they're going to punt it in tokens, or if they're going to punt it in, you know, 10 times leverage semiconductor stocks or whatever, like, you know, three times leverage semiconductor stocks, which by the way,

trading SOXL is a lot of fun. I've done it before. Like, it is fun. I'm not saying it's not fun. But like people can find other ways to punt their money. Look, the libertarian to me said it's up to them to decide where they should be putting their money. But obviously,

there's risks associated with anything. The benefit, though, of being able to invest in a crypto, And I guess if it was a tokenized equity would be the benefit as well, was, you know, there's, there's, there are a lot of liquidity in a lot of these tokens. There continues to be a decent amount of liquidity in these tokens to move in and out. So if you're starting to lose money, you can pull out. You know, if every private company in the world becomes tokenized, liquidity is going to be split across many, many things. And these assets are probably not going to be as liquid. Yeah.

Makes sense. I mean, I think a lot of people are just surprised because they thought that Eric Voorhe's all people would have done it differently, you know. I'm not saying that I really have not dug enough to have. I haven't either, which is why I was commenting on the most of the problem. But it is interesting that he gave the opportunity for everybody to reignite one of the probably longest going sort of debates and conversations in crypto. I think most people are going to move towards equity and away from tokens if they have a potential unicorn personally. Well, and I think, I think also you're starting to see like a lot of the reason that people

launched tokens in the past. By the way, when we were raising, we raised capital once, when we were raising capital, there were some VCs that were talking to that required us to put a token warrant if we were going to raise from them in the investment docs. And there were a lot of funds that would only invest if there was a token. That is definitely starting to change. And now, I have not talked to a single VC that has said, I will only invest if there's a token.

There's a lot of VCs that will still invest with tokens. and there are still reasons to have tokens and not equities in certain situations, right? I'm not saying that there's not. But I think the appetite is definitely leaning either I'm indifferent between tokens and equities or you should launch this as an equity business as opposed to it. I agree. Anything else on your radar before I let you go? The red card should be rescinded.

That's it. It's all I got. They won't even review it. And somebody please do a Trump copy trading. app because Scott and I will provide TV all to that, those apps. I will provide a provider for that. I mean, I guess you can only do it retroactively and not in real time. It would be amazing if we could get to get someone in the family to launch that.

He should just launch it himself. Yeah, seriously. 50% profit share. Trump, if you're listening, allow us to copy trade you and take 50% of the profit. That's totally acceptable to me. Okay, I don't know if you saw though, like as an honorable mention for this show, it's not a crypto show. It just because we were talking about that, it reminded me because this one just, it really blows my mind that Open AI is proposing giving 5% to the United States government Trump administration. Do you see that?

Because like, you know, like Bernie Sanders is like, you know, 50% of all AI should be a given. That's different because it would be just like we take it. And this is a gift. But like the fact that like I see the same people criticism. criticizing socialism and Bernie saying, let's take a piece of the company, are cheering 5% of open AI should be owned by the United States government. We have to be in a simulation. I don't know. Did you see, did you see in New York, Mom Dottie told everyone to set their Aces to 78 degrees? No. Yeah, he told everyone to do their part. So I saw a pretty funny tweet that said,

I texted every single person I know that voted to Mom Dottie and made sure they sent me a picture of their ACs at to 78 degrees. You know what? If you were a real supporter, you'd go 82. just to contribute to the cause. Yeah, exactly. Just no AC in New York. 78's for pussies. Let's go full France. Yeah.

Why do you turn the heat on? Me? I don't turn the heat on. I'm saying people, why don't people broadly? Yeah, no, it's so true. And Trump also told all the gas stations to just lower their prices or else.

All right. Thank you, Scott. Oh, yeah, I'll see you in a couple weeks. All right. Looking forward to later. Later, bye.