The Wolf Of All Streets - Bitcoin Rises While Global Markets Dump #CryptoTownHall

Episode Date: March 9, 2026

In this Crypto Town Hall episode, the panel discusses Bitcoin's resilience near $69K amid global market turmoil from Middle East conflict, oil spiking above $100/barrel, and sharp declines in Asian equities. MicroStrategy buys $1.28B more Bitcoin during extreme fear, Bitmain adds over $100M Ethereum, and speakers highlight maturing DeFi yields, Kraken’s Fed master account milestone, tokenized assets growth, and why regulatory clarity is essential for mainstream adoption.

Good morning, everybody. Welcome to Cryptotown Hall every other weekday here on X at 1015 AM Eastern Standard Time. I think we're going to change the title. Right now we've got Strategy Buys 1.28 billion Bitcoin during Extreme Fear, which I think is actually a very relevant story worth discussing. I believe also Bitmine, by the way, on the Tom Lee side and the Ethereum side, bought over $100 million worth of Ethereum as well, which was announced today. But I think the bigger story at the moment, and obviously, you know, you can't extrapolate too much from things that happen in the short term. But right now we have global markets reeling. Obviously, the Niki was down massively. Korea hit a circuit breaker last night again, down 8% when the markets opened. The Dow Jones opened down, I think, 400 points, I think I believe, has continued down.

And we have the S&P opened at 6,700, currently trading at 6640. And that was already a big gap down from the close on Friday. And Bitcoin, which was down slightly over the weekend, which has become a trend, is actually up at $69,000. So Bitcoin is up on the day. It's up on Friday's close, which was at around $68,000. And everything else is seemingly suffering the fate of volatile oil markets. So obviously we're not a macro show per se, but I'm sure you all have seen that oil on the open. yesterday, it basically pumped up to $119.50, both WTI and Brent. And then when there was news that the

world was going to get together and start to release about 400 million barrels of oil from reserves that settled down to just over $100. I haven't checked in the last 20 minutes. So I'm not sure where it stands, but that was the story up to 120, basically, and back down to 100. So a lot of volatility, a lot of insanity, and Bitcoin just kind of Bitcoining, which I find very, very interesting for the, uh, it's correlated fan base, which I am not a part of. Yeah. Well, I mean, it's one of those days when you look and it actually is logical, but we've had so much ill, so much illogic that people see it and say, oh my God, look at how strange it is. But the truth is that if there's there's two certainties here and a

lot of uncertainty. Certainty number one is monetary inflation is going to rage. Full stop. They need you're print, they need to print just, you know, just because of the war, just, just from the actual, you know, spending on defense, spending on munitions, we're talking literally the estimate is $500 billion more a year. And then that doesn't even count the cost of reconstruction when everything is all said and done. And so the, the amount of, the amount of monetary printing is going to go higher. You know, those sorts of assets that that react to that makes sense. The other thing that is an absolute certainty is people having learned how hard it is to

get their wealth out of countries they're trying to leave will once again find Bitcoin. And you can downplay that as much as you want, but there's a lot of wealth in a lot of the places that people have been panicking trying to get the hell out of and they can't you know, Bitcoin's one of the only ways they can get their wealth out. And that narrative is going to happen. And so, yeah, to me, this is logical, Scott. You know, I said it, you know, on Macro Monday, I'll say it again. You know, the sellers in Bitcoin are exhausted, all the four-year cycle stuff, whatever.

But if you actually look at the risk reward on buying Bitcoin, it may be higher now than it's ever been. And contrasts that with, you know, software companies where, you know, some are going to do fine, even though they're going to do it with much fewer employees. And some are going to be like, you know, what the hell? We don't need you. We can build it ourselves using AI. You know, contrast that with so many other areas of the economy that AI is going to deal with. Contrast that with places that are actually impacted by war.

And so, yeah, to me, it makes sense, but we just haven't seen it before. So that's why it looks weird. Oh, come on. I agree. We've got to go to the panel. Throw your hands up, guys. I'm waiting for hands. I'm trying to say things to make people like,

as an idiot, how dare he say that? I mean, come on. I know. Isn't it hard to be the guy who says things just to trigger people when you know that you don't necessarily agree with them and then you don't even get the response that you're looking for? Well, actually, I do agree with what I just said. I'm just kidding.

I was hoping for a response. Okay, William, you're the first one to raise your hand. Go forth. Okay. Well, I mean, I'm going to say something that I've been saying before. The markets are being led by liquidity. liquidity on liquidity off. Every week it's something.

Today, this week is oil, obviously, because of the war. Before it was gold and you name it, interest rates and so on and so on. And inflation, the narrative, we're not in control of the narrative. That's the tragedy of the industry. And I wished we could be talking more about what is going on in the industry as far as using the blockchain, using crypto for meaningful things, and not just talking about liquidity on or liquidity off and was driving it. It's a sad situation we're in.

Anyone else? Hands? All right, Dave. Okay, Carlo, go ahead. Good morning, Scott. Good morning, Carlo. First of all, listening to your piece with John Carlo, I encourage everyone out there to check it out. Fantastic. Reenforces a lot of the conversations we're having to.

having right now, especially around Bitcoin, especially around the massive adoption of digital assets, and the existential threat that this poses to banks, John Carlo nails it, and your interview with him is outstanding. Thank you. I think the Bitcoin market, per Dave's take, is responding exactly the way I think it should. And, you know, I listen a lot to Anas when it comes to kind of a a realistic outlook on what is happening right now in Iran, and I'm by no means an expert on Iran, nor do I intend to be one on this stage. But I think the markets are largely in a wait-and-see posture here because a lot of the pressure is happening in Asia,

where the indicators are that the Asian oil market is going to get pummeled by this continued limitation of oil going through the strait. And that ties into Dave's theory that, you know, you have people that are looking at ways to hedge against that and get their money out, per se, and Bitcoin is the obvious no-brainer to that. I did put out a piece this morning, which I think is interesting, and I'd love to pin it. There has been a precipitous drop in yield in DFI for stable coins, and while many may come to the conclusion that that is an indicator of a lack of liquidity

and a lack of risk on appetite in the marketplace, I think it also indicates an incredibly bullish sentiment for the future of stablecoin adoption. Just by way of a brief TLDR, I think what we are seeing is defy and stable coins are maturing, and the fact that you're not seeing those massive yields that were previously being offered by a lot of platforms, which may have not been totally justified

but may have been somewhat manipulated in order to gain adoption and to gain, you know, interest from people parking their stable coins. What I think you're seeing is you're seeing a maturity of the marketplace where defy yield on stable coins is becoming more of a more akin to an institutional thing where there's an actual defy yield. And, you know, Brian Armstrong's take this weekend where he, went out on Fox News and went directly after the banks and called them out for all the bullshit that they have been trying to perpetuate in trying to kill clarity. And this narrative is now

broadening Scott beyond just rewards, which has already baked into the Genius Act. I'm starting to see this as a full frontal assault on any yield. And I agree with him and I agree with a lot of people in the space, including Dave, that I think this is going to backfire badly on the banks. And I think that Defi is going to become a very interesting. play for consumers and an alternative to the banks. So I think ultimately while we're seeing yield in D5 for stable coins drop, and that might be a sentiment that there is no liquidity or it's a risk-off indicator. I think equally it is an indicator that the sector is maturing and there's no denying that we're seeing tons of on-chain activity with stable coins. So I think we just need to ride this out

and hopefully this war, sad and tragic as it is, is not a long, drawn-out thing because then we really have a lot of other concerns that we need to factor into this conversation. Thank you, Scott. That was great, Carlo. Thank you. Adam. Good morning, guys. Dave, I would just push back a little bit on the thesis that, you know, people leaving these countries or fleeing are going to use Bitcoin as their kind of exit strategy. How do you, I mean, first, how do you think they're going to on-ramp to Bitcoin, whatever? If I'm in Iran and I want to get out, how am I going to on ramp to Bitcoin? If you're in Iran and you're thinking of, and you have a chance of leaving, you're already in Bitcoin.

Right. That's what I'm saying, right? So where's the new buy pressure going to come from in that sort of scenario? It's not that. It's narrative. It's narrative. Adam. 100% you're right.

I mean, I'm not saying people are going to run out and go. But if you look at, like, during COVID, when the Canadian truckers were getting their accounts frozen, that created a lot of Bitcoiners, not immediately. But people said, oh, wait a minute, you know, it's this, the notion of censorship resistance, the notion of portability, the notion of scarcity, it creeps back up because it's easy to explain. And when you're trying to orange pill somebody in the United States, you can't even talk about that sort of stuff. Why? Because they don't have that issue.

That's what I mean. No, I get that. Actually, that's true. So you're just saying for narrative awareness building, it's actually a good thing, which I don't disagree with. I mean, that Truckers is the perfect. perfect analogy because I mean I you know so many of my normie friends had no idea that it was even taking place right no idea that people were actually getting their accounts frozen and stuff in

Canada so I'm with that so you're basically looking at it as more of a um awareness building event for long-term holders basically yeah we've had a few of these in time Dave right I mean I agree with you by the way I don't think it like moves the needle massively but you know Cyprus back in what year is it but that was kind of the first big Bitcoin move oh when they when they When they basically- Silicon Valley Bank? I mean, Silicon Valley Bank. Bitcoin, you could argue that the Silicon Valley Bank collapsed was the unexpected catalyst of the entire

last bowl market, or at least the catalyst that ended the bear market, right? Because it basically Bitcoin had dumped on FTX. We sat there kind of 20 and below 19, 18, for all this time. Then Silicon Valley Bank collapsed, and in particular, had some of circles holdings, right? So even people like me said, well, I don't know what the story is going to be with USC by Monday, so I'm just going to put it in Bitcoin.

By the way, I thought Bitcoin would go down, not up. And Bitcoin went from like 19 to 25. Right. And then that was the bottom. I think that's exactly my point. Look, I think, I hate to say it, but I think that that's exactly what's playing out here. I think it's actually funny when charts and things happen at the same time and time frames. You know, we said, look, I said October 10th would take six months to wipe through the system

before we can resume any sort of bull trend. We'll start doing the math. And, you know, here we are. That's tough. By the way, for those who don't, we're talking, that's tomorrow. Now, do I think that that prediction has any veracity? Of course not. I mean, it's an absolute, you know, estimate of estimate.

But, you know, whether or not it's Josh Mann with 444, you know, with 444 based on 84,000 on a particular date. I mean, come on. But the truth is that it is a lot easier to explain Bitcoin's use case to people when they see something in front of them. And it's easy to see how the money printer is going to get turned on now too, right? I mean, there's just no way around it. I mean, you know, it's there's just no way around it.

I do want to go back to the thing Carlos said because one of the things that I have always hated about defy and, despite being wildly bullish on DFI's future is this notion that people say, well, this token has yield. And you can't figure out where the hell the yield's coming from, right? You know, because it doesn't make any sense. I mean, it's not like the network's not generating the fees to pay the yield, etc.

So there has always been in my head a need for a transparent, competitive, open-sourced marketplace where real, yield can be shared between, you know, based on market forces between borrowers, you know, between the lenders and the servicers, et cetera. DeFi has that potential. But one of the problems that we had is the stupid, you know, the famous Sam, the Matt Levine interview with Sam, you know, where, well, there's this magic box and we saw UST paying, you know, 18% or whatever the hell it was paying toward the end. And it never makes any sense. The truth is that when you see stablecoin yields going down to the levels that they're at now, community banks actually are paying more.

So them to argue that this is a problem is just insane. I mean, it's truly insane because, you know, markets will price markets. The difference is, is there's a lot of money that is at well below those levels and there's just no economic way for that to happen and defy will make that happen. I mean, arguably, defy will decrease rates paid because you'll have a more competitive market, you know, when in certain times. And so to me, this is incredibly healthy. That's exactly my thesis. That is exactly my thesis. Okay, good. Well, hopefully I didn't, I didn't gunk it up for people, but I think that that's important. And it's the fact that we have octogenarian senators who don't understand what's going on just drives me, just drives me

bonkers. But, you know, we'll see. And, you know, I think, Scott, you and I both think, that the political process is so fubarred that, you know, that all these things, well, we're going to get clarity by this. We're going to get it by that. It's like, the truth is, the truth is is, what we're getting is a situation where if the Democrats win the midterms, then do they continue to cow to Elizabeth Warren and take the risk that at foobars their 28 or do they worry about the midterms? I mean, if they think they're going to win in a landslide, then they're not going to to care, right? You know, but if it's a wedge issue, then they will care. And I hate handicapping politics because I personally know Democrats who think that it makes sense,

but, you know, it's a question of what they want to make an issue out of, right? And that's, that's the stupid stuff. But the truth is, there's a lot at stake here. And, you know, from a crypto point of view, it's huge. From a Bitcoin point of view, it's relevant, for sure. But, you know, I thought there was headlines out this morning from certain people inside banks talking to reporters saying, you know, if we don't get this stuff passed, that we are going to be at a disadvantage and it's going to hurt us. Yeah, I mean, I think I saw a story this morning that I had pulled up actually for our show that they were thinking about taking legal action against the regulator. It's incredible. The narrative is really shifting in real time. Well, because the narrative that the the the the ABA American Bankers Association, you know, position is is essentially two plus two equals seven.

It's not even that it's equals four or four or four and a half or whatever. I mean, it's just so unbelievably dumb. And the math just isn't there. I mean, Brian, we see another hand. Yeah, just really quickly before Brian. Yeah, just just not misquoted. This is a story in the Guardian. and top U.S. banks way suing federal regulator over crypto banking rules.

Exclusive bank policy institute representing lenders such as J.P. Morgan and Goldman Sachs argues that new licenses can harm U.S. consumers and financial system. Oh, that's the difference. That's because they don't want to have a fully reserved crack in and have a bank. Exactly. That is the, interestingly, if that ever gets to the point, it'll be in the courts, but you're trying to make an argument. Just understand what that means.

What they're saying, it's the same thing. happen with custodia only instead of behind closed doors it'll be in the public you're making an argument that banks that have 95% or 5% coverage of their assets on hand are somehow less risky than banks that have 100% that's what that's what they're trying to argue i mean it's literally down is up and up is down you know it's it's right it's something right out of 1984 anyway right yeah brian sorry go ahead oh zero worries I covered banks for over a decade and nothing coming out of the big banks makes much sense to me. Not this deposit issue, which we've talked about before, but even on this specific issue,

like BPI is pushing back against the OCC, making it easier for crypto and fintech firms to operate under a national bank trust charter. And basically what this does is it's kind of like this limited banking charter. So you can custody assets, you can manage trust, estate, and client assets. can do things like settlement, payment, and asset servicing activities, which include stable coin reserve management, digital asset custody when you're approved by the regulators, but you cannot accept retail deposits, you cannot provide FDIC insured deposits, you cannot engage in lending as a core business. And so BPI is basically trying to say like you're providing

bank-like services without bank-like regulation, but I fully disagree for three main reasons. So no, number one, trust banks are still regulated. They're supervised by the OCC. They have to comply with capital governance and BSA AML requirements. Number two, they still have prohibitions on activities. So they're not this full equivalent, full service bank. And it shouldn't be regulated and such.

And then lastly, this encourages innovation under federal oversight, where if you don't do this, you know, it's either under this fragmented state regulation or outside the scope of federal banking regulators. So I think that this is really just a continuation in the push by the big banks to slow down what they see as this competitive industry. That actually plays into that old Jamie Diamond narrative

that if you wanna be in stable coin yield, you gotta be a full pledge bank. And you're making the point perfectly that that's not the case and that there is distinctions, but it just shows how scared they are. They're scared of these neobanks like Cracken, because why would you ever touch a bank again when you have these other alternatives were on and off ramp? Yeah, I mean, to be specific, I mean, you've heard me talk about this. Carlo knows where probably where I'm going to go. The notion of stablecoin rewards and all

that stuff is quaint and irrelevant if Cracken, Coinbase, Robin Hood, all can operate a skinny bank that can offer payment services. If you can have it linked into Zellon, in Venmo or even just Venmo, it doesn't matter. And there'd be easy to do that and pay your bills and write checks, you know, against a payment account and have automated sweeps from, you know, you pick your investment accounts in whatever order. So you have just set it up so that if, God forbid, you know, you run out of money in your stable coin balance, that it goes and sells because it's 24-7, right, so it can do it, goes and sells Bitcoin or Ethereum or Dogecoin. I don't really care or be UIDL, right? You know, a tokenized bank deposit and do so, people are going to

not have to have nearly as much in payment accounts anymore. And consumers are going to love that because it's going to increase the amount of return that they have. That's the fear. That's what these guys are afraid of. They're afraid of a 24-7 financial services company that can handle and provide the service of payments that people rely on banks to do right now. That is the end game here. Make no mistake. And if you're not watching that, I mean, assuming the banks don't know that, assumes that they're stupid. Now, I worked in at Citigroup for years. And yes, they're, they're not exactly the organizational IQ average is definitely well below a lot of other companies that I've worked at. But the truth is, they're not that dumb. And there are smart people there. And those people will know

what I just said is true because it's just so damn obvious. We talked about this on Friday. Jamie and I actually, Jamie came onto my show, my stable coin solution show on Friday, and we talked about this exact issue. So it's so funny you're saying this, Dave, because that is absolutely what they're scared of. They know they're being marginalized. Yeah, it's not that marginalized.

This happens in every single technology revolution, every single time. You know, it's like the difference is booksellers didn't have advocates, right? They didn't make enough money to be able to say, oh, well, we, you know, local bookstores just didn't have the political advocates to say, well, we, you know, we shouldn't be disintermediated, you know, but banks do. They've made billions, many of which because they were given

a direct subsidy. I calculate over $500 billion of subsidy by the change in 2008 that allowed them to get interest on their Federal Reserve balances, which was supposed to be, you know, sitting there as, you know, basically sitting there as cash. Before 2008, they weren't allowed to. People think that TARP was the big bailout of the banking industry. Well, it was a bailout. But the bigger one was both the ability to get money on balances the Fed and changing their reserve ratios so that they can hold more in treasuries

and other risk-free things and lever it up. And it's just, it's huge amounts of money that they've made on the back of federal galar gas. and people don't know that. It's actually crazy in my life. Anyway, Jamie, I'm talking too much. You've got your hand up. Sorry.

No, it's all good. I love the discussion. I mean, you know, the cracking development, I think it's important. I mean, it's a signal that choke point 2.0 is unlikely to happen again. And that's significant. And as more of these neobanks take that step, Coinbase and others, I think it's going to continue to solidify and build trust and build a direct connection as opposed to having to go through a middleman or through a middle bank to decide what they can do and what they can't.

You know, as far as defy goes, I mean, this is, people need to understand. This is where innovation begins and Tradfai adopts and regulates. So, you know, defy is important because this is where we get to play, figure out what things can be approved from the current structures and, you know, that's available to people. And then the thing that what elevates to the top, I think triphi is going to find. a way to to adopt it, to make it safe for people, and to allow more people to access it. You know, we talked about the Iran conflict, obviously, and related to midterms. We were talking about it last night in our space.

And it's just interesting because I just think people need to separate the two. Let Trump play this thing out. You know, deal with Iran's oil price. Iran separately and the oil prices separately. And then after this resolves itself, I think the midterm, will likely write its own narrative. And I just think we just have to let, you know, Trump govern and get this thing through, see where it ends up, and then deal with midterms afterwards.

As far as Bitcoin, you know, we talked about the range. I mean, you're still a $71,000 to $60,000 near-term range, and it's been largely, like, riding in the middle of that. But there's liquidity above somewhere, you know, 83,000 at the top, and 55 to 52,000 below. So I would continue to watch those areas for movements and price ranges as we go forward. But right now, Bitcoin's looking really strong, given the conflict that's going on. And I think it's really encouraging.

Yeah, Jamie, I would add to that that I think 74,000 is a very e-level for technical analysts that, you know, is going to have to be broken before that 82 area just because it was kind of the March high of 24, you know, and was the low on the tariffs and just has kind of, you know, been a very key level. And above 74 to 80, there's like nothing. So I think you're right that if we kind of get above 74, there's been very little price action, maybe a week in each direction, in that kind of 74 to 80 range. So it should be pretty smooth sailing.

Richard. Hey, guys. I want to be the non-American in this conversation. I mean, I find this interesting when we get back to these regulation, political type nuances around Bitcoin specifically. I mean, crypto in general. But, you know, Dave, I want to ask you this. I mean, you say you worked at City.

I mean, is the belief that, you know, let's say 2028, the Democrats get into power, that the banks would be happy for crypto to go away completely, for defy to go away completely? I mean, I'm trying to understand, like, if there's any belief that there's real value in what DFI represents the form of crypto? Here, okay, so there's just two questions here that get conflated, right? The first is, can you put the genie back in the bottle? That's really what you're asking. And, you know, look, if you're banks, what do you want?

You don't want to try to put the beat genie back in the bottle, because if you do, you know it's going to fail. So what do you want to do? You want to own it. You want to co-opt it. You want to basically make it. You want to make regulations, give you competitive modes. There are, and it's not just finance, but in all of these industries, there are armies of lobbyists

and insiders that work with regulators, et cetera, that what they do is they write rules that give them advantage. In fact, you know, a lot of people, a lot of companies have enormous regulatory outreach staffs that are very expensive and pay on lobbyists a lot of money. And what they're doing is they're writing a real rule. So let's say clarity passes. If clarity passes now, then we have two, you know, almost three years of Paul Atkins, SEC and a Mike Sealing CFTC who are going to write rules that are relatively libertarian that will be an open level playing field. And yeah, there'll be some things in those rules that get inserted that throw sand in the gears a bit,

but it's not going to stop competition. Now, if, on the other hand, clarity passes in 20, you know, in, let's say it passes and they start writing rules in 20, 27, right? You know, and we have an election around the corner and they can't, because it takes, it takes a lot of time. When an SEC does a rule, or the CFTC does a rule, it first goes to a comment period, and then they have to, and it all has to be documented through the Administrative Procedures Act. It takes time.

Generally, I think probably the fastest they'll ever get a rule from, you know, proposed to implement it, except for something really trivial, is somewhere around 18 months. So it means that if you don't get clarity this year, then it is entirely possible that the following SEC and CFTC, and if you have a president AOC or a president Newsom, that could be Gensler 2.0. And so now you have, you know, who knows whether they would do that. This is the ultimate downside.

In that scenario, then yes, yes, they've been directed to do this, but maybe they make it so that it's very favorable so that, yeah, you can trade crypto if you're an American, but only through if you have a brokerage account at a bank, and only if you're an accredited investor and these other things. And you can imagine all of the various grist that they could throw into it. That's really the issue. None of that has anything to do with Bitcoin, right? I want that to be very clear because the Bitcoin force has left the stable. any of the reason why you want clarity for Bitcoin will play out regardless. So there's no real political risk there because that ship has sailed.

And so it really, it is much more nuanced of an answer to your question. I think when it comes to defy, I don't think that there is any chance that the defy won't advance, but there is a huge chance that the banks will keep it as a cartel. Like, for example, take one business that has a history of this. stock borrow, right? The stock, you know, you buy, and this has, this is a very fraud issue, the way the markets work. The reason Paul Atkins is pushing for tokenization is because it's a much better market structure. One of the things that's better about it is instead of this notion that you can trade based upon a locate and you don't have to borrow until you settle and you can

settle for, you can have days and you can have fails, you have whatever, is under tokenization, you have to pre-borrow. You actually have to borrow if you want to sell. And, that has enormous implications throughout the market. One of those implications is it breaks the cartel and they're going to fight like hell against that. And we'll see how well they do, right? Now, that doesn't need clarity. That's literally what they're trying to get done. But those are the stakes, Richard. You could literally spend hours and I have on talking about the nuances of the stock loan market and how it will influence defy and or any other asset market. So it's a much more complicated question than you're asking, but understand the battle will be fought behind closed doors

in those sorts of rooms. I hope that answers what you're asking. Yeah, I mean, I think it does. My sense has always been that, you know, they just want to seat at the table and to take control of the table rather than to eradicate it completely. But yeah, that does give it a lot more context, you know, practically from your experience. I mean, look, at the other the thing about banks and the traditional financial markets are when when the leaders talk I'm not even sure that the people who are actually doing the businesses and working on the various pieces even are paying attention except in in cases where it's just dramatic right so you know you have this this level of dysfunction for jp morgan has had teams of people working on various

things in the in the world of crypto for years Jamie diamond has changed his tune dramatically but It really hasn't changed a whole lot inside it because it's just, it's not the way these organizations work. Anyway, I think it's way too in the weeds for this. I think, I don't know, Scott, you want to go in another direction? I mean, there's, you know, obviously we haven't even any great degree discussed the macro, but I'm not sure that that's interesting when there's so many shows about it. We kind of started off with the fact that Michael Saylor has bought another $1.2 billion, worth of Bitcoin, which I just find astounding. This is the success there of STRC to be able to do that

and that Tom Lee has continued to buy Ethereum. But I think all that in context of the fact that we're about to mine 20 million Bitcoin, it's really interesting as this becomes a serious buying floor continued from Sailor and others. And it's just, you know, when you zoom out 30,000 feet, thing is becoming more scarce. I mean, but how much, not to give a shameless plug to someone who isn't compensating me, but how much better would micro strategy be doing is if as they have their cash flow from STRC, they put it in an arch public kind of account. Yeah, I mean, they did that study.

They did that study. So for anyone who doesn't know, like Archipublic is a company that I work very closely with. I'm an equity holder, but it's now a rhythm for buying Bitcoin dips. And I use it, so it's not really shilling when it's how I buy Bitcoin. But I don't have it in front of me, but they did a study on using the algorithms back tested versus strategy's actual thing. And the cost basis would be like, like I said, I don't want to misquote it, but I think it was rather than 77, it was like 30.

Well, I don't know if it's going to be that big. But I mean, the point is that when you look at last week, the fact that you paid, I mean, anything over like, you know, 67, 68 is just, It's just giving money away. I mean, it's just... What was the cost basis on the buys? I didn't even see these. I didn't look.

I can look it up. 70,946, meaning he did all of his buys in the run up to 70, where it got rejected at 74. So we bought it. It was earlier in the week right on the rally. And to some degree, STRC inflows...

This space was downloaded via spacesdown.com. Visit to download your spaces today. You're going to be bigger on Bitcoin update. But this notion that you have to deploy the cache immediately, it's like, I don't know, it just seems silly. But someone will build a better mouse trap, which won't. And then, you know, then they'll out compete. I mean, who knows, maybe, you know, maybe Jack Mullers is listening. Jack, if you are, then, you know, design an algorithmic strategy to implement the cache that if you're good, if that's what you're going to be doing.

But, you know, and as I said, I have no, no skin in this game. I mean, I could design probably the right kind of algorithm because that's exactly what you want to do. But the reason that it matters is because of all this stupid chatter on, on, on, on, on, saying, well, look how bad strategy as is it trading. And okay, maybe, but, you know, they're making a long-term bet on multiples of this. And they're either right or they're wrong. You know, STRC is a really interesting vehicle for a lot of reasons. And I think a lot of people misunderstand it. But, you know, that's just me.

Should we talk about. Try to find that data. Yeah. Go ahead. Yeah, no, I was going to say. So, you know, we got, we have war where no one knows what's going on. We have BlackRock, you know, and the private credit saga, which is yet another, yet another thing where, you know, the private markets, a lot of that money that, you know,

people are wondering where catalyst is coming from for Bitcoin, if people sour on certain asset classes, that it helps, you know, it helps the, it helps. It helps what's going on. And that's something that, you know, Gary, I see you're up here. I mean, you talked about this, you know, you don't see where the catalyst is going to be. Well, if silver stays in this, in the range that it's been, and it's been in a pretty tight range recently, even though, I mean, I guess, you know, I guess last week it dropped 6% because it had gone up over 90, but it's still right around where it's been after this breakout. Is that, is there, is hot money likely to come back to, you know, assets that show relative strength. So the question is, is what does it take for Bitcoin to show relative

strength? It's been, and we just, if you go back and look at the math, it's been more or less within a few thousand dollars, but on every Monday for the last four weeks, it's been around 68,000 somewhere, give or take a thousand. And that's pretty dead. There's been a lot of volatility in the middle, but it's pretty dead. I got to say, I've been very impressed with how Bitcoin's done this weekend. It's, uh, once again, betrayed my logic. It's hilarious. I don't know where the buying's coming from other than Sailor.

Well, he bought last week. We can tell, you can, you can, you could forensically tell. By price. He bought, he buzzed every week, man. No, but he bought early last week when Bitcoin ran and then failed at 74 and didn't buy anything as it fell back. and now probably we'll be buying again tomorrow. Let me ask this question, maybe. I mean, is anybody surprised that Bitcoin didn't puke out this weekend?

I would have thought it would have done that. And it's held up very well, surprisingly well, I think. I agree with that. Yeah, I mean, look, I personally, expected, you know, I was, I was at the World Baseball Classic, using, you know, every, in between innings looking at what was going on. When I saw oil go to 120 and I looked and I saw Bitcoin was still at 66, I'm saying, well, that's, that's pretty good, you know, like, that's surprising.

I thought I would do the C-64 or 63 here. And then I saw oil drop all the way down to like 115 and it was, it was a bit higher. And I'm like, wow, this is, this is interesting. So even I, and we all know I've been one of the more bullish people, I'll admit, yeah. I mean, I think most people were surprised because it looks, it feels, Gary, like, like there's not that they're set. This is what they call it bottoms. They call it sellers exhaustion, right?

And I'm not saying that they are done. I mean, who the hell knows? But, you know, it certainly feels that way. That's the only thing I can say. Well, it certainly felt. We will see. We have a lot of levels to get through here. Oh, yeah.

You're going to see a lot of sellers. 95, 92. Hell, 74 is a really hard level to get through. That's right. Yeah. And that's what people need to understand. This is going to be a rocky road. If you haven't hedged, it's probably a little late.

I mean, it's probably a lot late to do anything and just hold on for the ride. I, you know, the Crudol thing, I mean, does anybody think crude all is really going to explode to the, what's Bloomberg? What's McGone saying? Is Bloomberg, like, believe as gas prompts promoting $150 to $200 crude oil, which I think it's just stupid? I think that, yeah, we didn't, I think Mike thinks that the 119, 120 level was a great short tactically. Look, this isn't changing the cost of production. It changes people's ability to get at it, right? So, you know, all you have to do is look at the December.

the fact that December's in the 70s is really high. I think that's what he's focusing more on than on the front month. Yeah. Oh, you're back. Okay, good. I think I don't know what happened. I was trying to get back. I think I'm back. But yeah, I would say Mike's actually bearish oil.

So, you know, he's kind of the commodity guy. He thinks that this is a temporary spike, Gary. I mean, Gary, you've said it. What's the average cost of oil production these days? Somewhere in the 40s? Yep. In the U.S. may be 55, 60 in Middle East. I mean, but at $100, the entire planet comes on stream.

Yeah. And the entire planet. And can you imagine it lasted for any length of time like it did in the 70s? I mean, just imagine, you know, I are at the oil companies for how much money they'd be making 100%. Yeah, but Dave and Gary, quickly. Gary, you just said 100, everybody comes on. But we saw, obviously, like, I think Qatar shut down, that was last week. before it was 100, and Saudi Ramco shut down two major fields today.

So like, and I kind of asked McLean this too. I get the, what historically happens based on certain prices, but is this time a bit different because the straits are actually closed and there's literally nowhere, no way to ship that? Or is it just another narrative? Well, look, I, let's remember that, uh, everything got shut down during COVID. So my theory is that the entire industrial complex is now almost anti-fragile. It has been supply shocks so many times by these psychopaths that within weeks we will be up and running like at $100, guys.

There's $30 of transport. Okay, I can pay somebody $10 to take a bribe. This is what happens in oil, okay? This shit never stops flowing. You can embargo this into oblivion, but it's not on the blockchain. You can't trace it and track it. It's black crude oil, man. It's got a few different flavors to it.

But, I mean, you put a logo on a ship and you move it. So I'm not convinced the Hormuz is completely shut down. I'm not even confused who actually shut it down. I mean, based on every supply disruption we've had, the wrong players are being blamed for it. I mean, it sounds like the quote unquote shutdown is more like nobody wants to take the risk more than than the end up.

You're not going to pay $50 for an insurance premium to move something worth 100. Exactly. That's what I'm saying. So shutdown is anecdotes sort of like it's not the correct term. Mercifully non-viable. Effectively, yeah. Yeah, it's.

But I just don't see this lasting. Like, you know, when people, are blaming it's saying hey putin's taking a bath putton is getting like he's going he's going to sell discounted crude oil to everybody he can so that he can get long-term contracts after this is done he loves this smart cat dude well he doesn't 100 dollar crude oil though i promise you he does not want that or 150 because he knows 150 means we're back at 30 in about six months the whole world will start drilling toward if you see the few people you see the few future's curve. Think what can happen. If the futures curve goes to $70, $75, and you could get volume off of that, say out one year, you don't think Exxon who drills for 40 isn't going to sell $75 crude oil in one year?

Of course they will. Of course, dude. This is a monster margin. I mean, that's an incredible margin. Nothing has changed for Exxon. The cost of production has not changed. penny. The cost of consumption is going to change in different areas. I mean, Europe is so fucked. It's unbelievable. We are going to watch the total entire collapse of Europe. We're literally going to watch it unfold right here, right in front of the next two years. It's pretty wild. I mean, it's amazing. It destroys demand. Yeah. It's amazing like when you zoom out and see. There was a great book. I mean, he's a bit of an alarmist. Peter's Eyehand, is that his name? I try to remember the exact name, but, you know, the end of the world is just the beginning, something to that effect. And he goes very deeply into how, like, as a result of many unique

properties geographically and resources and stuff, the United States could basically just survive anything on its own. And this is one of those scenarios where you start to see that, you know, I mean, even Mike was talking about that this morning. We have plenty of corn, plenty of plenty of oil. We can just basically go about our business while the rest of the world, you know, explodes. It's really pretty crazy. But Gary, I think, you know, I don't know how, what Europe coming apart before our eyes looks like in two years, but I think we've been watching it slowly happened for quite a long time. Yeah. I agree. We got any more. Yeah. Look, we always make the statement about markets, how markets hate uncertainty.

And, you know, and so the notion of, well, okay, you know, we think there's, going to be a war, we're uncertain about it, so let's sell it off. Okay, the war started, okay, we're okay. But when you get to this sort of situation where nobody really knows what the hell is going to happen, that's one of those things where it lasts for until it resolves. And that's markets. Now, that's in general. But within markets, the longer it goes, the more people start to make bets on rotation and where things are actually headed. And I think that's what we're starting to see. Right. I think that they're starting to become a consensus in matter what there's going to be monetary printing, then no matter what the need for certain assets

are going to go higher and other assets, they may do whatever. But if you start looking at the internals, you know, like, you know, oil is like, you saw what the CME did, right? I mean, this was, this was crazy in my mind. And not crazy that they raised margin requirements on oil. That makes perfect sense. I mean, they always tend to do that. But evidently, they cut margin requirements on gold and silver, which I don't really understand that. I, you know, Gary, you more a commodity guy than me. I mean, I thought that the gold and silver, what they had done was they made a margin requirement based on price so that if it goes up, margin would go higher and vice versa. But is that all that happened or did they actually change the rules? Do you know?

Yeah, this is where McGlone would know the answer to this, but I don't. But I thought that was interesting. I mean, it's like people always talk about manipulation in markets and they always conveniently laugh at what's called the PPP, the Plunge Protection Team. I mean, who knows what's actually happening under the covers in some of these markets. But the fact that oil seems to be pegged right around 100, and it doesn't seem to be able to get too far above it right now today. And I doubt seriously you're going to see it go much lower is fascinating. I mean, I guess you always sign narratives to things we laugh about that after they happen.

But I mean, doesn't it make sense that, you know, oil trading was basically closed all weekend, and then you see all this news, and then you had the huge spike, and then the government step in and say, hey, we're going to release a three or four hundred million barrels. I think it was 300 of the 1.2 in reserves and prices calm down. That's one of those that actually kind of rationally makes sense to me. Not that I know much about oil. Of course. It's not just oil, though. I mean, it's just, it's like everything else, you know, in the indices and what's going, you know, what people are investing in. I mean, it's just, Mondays are always weird that way because the expectation in the weekend, at least historically, has been dramatically worse.

The downside expectations on the weekend tend to peter out Monday morning. Now, that's not, that can't happen all the time, right? Because one of these days, you know, things will actually be as bad as people expect. But that just hasn't happened. Absolutely. Any other topics that we missed? I think we pretty much covered it. Yeah.

I mean, look, I think when you start talking about, you know, there's all sorts of stuff inside the world of crypto that one of these days maybe we'll talk about again, you know, things like, you know, what's going on with, you know, bit tensor. Or hyperliquid, right. Hyperliquid or, you know, and there's a lot there. Or, you know, or our favorite XRP because, you know. I did see something funny, by the way.

I don't know if this is exact. It was somebody in this ballpark that, like, only three of the top ten assets traded on hyperliquid or actually crypto. Well, I mean, you know, tokenized everything or contracts on oil and all those things and not actually like crypto anymore. Yeah, Richard's giving me a thumbs. I don't know if it was three or four, but it was a pretty astounding staff. Well, I know because, you know, there's a lot of precious metals are trading on hyperliquid for sure, which is, which is a very interesting use case that I don't think people truly understand how important that is. You know, it's like, you know, it's essentially creating, putting much more transparency on the gambling market with regard to a lot.

of these things you could you could have you could have traded oil on sunday before the markets open that was one real advantage author hayes was was pushing that quite heavily which i thought was quite interesting there it's it's it is very much uh going to become a fixture not just hyperliquid in general but just the notion of of perp dex's trading products 24-7 if if you if you think that that the cf tc isn't paying attention to this, you're not paying attention. Because they definitely get it. William, I see your hand up.

Yeah, I was going to ask you, David, why not talk about these other things now? Why delay? I mean, this is the time to talk about things like today, the NASDAQ has a deal with Crackin to do tokenization of assets. We have a company called Cass, raising $80 million for stable coins.

We have the government saying they will relax their views on privacy of some tokens. I mean, there are some developments. And again, it sounds like a broken record. We should be talking about these and let those kinds of stories drive the narrative instead of just talking about liquidity and the war and oil and all of that. Why not? I mean, this should be dominating the discussion. I think you're right.

And actually, you know, I just don't know the details. I saw the headline on NASDAQ and crack. That is a, it is a very big deal. I sort of teased it before. I mean, people don't understand what happens, you know, why, you know, everyone in the world of crypto, not everyone, but a lot of people look at it. And McGlone always talks about it and his, he's a much more negative version of it, but that there's a lot of overvalued and crap assets that are there

because they were cheap to bring to market. They got their liquidity, whatever. But what happens when you can trade interchangeably on the same platform? And what does that mean? Well, it means a lot of things. One of them is it means that you'll see competition and value will need to be created. But it also means that founders and foundations and controllers of various tokens will have the ability to actually tap into real liquidity. And so it's going to be really interesting how that plays out.

I mean, look, my thesis for years has been that there's a massive total addressable market for well-designed utility tokens. I just don't know that there are any. I'm not joking about that. That's a pretty hyperbolic statement, I realize, but I don't know that there are any where it's very clear other than exchange tokens where they have a specific schedule. So, yeah, I mean, I think these things are a very big deal. And I think that this is the time when people want that the building is going to increase. The question is, can it happen? I don't know the answer.

I mean, what do you think? Yeah, I mean, with the crack and deal, what it does is it makes U.S. stocks available to international markets that that was not possible before. So it allows anyone to invest in those companies, for example. I mean, that's one aspect of it, tokenized stocks, bringing them to the, you know, bringing them to the, the international markets. That's interesting in itself. Yeah, brilliant. I think makes a great point about that we do generally like it. I think we do get bogged down obviously in prices and whatever, but we should make a concerted effort to go back to at least listing the important news stories that nobody views as important each

day. Something that we used to do. And, you know, I think we do generally like cover them. The thing is we have a three second conversation about it and then everybody moves on. Yeah, we're all like Dory in finding Nemo at times. Look, a boat. I seen a boat. What boat? Short-term memory loss. I saw you raise your hand.

It's just going to say, I think this is the part of crypto and blockchain that I'm currently most excited about. And I think Cracken's announcement with NASDAQ is pretty massive. And so to me, this is just further movement on this inevitable trend. I'm like super bullish on tokenization, see it as inevitable for two reasons. One is finances built on these antiquated rails, literally things like ACH and the credit card issuer networks that were created 50 plus years ago, but we can reimagine these rails with blockchains and internet-based rails, things like tokenization.

And then number two, finance is right with intermediaries and all these intermediaries extract rent, and we can remove that with blockchain technology. And so end result is you get these massive speed and cost benefits. You get other benefits like enhanced transparency, composability, access to capital. And I just think you continue to see movement here. So even before today, NASDAQ had filed with the SEC to enable tokenized securities to trade on the same border book as traditional securities. NYSE is building their tokenized stock trading platform. DTCC announced plans to make all their 1.4 million securities that it custody.

digitally eligible. And to me, a lot of this stuff could happen on public blockchain. So there's a big emphasis in NASDAX press release today about connecting both permissioned and permissionless environments. Similarly, DTCC said in their press release, they're not dictating which wallet or blockchain's clients should use. So I think like this is the big massive unlock. And lastly, what I'll say is like the thing that gets me so excited is this is not being

led by individuals because I think it generally takes decades for people to change their behaviors. Like people still go into banks and deposit checks physically when they can do it on their phone 20 years ago is being led by the institutions. And when that happens, they're going to abstract away all of the complicated like back end of it. And so people will just start to utilize and adopt blockchain-based solutions. And that to me, you know, they can onboard tons, like millions or billions of people pretty quickly. So I'm pumped for this whole movement. There's one more thing I want to say.

Also, Corn Base, today is rolling out crypto futures trading across 26 European countries. That's also important. I want to ask one question. Has anybody seen the SEC proposal for a new token taxonomy? They announced it last week. And I saw it. They're doing it, but I don't think that they've shown it yet. Yeah.

I couldn't. Okay, so I'm not the only one not able to find it. I looked and I couldn't find it. Yeah, I would like to read something so we could make comments on it. So this was a tease. Yeah, no, I was thinking I literally saw the release and I went back to try to find it. I went on the SEC website and I couldn't find it. Yeah.

If anyone does, if it's actually out there, love to see it. Yeah, I know. I think that the more important point, though, and this is what, you know, I will be, you know, in New York, on what I guess a month from now, April 13th is the Security Traders Association Conference and the head of trading in markets, Jamie Selway will be there. And that's going to be the main question is he knows full well that there are certain rules that are incompatible with crypto issuance, namely, most importantly, the accredited investor rule, but there are several others.

That to me is the bigger deal, right? You know, because if you call something a security and those rules are no longer or there's no action relief or whatever around it, around them, then it's not that big of a deal. In fact, it may actually be better. You can make a very strong argument that the reason the SEC, apart from a few rules such as the need for transfer agents and all sorts of other grunky stuff in the middle of it,

the way that CIPIC works, that's the securities industry protection corporation, if you get rid of the grunky rules and you get rid of the need for seasoned liquidity and you get rid of the accredited investor rules, why does anyone care? this notion, and I love when lawyers talk about this, because you try to find a lawyer who's ever dealt with enforcement against us from the CFTC vis-a-vis the SEC, and tell them, you try explaining to the lawyer that the CFTC is like, you know, like a teddy bear compared to the SEC on enforcement, and they all look at you like you got two heads, because that is totally not true, right? The reason the SEC is considered to be bad for crypto is because they had archaic rules that didn't apply that made the tokens non-workable. And so that's really the question. It's not the taxonomy that matters, nearly as much as how they will apply the rules to

those tokens. So if what they're doing is coming up with the taxonomy that will qualify for certain exemptions or different paths through the system, that could be extraordinarily bullish. On the other hand, if they're not doing it that way, well, then it could be pretty bad. So we'll see. I actually think the former is more likely, though, based on my conversations. I just don't know. I haven't had, I don't know the details. I would normally wrap, but like, Rand Nooners here.

His face is on the show. I just decided to join. I was driving home, and I just decided to listen up and see what you guys are talking about. Oh, my God. We're blessed. Wow. This is like, dude, Rand. What's going on, guys?

Why is Bitcoin pumping? Well, why is Bitcoin more stable than all other world assets? Is it because Bitcoin's the real store of value, or what do you think? It's finally happening today. Yeah, we've got to answer. I think, look, Rand, I think it's seller's exhaustion and the fact that all the reasons to sell have already happened. So it's your basic, you know, they're not selling. And the buyers that are buying it are still looking at the long term and saying, okay, this is accumulation.

And, you know, you see it. I mean, volumes aren't particularly high. So it feels more like that than anything else. I must say, yeah. It is. It is. It is divergent strength, though, however you want to look at it. Yeah.

By the way, Ran, I think you still have me on my old account. So if you could follow my new one, that would be helpful because I've tried to... Dan's the new man. I can. I'll definitely, I think I was on both of them, but I'll... Yeah, no, I got hacked and... Ran, how bearish were you Saturday when you saw Crude doing what it was doing? And how surprised you knew that Bitcoin's holding here?

But I did on Friday. and I did it again on Friday I went long oil, short Cospy, long Bitcoin. So what is my logic? My logic is I knew there was going to be an escalation. I didn't realize just how big it was going to be. So I took it long on oil. And then I thought if oil goes up, risk is going to go down. What's the highest beta risk at the moment?

So my options were NASDAQ or to go more oil-related risk, which is Cospy or Nikai. So I went Cospy. So I went to long, long oil, short Cospy, and then I went long Bitcoin. I took long Bitcoin because it's a contrarian trade. In other words, everyone believes that Bitcoin is going to get smashed now because of the, because it's the highest beta risk asset. But I think it's already had its correction. That's why I went long Bitcoin.

And so far the trades three for three. I mean, I'm not speaking too soon because I probably should have cut the trade when the oil features went to like $1.15 or whatever. The problem is I was asleep on that. So I couldn't do that. Yeah, but I mean, so that's, I'm still holding that trade. That trade still open for me. Can we still, can we full circle this, Rand? Because right before you showed up, we were talking about how the bulk of assets being

traded on hyperliquid or non-crypto, were you trading oil on hyperliquid on the weekend? So the weekend, yes. But the problem with hyperliquid is it went because so it went up more than what I thought the oil futures were going to go up. It was because it was, you know, it's such a thin market that it's, It is, it went up much more than, so like when I looked at it on, it was already on $103 or something when I looked at it on the weekend. And like my whole play was that the oil features were going to spike. So the big trade that I took was actually last week where I took a thing was like, I started at like $77 a barrel.

And I kept progressively going up until like 85 or 86 on Friday. And then I stopped. And then, yeah, I probably should have sold them through the night, but I didn't. Crazy. So Gary, I guess, Gary, Gabe, you'd answer your question, ran around long while everybody was trying to get short. I think another one now, by the way, I think the next trade that I'm setting myself up for now

is Dubai real estate. So I think that I love Dubai, and I think that Dubai have got it right, and I think just the way that they have set themselves up in this war and how they've survived these attacks for such a small nation is incredible. But Dubai real estate is very, very, very highly leveraged. And when I say highly leveraged, I don't really mean bank debt,

but I mean the fact that a lot of developers are building off plan or selling off plan. So I don't know how it works, but effectively you secure your apartment by giving them $10,000 today or whatever it is. And then that's considered that the apartment sold, right? And then the developer basically starts developing. Right. Now, the thing with Dubai is that not a lot of people actually are Emirates, a lot of lot of people just live there as expats and what you see now is the troubles here and they're

basically all left so you've got a whole lot of these empty apartment buildings and now you've got a whole lot of these people panicking about to buy real estate prices right so i've been following a couple of uh of thicker symbols from either developers or uh uh real estate indices or whatever and some of them are down as much as like 20 percent now i mean Dubai is going to come back to buy is like today's new york It's like the society's New York. It's a tax haven. It's where everybody gets pushed to go to because they're making so much money. They'll end up going to Dubai and they want to protect themselves against taxes.

The quality of life is amazing. It is one of the safest cities in the world, even though now it's got debris folding and drones coming in and whatever else. Did that affect real estate prices, by the way, like in the very short term? Crazy. Crazy. Crazy. People are panicking. People are panicking.

And that's like on the one hand, if you're not. If you've got time and effort, you can go and buy actual apartments and you can get them for a lot less than you could have got them a week ago. But you can actually buy indices like there's, I don't remember the ticker, but there's a Dubai real estate index and it's down 20% in the last week or so. 20%. I mean, that to me, if you want an entry into the Dubai real estate market, I've been waiting for an entry into Dubai real estate market, just couldn't find it, kept thinking the market was

overheated. This is a black swan. Like you've got it, you've got to take this opportunity when it's given to you. Well, that's literally some of the best things I've ever done financially in my life was I bought an apartment in Miami and between 2010 and 2012 during the massive crash, mostly just because of luck because I wanted to move to Miami. It doubled basically in value in like three years. And then, you know, we kind of had a similar situation. I guess Gary knows better than anyone because he wrote it out. But, you know, the hurricanes in Tampa that sent the, you know, market here down massively and buy a house, you know.

As long as you don't believe there's going to be a hundred-year storm every year, or that there's going to be a war and two-bye every year, probably by the dip. But you see, the thing for me, I don't want to buy actual apartments because I'm not there. I don't want to manage them. Every time I've done that, every time I've done that and I've bought, I'm always like, you know, you try and manage from a far. It's very difficult. You know, your agent's not amazing.

He doesn't answer the phone. Are you telling me you're not good with plumbing good? Come on. I could see you with that little waste belt with all the tools. You know? It's a very big race belt. It's a very big race belt. Oh, I'm sure it is, bro.

No, but I'm saying, like, for me, like, I think to buy real estate, if the market carries on coming down, it's a no-brainer. Or if you've been waiting for an entry to buy real estate, it's a no- Yeah, I wasn't aware there was those indexes. That's brilliant. I mean, it feels to me, I actually was talking to my son about this because they, you know, they have an apartment and they were panicking about it. I said, listen, anyone who sold New York Fidei real estate after 9-11 felt like the world's

biggest idiot within a year and even bigger than it's five years later. This is, yeah, it is, unless you think somehow that this is existential to Dubai, and I don't, I agree with you completely. I think that, but it's, it's what markets do, Rand. It's what people do. People panic. People make emotional. Yeah.

And you've got, you know, what markets also do is they're focused on the, in times of panic, they're focused on the fearmongers. So in times of panic, there's this professional. Professor Zhang, is that his name? The Asian dude that's going around saying it's the end of the world and the end of Dubai and the US is going to lose this war. And I mean, I don't know if you guys have been following this guy. But he's literally, he's calling the end of the world.

Look, there's so many cross currents and so many people. But the reality is saying stay calm gets 10 clicks, staying panic, hair on fire gets 10,000 clicks. What do you think is going to happen? I mean, it's just, it's unfortunate, but it's just the reality. Run's also on the southernmost tip of Africa. He's perfectly safe down there, hey? We're not feeling any of this. We're really not affing any of this.

Except the fact that you can't get flats because we used to fly through Emirates all the time, and now you can't get flats anymore. Yeah, this two should pass, though. But yeah, you're right. Exactly. And it's just, you don't invest for the next, Well, you can. You can trade for the next week. You don't invest for the next week. Right? You trade.

Just on this real estate thing in Dubai, though. We have to be honest. There's 12,500 people left the UK that were very wealthy. I bet you a good half of them went to Dubai. Most certainly, no one is making a decision in the UK today or France to go run and buy an apartment in Dubai. No, not today, Aaron. And this will take some time. Like, yeah, right? Because it's no longer the safe haven that, like, you only, you break that one time, the safe haven thing. I mean, if Switzerland had ever been bombed, you could never say, okay, that's a neutral spot. But I think people confuse Dubai with, like, when they say safe haven, they mean safe haven against crime and stuff like that.

Because, you know, there's a lot of, I don't know if you've ever, you know, how often you spend time in Dubai? I include bombs dropping on my head as safe haven event, for sure. during a war like you think that that could ruin a safe haven status i think when people move to dubious because they don't be in a place where they don't get mugged and the car doesn't get stolen and you know they don't get scammed and stuff like that and i think dubious got that completely under control yeah but i'm a uk citizen i can go to the cayman islands dude i'm pretty sure the cayman's isn't going to get it bombed right i mean i have options that's all i'm saying i have options it's not as safe as it was friday right so you just got to

to admit, hey, it's not as safe as it was Friday. Let's see if we can get back to some normalcy. But that real estate takes time for that kind of migration to occur. So at what kind of correction would you be looking to buy like 25%, 30% from the top? Like what's what would be your... Most illiquid, rent, most illiquid asset on the planet. Now the ETF, the problem with your ETF that you don't enjoy if you go pick a piece of real estate is you don't get the deep discount. Right? I mean, if you've got an agent working on the ground, I agree with you.

That's the best. You're not equipped. I was joking about, yeah, you don't want to be a plumber. Of course, you don't want to be a plumber, dude. Like, that's not your business. You'd lose money on your deal. So I just think that, I mean, these are very illiquid. Nobody's going to, like, nobody has to have a second home in Dubai.

That's all I'm saying, right? Like, I just see, this whole luxury market, I think we have met peak demand. I don't think rich people need any more villas. I went to Dubai and you cannot you can't rent anything that's always full. You can't buy anything. It went on the market and three minutes later it was sold every single time. Like there was a crazy, crazy, crazy, crazy insatiable demand for these things. Yeah.

I mean, listen, I've seen it. Look at what Scott just said. I've seen Florida. Florida goes from, I have it. least a thousand homes within 10 minutes for me, there are worth $350,000. Like, you can buy these houses all day long. I mean, it is a buyer's dream right now in Florida. But for, four, uh, two and a half years ago, there wasn't a house on Zillow, not one for sale. This market is really weird. It goes from extremely tight to grossly oversupplied.

So, you know, I think that that'll be the same for any, any place. They'll overbuild. But I just can't, you know, we had a big exodus from countries, people wanting to move to places for tax reasons, for safety reasons. You know, they were leaving the UK because it was so draconian. But I think you're just going to have people go, well, maybe that's not the right place for us to go right now this year. You know, I just think this kind of shit slows everything down. Fair point. Fair point.

All right, guys, I'm going to go watch my kids play soccer. I'll catch up with you guys again soon. Okay, well, I think it's ready to wrap, right, Scott? Oh, did Scott leave? Well, it looks like he did. So on that note, since we're way over time, we'll see you, I guess, on Wednesday, if that's the deal.

I'm not 100% sure, but we'll see. And everyone have a great safe day out there. It should be interesting.