The Wolf Of All Streets - Bitcoin Was Recovering. Then Wall Street's AI Problem Hit. | Carlos Domingo

Episode Date: October 22, 2026

Bitcoin pushed toward the top of its range, then gave it all back overnight as Tesla and Meta reignited AI spending fears and stock futures slid. Is Bitcoin still just a risk asset tied to Wall Street's AI trade? Carlos Domingo, CEO of Securitize, joins to talk about Securitize Stocks, the new venues for trading tokenized shares, tokenized Meta shares moving to Solana and why some companies are opting out of having their stock tokenized at all. Plus, China moves to claim 61,800 BTC held in the UK. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Bitcoin was recovering nicely, and then the world seemingly completely imploded. The global market metrics are insane. China on a historic downrun, Cospi collapsing, Japan collapsing, French yields up 5% a day, and of course people questioning the AI trade. All of that is interesting, but I think the more interesting conversation is what is happening in the world of RWA and tokenization. And when I want to know what's happening in that world, we bring on the best. And today we have Carlos Domingo from Securitize to break it all down.

Can't wait to have this conversation with one of my favorite guests. Let's go. Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the show. I'm glad that you are all here today because apparently the Internet died yesterday. I read on X. I'm going to go ahead and bring on Carlos right now. Good morning, sir. How are you?

I'm fine. Thanks for having me again. So did you see? Yeah, I was sitting at my kids' baseball practice last night just kind of scrolling X. and you would think the world was literally ending. I don't know if it's just... Yeah, I mean, so, you know, apparently we've got... Who uses PHP still?

I haven't heard of it in a long time. Dutch, French, Danish, Finnish, Finnish, Finnish government takes sites offline. So apparently what happened is that Open AI, somebody used it to discover a potential exploiter issue that's been there for 10 years, but was not hacked and then decided to tell the whole world so that you could get hacked and everybody's freaking out. But I'm glad we're here. The Internet's working. It is working. Some websites are not, but the internet itself it is.

Yeah. There was also like another one on railway, which apparently holds a lot of... I mean, we're going to see more of these, because obviously with this advanced AI models, they're going to be able to find things that humans don't look at it, right? So, but overall, I think it's good. It's going to harness the internet. It's going to make it safer. Yeah, I was going to say, I mean, as as dumber as it sounds, it's actually somebody discovered it so that it could be patched, which is actually, you know, a major silver lining, right?

We know that old code is going to have issues. 100%. Okay, so let's dig into what's happening with Securitize, because tokenization has been the conversation, I think, to have of late, especially now with the innovation exemption and all that coming. You've launched your own, you know, tokenized stocks on a platform, and we have all these different iterations of it. So maybe you can just give us the lay of the land right now

as to sort of what the options are and how people are pushing forward with tokenizing stocks. Sure. So the options are pretty clear, right? I think the SEC laid that out in a previous taxonomy that they did, you know, kind of distinguishing between two different models. The actual shares that you put on chain, which is what we did with our own equity when we went public in the New York Stock Exchange,

where you basically, the token does represent a share and you're on the cap table and is managed by the registered transfer agent that manages the public literary company. The second model is the custodial model. where this is what DTCC is doing. We're all doing both the first and the second where you guarantee that there is a share sitting in DTCC or in a clearing broker-dealer. And what the token represents is what is called a full-securities entitlement.

That's essentially what you get when you go to a broker-dealer. When you go to Robin Hood and you buy Apple shares, you're getting not a share, but you're getting a full security entitlement, which is regulated and it gives you exactly the same rights and they claim back to the share through something. called Article 8 of UCC. And then the third model, which is the one that has prolifered initially in crypto, which is this synthetic derivatives, et cetera, that are not the same security.

There are another securities, a derivative of the security. There are still securities, even though people are not treating like them, and they are, you know, it's not that they are illegal in the US, is that when you create a derivative of security, you have to register that new security to be able to offer it to retain people. They could do it, they don't do it, so they only offer it offshore. And then the other news that you mentioned was the innovation exemption, which basically clarify that the only things that are lawful in the US are the first and the second model,

and that it gives an exemption from venues to create trading venues without having a full exchange license and following all the, you know, REC and MS, which are the publicly securities regulations, which is a very interesting development, I think. Yeah, it's so much to sort of parse there because the innovation exemption, obviously, is great news, right? They gave some rules of the road as to what would likely happen. I think you can see who the have or have-nots are, but I think that those who are have-nots, like Robin Hood in Europe, will probably find a way to try to be compliant. But there was that very public spat before the innovation exemption between Vlad and the CEO of AMC that we keep talking about. But AMC is not stopping,

even with this new novel approach. I said a few days ago saying, I'm not stopping here. I'm going to try to prevent this from happening. Right. And then you add on top of that. And listen, I know it's repetitive news for people, but, you know, you're the man to unpack it. Microsoft and Alphabet opt out of tokenized stocks, the latest blow to an ambitious plan to shake up trading. So this is the story.

Obviously, we had the announcement of OKX ICE, which is a joint venture exchange between OKX and Intercontinental Exchange, the parent of the New York Stock Exchange. and it was the first announcement we've had of someone basically running with the tokenization exemption on this level, right? It's not even a rule yet, but they said, listen, it's enough. The FCC has said this is going to happen. We're running with it. But a lot of companies opting out, and I actually found this very surprising, but I'm also assuming there's some nuance as to why they're doing it. So we announced subsequently, this was announced on Monday two weeks ago, and on Thursday we announced that the securityized stocks that we're issuing, which we started with 12 names.

will be actually the ones that will be trading on the OKXIS exchange. We've been working with them since the exemption pretty much came out in figuring out the model. The plan is to try to go to as many names as possible, and then OKXIS has already started sending these notifications to issuers. Actually, we're one of the issuers that is listed on the OKXIS, so we actually got the notification saying, do you want to opt out or not? I think what we're seeing here is two kind of two models. first some people like us and others that are familiar with the space and when we get that

email talking about the organization, we know what they're talking about and we obviously are not going to opt out. I've seen some other issuers that have actually reached out. And I just had a conversation yesterday with a banker that, you know, one of the CFOs of a Fortune 500 reached out to them saying, I received this notification, but I don't know what it means before they say yes or not. I want to educate myself and they're connecting with us to talk. I think that's a great thing because they're trying to.

trying to find out what does this mean for them. And then the third one is people that apparently are opting out without even having the conversation, which I guess is a reflection of the lack of knowledge about what it means to them, right? I think that this is normal when you deploy new technology and new innovations, some more conservative people. By the way, these notifications probably go to the wrong person in the company because that's right.

Yeah, the only goes. The last thing he wants is more problems in his life and he's probably dealing with the debt for the data centers in AI and things like that. So I think that this is normal. Every single new innovation has, you know, people concerned about the implications, people curious about it and people that are already known and are embracing it. So I don't think that this is anything in an experience. Yeah, like it's a fishing link and they're afraid to click the button to opt it.

Very simple. So I'm publicly traded, right? So if somebody comes to me and in terms of instead of leading with tokenization, If they come to me and they tell me, look, I'm going to give you a way for you to actually have access to more investors. There's nobody publicly traded. They will say no. That's why I was surprised. Correct.

They tell you the second thing, you're going to have extra liquidity pools. Nobody will say, I don't want my stock to be more liquid. It makes no sense because the more liquid your stock is, you know, the more ability you have to raise money in the future or things like that. And the third one, they tell you, you will be able to trade 24-7. so you'll be able to serve maybe, you know, investors in offshore jurisdictions that don't have a good trading experience when U.S. markets are closed being able to trade. And the fourth is maybe you also have a potential better as a holder engagement with those investors because you can reach out to them directly. I don't think anybody will say no. Now, if you send them a message saying, I'm going to tokenize and they've never heard the word and they don't know what it is and they have, you know, maybe they're obviously they are familiar with ICE because the email comes from the New York Stock Exchange, but they don't know who OKX is and this creates confusion.

So I think it's up to us as NIC and others to just do the proper issue or education to tell them why this is advantages for them. And there is no downside. It's all regulated. It's all legal. All these concerns that the AMCCO has do not apply to this model at all. So there's no reason why companies, when they've had the proper conversation, will say no. Yeah, you just answered the question I've been asking for basically a week because I keep saying to myself, it seems like you would want liquidity, seems like you would want volume, seems like you wouldn't really care where it came from if the SEC is telling you.

that it's compliant. So it's just yet again a poor marketing. The messaging is bad, but that means they're going to come around, right? If they see that those who accepted it are seeing insane liquidity on a Saturday at 3am, they're going to want a piece of that. 100%. And by the way, we're going to have enough names for OXIs to launch with a decent number of names because obviously they can go up to 75.

and if somebody opt out, they can reach out to other days, you know, 3,000 or whatever probably trade companies. But we also, alongside we're going to have other kind of regulated venues that do not require the issue or opt out, like the one that we deploy in stocks, securitized with with Jam through the prop AIMM in Solana. You're going to have the New York Stock Exchange digital ATS, launching in Q4, et cetera. So I think that, you know, the next month, we'll see how this story turns into something else as people see these markets being developed.

Is there a timeline for when these are actually going to be trading and active? So the OKXISDSDSV has a 30 days notice. So it's coming up in the next couple of weeks. So I believe that they will launch pretty soon in November. I want to speak on their behalf. But from the joint work we're doing, I think you'll see this life in November. It seems like securitize is you're at the kind of the core of all of these things, right? So you're doing it for OKXIs.

You're doing it for yourself. You're doing it for other entities. How does that work? I mean, you're effectively the entity that's doing all of the actual tokenization and the distribution to all platforms? So we are the only ones so far of all the people doing these things that we're doing in a compliant way with US regulations, and therefore we're kind of like the default choice for all these TSVs because obviously, as you mentioned, they kind of go to Robin Hood stocks today.

They kind of go to, you know, excess stocks or on-door or the companies that what they're doing is not compliant in the US, and therefore it doesn't fit the innovation exemption. and it will be interesting to see what they do, whether they fragment their liquidity by having two different tokens that are completely different, or they just stick to the offshore model and ignore the U.S. And our strategy is very simple. We want to have, you know, as many, you know, tokenized equities as possible in the U.S., trading in as many places as possible. Because the whole idea about this is the more liquid those tokens are, then the more utility you can provide, the more you can use them as collateral for borrowing, the more you'll be able to, you know, conduct corporate actions in a more efficient way, et cetera.

So our idea is not to trade only on our venue. I think we want this to trade in as many places as possible and in as many TSBs as possible. So, you know, why does somebody choose one of these venues versus another one? I guess it depends where you're coming from, right? Like if you are already an OKX user, you're going to be, you know, accessing that directly on the same app or UI where you are actually in your OKX, you know, crypto trading. So naturally those users will flow into the OKX, you know, TSP. But if other, you know, exchanges or other apps launch their own one, then the users will get reelected there.

And I think that what's going to happen also ultimately is that you will see the same thing you have in crypto, these routing engines that route across multiple trading venues and you don't really know where you're trading and you're just trading through a UI. So the same thing is going to happen here, which, by the way, is what happens in traditional markets as well. Like, we're listing in the New York Stock Exchange, but it doesn't mean that all our shares trade there, right? They trade in multiple places. They just have the opening and close at this chains and the rest rates in multiple venues. So the same market structure is going to develop on chain.

So effectively, you're going to go to one place and they're going to act as the broker. And because it's tokenized, it's going to all be effectively instantaneous anyways, right? And they're going to go seek for the place that they can find those shares that you're looking for and you're not going to know that it happened, you know, on one of these various platforms. You're just going to get your share. I mean, that is how, yeah. I mean, it's how it happens in crypto, right? Today, if you use, you know, Phantom or Metamask and you swap an asset there, just don't know where, where they're actually doing the swap, right? And then behind the scenes, I try to find what's the best, you know, price for you. So I think the same thing is going to happen here. Initially,

will be more concerned because there will be not that many venues. But I, I predict that we're going to have a ton of these venues. Obviously, I think, okay, XAS has been extremely diligent of being the first ones launching this and like literally like a week after the innovation exemption was done. But, you know, the whole filing and disclosure, you need to do all sending the notifications this takes time and also figuring out the tech side, the liquidity, market makers, integrations, et cetera. So we're still in the very early days of this. But I do believe that by early next year, you're going to have, you know, a dozen of these DSVs. Everybody's going to offer this, right? I mean, okay, XIs, it's great that they're fast. And I think it's great that it's an actual partnership

with ICE, right? As opposed to... It brings legitimacy, so... Yeah, so maybe they are unique in that, but you're certainly going to see this from Coinbase Robin Hood, crack in everybody. I guess the question is, you know, what will we be able to actually do as U.S. citizens

which everywhere else in the world would seem to be installed? I think that this definitely brings tokenized stocks trading to the U.S. Now, it's the playbook about how to do it in a regulated way or through the exemption. It's there. We proof is doable. this narrative that we've been hearing over the months about, oh, we're doing these synthetics offshore because it's not possible to do it in the U.S. I think that has been

already dismantled that you do it offshore because you want to do some sort of regulatory arbitrage, not because it's not doable in the U.S. So yes, U.S. people, which is the largest capital market in the world, will have access to this, and you will see a lot more activity around this space. But if you're a person in, you know, choose your favorite European country or Asian country or something, most of those people probably are actually looking for price exposure to U.S. capital markets more than they are concerned about the underlying rights or the ownership of their shares, right? So I think those other things, but I think they can still remain popular outside the tokenized exemption, innovation exemption in other countries.

I think they'll remain popular because the way they're doing it is not following regulation. and then they allow unregulated entities to distribute this, right? But look, if you're an investor and they tell you you have two options, you buy the real thing with all the rights of the protections, with no counterparty risk, et cetera, or you buy this synthetic that you're taking prices, postures, you don't have the rights, you're taking counterparty risk towards somebody else,

which you don't even know exactly where they're doing is unregulated, etc. And doesn't have all the disclosures. So people will choose the safest option. I think there was some debate the other day in a podcast about speculation versus. versus investing. I think people, some people want to speculate as well, perps and other stuff is very, is very popular, right? But some people want to invest. And if you want to invest, you want to make sure that you're buying something safe that you can

hold an appreciating value over time and you're not taking, you know, unnecessary risks. So I think there's different audiences. So yeah. And there's, I mean, there's also just like exchange counterparty risk in the world, you know, that, and we've all seen it in crypto. So if you're doing something, if you don't have the rights and your exchange goes under. Where's your share? Correct. Correct. So I think that you're right, that in the end it will matter.

So I know that Securitize is a bit chain agnostic, right? We talked about how people will be able to do this on all different platforms, but I'm assuming you'll be able to do it on all different chains as well. There's a tweet from Securitize. RWA's on Salon on Group 4x in a year from $1.08 billion to $4.37 billion, becoming the third largest network by distributed RWA value. Tokenize the world, right? We continue building there.

but it seems like we're going to see everything on every chain as well, not everything on every exchange, not just everything. I think so. I think we are in a multi-chain world. This is not likely to change anytime soon. Every chain has their own kind of ecosystems, advantages, etc. In some cases like Solana, you have lower fees, faster trading, which is great for things like stocks in other places like Ethereum.

Maybe you have more decentralization and more, you know, security, but then lower transaction speed, and therefore it's maybe more suitable. for other assets. You have different DFI EFI ecosystems and so on you have Kaminu, but on Ethereum you have ABE. So I think that I don't see this

changing anytime soon. I come from the telecommunications industry many, many years ago where we had that situation where the mobile operating systems were very fragmented and you had to develop for like five or six of them until one day, you know, iPhone and iOS and Android came and kind of consolidated everything around two ecosystems.

But I don't think we're there yet on the you know, blockchain space. We're still going to have a multi, multi-chain environment. And so will that be the same from a UXUI perspective as what we discussed with sourcing liquidity and finding your shares? I mean, will you basically just go to some front-end platform and not care if it happened on base or Ethereum or Robin Hood chain or Salana? They'll just go somewhere and click a button and you'll get your shares or is it still going to be, I go to a Salana-based exchange or an, you know, an Ethereum-based aggregator or something. I hope you don't know which change you're training on, to be honest with you, because part of part of the issue, I think, of for adoption of these products is the user experience, which is still not what it should be to make it a mainstream product.

And one of the problems is this fact that you have to choose which, you know, blockchain you're connecting to blah, blah, blah. I think that the wallet companies and the apps, et cetera, you know, companies like Jupiter or FOMO, etc. They're kind of doing a good job with this embedded wallet infrastructure that they kind of, they kind of do. kind of abstract this out from the end user, which is the right thing to do. Because, look, when you're connected to the internet, you don't care about what, you know, sub-network, you're connected to route things from one place or another, right? Like, it's just you are on the internet and that's it. So hopefully one day we will be on a blockchain and then, you know,

the underlying infrastructure will route you through, you know, where the assets that you're looking for are. So the other conversation that you and I had in Miami that I thought was interesting is it was on the heels of the DTCC news that they were going to, you know, tokenize everything and effectively move on to blockchain rails and throwing out numbers like four or five quadrillion in volume a year and all these astronomical things, you kind of hinted to me that that wasn't really exciting, right? And this is sort of a struggle that I've been having, which is that a lot of this can happen, but it can't, but there's a world where it doesn't benefit retail

investors who have believed in RWA or tokenization and crypto and blockchain for years, right? because that's just them replacing their plumbing. That doesn't help me. Correct. I mean, the constituents of DTCC are not the investors, right? The constituents of DTCC are the people that trade there, right? Like the broker-dealer, the banks of view, DTCC is actually owned by a consortium. So what they're doing, I believe, first, you know, I think it's interesting from the

perspective of their putting the war out there, tokenization. They're forcing companies to think about all these traditional companies to think about wallets and things like that. I think that, as you and I discuss, this solves efficiency problems and post-trade problems, etc., within the CDDC ecosystem, which is very different than let's put this outside in an open permissionless, you know, blockchain, which, by the way, that's what the SEC has said, where the TSVs can launch in a permissionless blockchain. The definition is not there, but I think everybody understands that they're referring to things

like Ethereum or Solana. It would be good if they clarify the definition. But, and that in the history of technology, open permissionless environments where, you know, anybody can innovate and anybody can provide new applications to something has always private, right? Because that's where innovation happens. So I'm a big believer on that, that I want to put my token as stocks in Rosolana or in Ethereum or Avalanche or whatever and let people build stuff around it. That doesn't have to, they don't have to come to me to do it, right? because it's an open platform where they can build the functionality, and that's how you win. Yeah, there was a story. It was yesterday or day before this one that I thought kind of spoke to that, right?

J.P. Morgan brings JPM coin to Ethereum, right? I mean, I know this isn't a tokenized stock or anything, and, you know, it's a tokenized bank deposits or, you know, whatever. But the fact that J.P. Morgan, who has probably been the most aggressive with doing what they're doing behind a wall, like on a private blockchain, has decided, I know that they went to base last year, but to bring their own J.P. Morgan coin to Ethereum, right? Because we've wondered, hey, is it all just going to happen on some private corporate blockchains if we don't see any of it, or are we actually going to see it come to Ethereum and Solana and the others? I think this is actually a meaningful signal. I think it's also also a reflection of the change in the regulatory situation in the U.S., right?

Like I've talked to J.B. Morgan over the years, they've always, they're a bank, right? So they're not going to take, you know, regulatory risks to do these things. And over the years, it's been uncertainty about whether you could actually do these things on a public permissionless blockchain. I think that now that we have a more, you know, favorable regulatory situation where people are not concerned about these things, you're going to see more of this, you know, proliferating into open networks. Because if you're JP Morgan, what would you want to do it in a closed ecosystem where you don't have, you know, people don't have access to the kind of concern. your product, if you believe JPM Coim is the right product for your users, why you want to run your own infrastructure versus relying on a massive decentralized open infrastructure, why you want not to be able to interact with other staff that has been

built there, et cetera. So it takes all the boxes of why this is the ultimate, you know, winning value proposition. Do you think that that's the future trajectory? I mean, they're kind of hedging, right? They still have, they still have their own version, right? And they're doing it behind their wild garden still, and then they're kind of, I think, testing the waters with the other ones. But at what point do all of them just say, Ethereum and Salon are fine? It's just better, right? We don't even need to test us behind our own.

And like I said, they've actually quietly been doing this for years, so I'm not surprised. We've seen this happening in other contexts, right? Like, I don't know if you remember when the internet started, you had the open internet, which was clunky, it was, you know, Wild West, etc. And then you had this close internets, like, everything. or MSN where, you know, the content was curated, who could publish there was curated, who could connect there was curated, et cetera. And that felt safer for some people.

But it kind of, you know, didn't allow for permissionless innovation. And therefore, innovation didn't happen on those ecosystems. And then it moved to the open Internet where anybody could actually publish any website, anybody could compose content with each other, et cetera. And that's what ultimately everybody end up using. But it takes time. Cloud was the same, you know, when AWS starts. a lot of the corporations wanted to have private clouds to benefit from the technology

but not take the risks of like sitting on a public cloud where they didn't know where the data centers were the servers they didn't have SLAs they didn't have data retention policies etc so this is very very common of any new innovation that it always happens in the open and in the close and the most traditional companies go for the most perceive as safe environment until the other environment just becomes way better and outweights the potential risks that they have of not being on a closed ecosystem. Did you expect all of this to happen so fast? I mean, you were way ahead of the curve, and so I'm assuming if anybody did, it would be

you, but it feels like we're just going parabolic here with, you know, adoption. I've been waiting for this to happen for many, many years because we are in October, in November will be the ninth anniversary of Securitize. So it's been a very long journey, but you're absolutely right. the last since 2004, I will say early 2024, I think is when the industry has gone parabolic. And I think it's been accelerated more recently because of the regulatory changes and the new, you know, SEC leadership. I think we still have a very good two years to go because we'll see what happens after the next elections. So what I'm telling everybody and telling my team and myself is like, we need to try to build as much as possible the next two years to just make this a reality that this becomes unstoppable.

whoever comes after. Okay, the midterms are in 12 days. Midterms are not going to change much because the SEC is not going to change because of the midterms. The CFTC is not going to change because of the midterms. The things that had to go through Congress, they already pass or die. So that's nothing else is going to move there. And I think that the main concern of, you know, regulation by the regulators versus Congress is the durability of the rules, right? Like the innovation exemption, you know, somebody can come as a new chair of the SEC and decide that they don't like it and stop it, right? But if you build no value and you have enough traction, you know, it makes it harder for anybody to

actually, you know, change it. So that's what we as an industry need to focus now. This make as much progress as possible. Let's work. Let's build as much as possible and the next two years. So this becomes unstoppable. Yeah, I've gotten pushed back on the terminology I use, but I've said that we have like two years to become too big to fail. Yeah, I don't like the idea. They don't like the idea. Yeah, like if literally everything is trading on tokenized rails and that's the majority of the volume. There's not going to be much impetus for the SEC to try to reverse that. Correct. Even if it's not the majority, right, but if the volume is significantly enough and you've proved that you can provide a good experience

that there is no significant price dislocations, that there is enough advantages of the tokenized versus the traditional version. I think they'll stay working alongside each other for a very long time because the market, the current market structure is so huge. It's impossible to think that in years, you know, tens of trillions of dollars move on chain, right? But if we make it to one or two trillion in the next two years, that becomes meaningful enough that nobody can actually stop that from continue happening. I'm trying to now find the Kalshi market on the Democratic odds and predictions, which I saw, but last I checked, it was really high.

Yeah, you know, I don't have it exactly. but there was one that was, you know, odds of Democrats sweeping both. These are more... It's like 65, 68% or something. So, you know, the market is assuming, and I think I saw that Trump was at, you know, historic lows for popularity coming into midterms. So, you know, I think crypto industry

in the world has to prepare for better or for worse, depending on your opinion, for a, you know, Democrat sweep here and for it to be, you know, Trump as the president with the House and the Senate potentially both blue, which means potentially Maxine Waters at the head of, you know, banking in Congress and Elizabeth Warren at the head in the Senate. Right? So like the anti-Centanyar Army Poked Tendmat.

I mean, is there a world where we have to worry about a crappier version of the Clarity Act that's completely contentious and aggressive coming out and being proposed in the next two years? But this is why you kind of build your business on regulatory arbitrage because then it's not a durable business. So I've been across three different chairs of the SEC. We started with Jake Clayton, then we moved to Gensler, and then now we have Paul Atkins, and we've been operating across three different administrations, and we will operate across the fourth and the fifth whenever they come.

I think that we personally don't have anything to worry about. Obviously, the more progress and the most liberal is the regulator in terms of letting you, you know, do things the better. But I think that this is a concern for the people that are doing things that the current administration is not necessarily enforcing, but that may be a more aggressive administration will go after, right? So, but for us, it's not a concern. I actually like the, the approach the administration is taking now, which historically has been how capital markets have developed, of instead of, you know, providing ruling up front, which is what they do in Europe, which is

terrible. They give you an exemption to operate, and then eventually that becomes a rule after they've seen how it works. Because the best thing is to let us experiment, right? Let us put things on chain, let us trade, let's see what happens. Every innovation has unexpected consequences that unless you try, you're never going to know, right? Like, think about music. Music got digitized in the 80s to put, you know, songs on a CD on a compact disc. Nobody could predict it in the 80s that in the, you know, in 2020, we will be doing music streaming because of a consequence of that innovation, which was MP3 files on a compact disc.

So this is the same. Like, unless we put things on chain and we see what happens and some smart. people come with the staff that you cannot see today, that's never going to happen. So, so innovation by, so regulation by enforcement or by too early ruling to try to regulate something that is new is not a good idea. This exemption approach that they see has, which by the way, that's how ETFs has started. That's how ATS has started. Like historically the US has been very good at doing this.

I was with Christian Carlo the other day and he was actually telling me the same thing. That's how the US has operated as opposed to Europe. Let's give exemptions. Let people do. things and then we provide, you know, regulations after. Yeah, one of the, one of my favorite stories about innovation and fear of innovation is also the music industry. I'm sure you've heard it, but you know, back, I think it was in the early 20th century, the live bands gathered together to try to protest records because they hated

the idea of recorded music so much. They called it canned music. And it was because they, it was because live band for people to hear music on the radio or to hear music in general, they either had to go to a live show or the band had to be booked to come into the radio station to play live on the radio, and they assumed that any sort of technology would eliminate, you know,

people's ability, their ability to make money and that they would be replaced. But, of course, what naturally happens is that everybody hears your music. More people hear music. That's a great. Yeah, I mean, it's a lot, you know, and you see the echoes of it

with when the internet came and certainly with AI. And I think now you're going to see echoes of it with tokenization and blockchain adoption. This is very typical of any industry. I was actually referring to some people a book the other day, The Innovators Dilemma, a professor from Boston called Clayton Christensen brought, which is basically describes these across multiple industries.

How like when a new innovation comes, the incumbents tend to ignore it, tend to try to block it, et cetera. And then at the beginning, it feels like you're not solving like real important problem, but then you're trying to surf and they're underserved part of the market, and that eventually becomes, you know, good enough that it just takes over everything else. Yeah.

Now, I chat GPT that while we were talking because I wanted the specifics. We had started in 1906, and then in 1930s there was an anti-robot campaign when radio stations began broadcasting. And then actually from 1942 to 1944, all union musicians in the United States went on the total recording strike for two years. I didn't know, actually. Yeah, I can't remember the book that I originally read it in, but, you know, now, it's nice to have the facts.

I'll start using that moving forward on my interviews. But it's just so funny, like, you know, being terrified of technology is going to replace you. I really think that that's kind of where we're at with AI. It's the same thing I happen with AI now. Like, people are concerned that AI is going to replace, you know, some workers. And the answer is he will replace some workers, but it will create other jobs. and it will also maybe empower the workers to do different things or to be able to do more things that they can do today.

This is not, you know, I'm a techno-optimist. I think every innovation brings value to the society and, yes, it brings disruption, but ultimately creates value and increases productivity and increases, you know, the wellness of the people. So I think we should just move forward and the government should let us try. This is a very important thing.

You need to have a government that is open to, you know, within the boundaries of something that you're not going to break anything, which I think that's what the innovation exemption is designed for, that you can experiment to prove the point whether this is valuable or not. Yeah, I had Hester Persson a week before she left to three weeks ago, four weeks ago. And she kind of said, yeah, cool your jets, everybody, calm down. We're testing stuff. Correct.

Exactly what you said. We're allowing people to try things. We're not saying it's going to be successful, right? So it's kind of what you said. But you don't try. You never know, right? Yeah. how you're going to know.

Yeah, exactly. Keep in mind that they could have done this differently. They could have opened this for a consultation period like they're doing with Red Crypto, where people then have some time to submit comments and then they have to review their comments and come up with a revised version, etc. And that will have taken, you know, six to 12 months. So I think by making something that is, you know, is big enough but constraint enough that is not going to alienate anybody, but it's going to have enough room to play to try out

the technology. It's a way to just put it out there and let. things happen faster. So we're very focused on tokenized equities right now, and I know we can't do everything at once, but what are you excited about beyond that? So the other area that we're very excited about it is the fact that you have out there a trend that, you know, has kind of a slowdown recently, but I am very bullies on it, which is stable coins, right?

That there's $320 billion of stable coins. We all believe that this will get to a trillion dollars, and that means that it's going to start replacing, you know, cash by stable coins, right? So then once you have stable coins that move very fast, the question is how do you make money on stable coins with your ability to move it to a place where you can earn, you know, money, but then put it back on stable coins when you need the money for a payment or for, you know, anything else, right? So this whole concept of, you know, these idle cash that sits in stable coins and others in many, you know, banks, fintech platforms, you know, wallets, etc. How do you make them productive? and how do you then allow people to earn money on their idle cash in an efficient way, right, without having the cash type. Like you don't want the cash to like be, okay, I put it here and I say, I'm saving money,

but when I need the cash, it takes me three days to move it or it takes me like a month, etc. So this whole concept of creating these yield-bearing assets on chain that are tokenized that interact in a very fast way with the stable coins to allow a stable coin people to earn money. It's a very interesting one. And we've studied, we have a bunch of different products there on that space with different yields, different duration, different, you know, risk profiles, etc. Because no everybody is the same in terms of risk appetite versus reward.

I think that area is super interesting and it's very still unexplored. Yeah, it feels like the end game is every single thing is tokenized and it's all being put to work 24-7, 365 by your AI agent while you sleep and your money is always doing something and your assets are always productive. Correct. But you need to have everything to organize. You need to have the dollars and the securities that allow you earn money, and these all needs to be on the same ledger, and it's to be open.

So somebody can build an AI agent that will allow you to make money, and you will set up your own parameters for risk, profile, liquidity, et cetera, and this will operate there. And it's very interesting to think that everybody's this day is more interesting about AI than crypto, but I think that these two things are very complementary, right? Because you want to have AI agents that interact with financial services, products. You need those financial services products to be programmable, right? And you want the dollars that interact with those things to be programmable. And that's what tokenized assets and

stable coins bring to the table. So I'm very bullies about this. I think that we're going to see massive convergence of these two industries in the coming months. Where do you think Bitcoin will fit into all that? I think Bitcoin is a bit of an orthogonal thing, right? Bitcoin is the foundation of how this whole thing started. This is where a blockchain was created from a technology perspective is a good, you know, reserve asset. It makes no sense to me that people will hold gold instead of Bitcoin because if you want to have a reserve asset for your savings, it feels to me that Bitcoin is safer, you know, it's cap, is digital, etc.

So I think that, you know, I'm very bullish on Bitcoin, but I see this as very orthogonal with the kind of utility that you can bring to, you know, to tokenize dollars and tokenized assets on a blockchain. Yeah. I mean, you know, we have a conversation, Jordi Visser is championing the idea that, you know, once AI agents get their hands on money, they're going to need somewhere to save. They're going to go into Bitcoin while they do everything else in stable coins. Maybe that's another, that's another option.

So Bitcoin, because it's also a digital asset, it becomes part of this, you know, investment portfolio that AI agents create for people with their stable coins. I mean, we'll securitize be doing all of this? Like, are you going to be the ones tokenizing everything? or is it going to have to be like securitize two? Separate entity for doing real estate and all these things, you know, or is this something that can all be done under one roof? It's a very good question.

So I think what people don't realize, and this is why people won't talk about tokenization, it's difficult for people to understand because every asset class, what you do, why you tokenize it and who you need to offer it and what that tokenized asset needs to do in terms of, you know, integrations and, et cetera. to be successful is different than others. Like we're just talking about tokenized equities.

That to me is a completely different segment than, let's say, yield-bearing assets, right? So it's very hard for a company to do everything and to be in all the verticals. We're probably one of the largest and most well-funded companies in the space, if not the best, the most funded and largest. But even though internally, it's difficult to manage too many verticals, right? So we're focusing for the most part on, you know, how we generate, you know, yield-bearing assets for, you know, stable coins, idle cash, et cetera, and that there we have multiple products, but they're all within the same kind of segment, and then the token executive portion.

And then, you know, all the verticals, I think other people will be able to do, you know, things in a more focused way than we do. Yeah, Carlos, been always a pleasure to have you, give us a ton of perspective. Anything I might have missed, by the way. I mean, I know you've got a couple more minutes, so I don't want to take for granted that I ask all the questions. You've been touching on most of the recent developments. I think that as we discuss, the next six months are going to be very interesting, right? Because all these things will come to life.

And then we will see really like what kind of innovations people are building around it. So it's very exciting time to be in the industry. As long as we still have the Internet and AI. And as long as AI hasn't killed us, which apparently can happen as soon as three months. I don't think AI will ever kill us. I'm a techno optimist, as I mentioned. So I think AI will make us better. Maybe it'll just plug us into little bubbles and make us into batteries and, you know, or Terminator, you know, we've seen these movies before.

I agree with you. I'm a techno op this as well. Also, Carlos, happy birthday, buddy. Thank you. Thank you very much. You're welcome, man. I can't wait to have you back very soon as all of this develops. Thank you again.

It's always a pleasure to be here. Thank you. All right. All right. Carlos, amazing. I did notice Carlos wore a black shirt, but it was not a T-shirt. I saw you guys commenting on it. He doesn't know, but it's become a me.

meme here. And mine actually has a Bitcoin on it this time. But I do think that this week we had every single male guest so far has been wearing a black t-shirt. I know on Tuesday, well, not on Monday, but I know on Tuesday that Alex Thorne and Andrew and I were all wearing exactly the same plain black t-shirt. So I tried to give a little variety today. Before we go, I mean, it is probably worthwhile talking about the market. I've been thinking about what I'm going to do today on the Yahoo Daily Wolf and I think I'm the core of my first segment will probably be Bitcoin at 81,000. Hopefully it'll still be 81,000 at that point. But Bitcoin in the low 80s while the world explodes is probably a pretty good signal. In my opinion, you know, we had Bitcoin in the 60s,

then Bitcoin in the 70s, then Bitcoin in the 80s. It's probably less than 10% off of the recent all-time high, which is a rounding air for Bitcoin. But yeah, Bitcoin at 81, 588, still up 1.29% on the week. And once again, on the daily willf, I'll just kind of rattle through all the world-ending headlines that we're seeing on a day-to-day basis. And the fact that Bitcoin is just sort of holding up. I mean, today, I don't know why I got the Wall Street Journal, but I just opened this stock market today. Stock slide after middies' tensions push oil higher.

I said at the beginning, I think French bond yields were up 5% a day, highest versus U.S. bond yields. It's the first time they've gone higher than them in decades. Chinese stock market on a historic heater to the downside. Japanese stocks crashed today. Obviously, their markets are hours ahead of us. Korean stock market crash. Oil at cycle highs, United States, apparently preparing for war again in Iran. And Bitcoin just does the thing.

It just kind of goes sideways. You know, like the articles. Bitcoin slides below 82,000 is a. I doubt's return. Yeah, super doubtful. Bitcoin gives back its run at $85,000. Is Tesla and Meta fail to climb AI nerves? I mean, it's every single headline right now.

If you take a look, I mean, will Bitcoin hit $50,000 before $100,000? I love to show the Kalshi markets because, A, you can see right up there that Kalshi, we do work with them, and they're one of our sponsors. By the way, I think if you sign up, you get and trade $25, you get $25, which is awesome. There should be a link down below. but will Bitcoin hit 50,000 before 100,000, people are still pretty pessimistic about the end of the bear market, which I like in this case.

Listen, I don't like to necessarily trade with the crowd, but I agree. Like the odds of it going down 31,000 for here before it goes up 19,000 more. I would take that bet as well if I was a betting man. Yeah, man, it's fine. We're going to be fine. We're going to be fine.

Someone all said, you all need to, what does that say? Well, safe mood? You all need to get on the safe moon train or be left behind. You all want to hear a story. So I went the, have I told this story?

Have I told the story about the guy? I don't think so. I went to buy, I live in Florida, so one of the requisites to living in Florida, if you want to be accepted, is you have to drive a pickup truck.

So I wanted to be a real Florida man. So I bought a RAM TRX recently, which is amazing. And I go to you. to sit down the dealership and I was wearing a Bitcoin hat, which is probably dumb. And I'm wearing a Bitcoin shirt today, which basically means someone's just going to rob me. But I was wearing a Bitcoin hat and I sit down with, you know, the finance guy and he's like,

is that be there for the Bitcoin? The Bitcoin. He's like, yeah, that be used for the Bitcoin, buddy. He's like, okay. He's like, you know, I got to tell you, man, I've been all in. I was all in on that for a while. I was like, you were all in Bitcoin. I was like, how's that going for you? He's like, no, not the Bitcoin. That one I don't get it. What do you say? He said, but I really had a bad, bad time with the safe moon. I was like, oh, safe moon. He was like, yeah, you know, I did years of research on it. I'm not mocking this guy, by the way. This is a very common story that I hear. He said,

now, he said, I looked into it a ton. I thought it had a lot of upside. Dave Portnaway was all over it. And I went all in, man. I'm talking about all in, buddy. all in on safe moon. I lost everything. I said, yeah, well, that was an actual scam. Not even just crypto going down. I think those guys are like in jail or something. He's like, yeah, I fell for it.

And I was like, you know, man, you should just think about, he's like, I'm looking back at the market now. And I'm pretty interested. I really like crypto. I was like, you just think about buying some Bitcoin. He was like, yeah, man, I don't know about that one. Seems kind of boring. He's like, but I really think I like XRP.

That's something I hear. Nothing against XRP. It's something that I hear every single day. I went to an arch public dinner Monday night, as you guys know, me and Tillman and a couple other people having dinner. And a guy approaches me. He's like, you're the crypto guy. He's like, I've heard your podcast once or twice. And he goes, there's an ETF that my friend is super into, an ETF.

It's like a super... R.HP, RTP. I'm looking it up. I'm like, man, I don't know. I don't think there's an ETF like that. And he opens his phone, XRP. Not an ETF. What do you think of XRP?

And it's absolutely incredible how mainstream aware people are, like how aware the mainstream is of XRP versus everything else. Nope, no value judgment, no comment. I'm just saying, man, I hear it all the time. Bitcoin's boring. I'm going to do the XRPs. Made me almost XRP myself. Okay.

should probably tune into the Daily Wolf. By the way, I've been much more unhinged on the Daily Wolf. Not sure if it's good or bad. But if you're not watching that on Yahoo and noon every single day, shame on you. You're not welcome here anymore. You're welcome here. I shouldn't have said that.

But I'll miss you guys until tomorrow. Oh, tomorrow, Jack Mallors. Jack Mallors live on the Wolf of All Streets podcast. We got Jack Mallors live on the Wolf of All Streets podcast. Jack Mahler's live on the Wolf of All Streets podcast, and then we have Grant Cardone on the Daily Wolf. Tell me today, Carlos Domingo, casually, CEO of Securitius yesterday. He had a crypto over at Robin Hood. Galaxy research.

Who has a better guess than us? Nobody. Nobody. Jack Ballers, tomorrow, maybe more than 410 of you will show up. I love the 410 of you. Go find the other thousand of you that usually show up and tell them to come back. Jack Muller's tomorrow. I'll miss you.

Communities across Canada, hourly Amazon employees earn an average of over $26 an hour. Employees also have the opportunity to grow their skills and their paycheck by enrolling in free skills training programs for in-demand fields, like software development and information technology. Learn more at aboutamazon.ca.