The Wolf Of All Streets - Bitcoin WIPES OUT $504M Of Shorts As Korea PLUNGES 9% - Macro Monday

Episode Date: June 8, 2026

Bitcoin sparked its first real relief rally of the cycle this weekend — pumping from sub-$60,000 lows up to $63,700 and crushing $504 million in shorts in 24 hours (the biggest single-day short squeeze since late April) — but the bounce is already losing steam as fresh Iran-Israel strikes shatter the April ceasefire, sending oil up over 3% to $96 and Korea's KOSPI crashing nearly 9% in three minutes. This week's macro calendar is brutal: Wednesday's U.S. CPI print is expected to jump to 4.2% YoY (from 3.8%) — a hot reading locks in a restrictive Fed and could deepen the record ETF outflow streak — plus the ECB hikes to 2.25% Thursday, the CLARITY Act enters full Senate floor debate all week, JPMorgan/BofA/Citi just unveiled their own bank-backed tokenized network as a defensive move against stablecoins, massive token unlocks (HumidiFi unlocking 111.59% of supply Tuesday alone, HYPE $673M) pile selling pressure on already-weak markets, and global central banks have pushed gold holdings to the highest level this century. We break down whether $504M of squeezed shorts marks the cycle bottom or just a dead-cat bounce before the next leg down, what a hot CPI print means for Bitcoin's $60K floor, and which catalysts this week could finally turn the tape. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Bitcoin wiped out $504 million of shorts coming out of the weekend when everybody was calling for Black Monday at the end of the week. Meanwhile, markets are exploding across the world. Korea hitting circuit breakers, Japan down almost 5%. Much of this on the tech unwinded and, of course, an escalation of the war in Iran. We're going to talk about all that and more today with Dave, Mike, and Peter cheer. Let's go. Good morning, everybody. everybody welcome to yet another macro Monday going to bring everybody on now we got mike dave and peter cheered joining today uh mike start at the morning meeting and uh tell us what's going on so anna wong um expecting the cpi to be out point in four tenth starting to decline um she thinks will be near the peak 4.1 percent is their year over year um her year over the outlook i think the

consensus is 4.2 she thinks the peak from the iran war gasoline wave and inflation is over. More surprising is core. It's been subdued. 0.2 is what you expecting. Year of year, 2.9%. 2.2% on the monthly is basically in line with the Fed's consensus, the Fed's target. And she says part of the reason subdued is because airfares are still likely be hot, but AI and, you know, AI showing up memory chips, electronics, anything. But the reason, she said, is a one-off housing net surge and rents have come back down. Second, higher prices affected consumer spending, higher gasoline prices, which causing deflation and other stuff.

Club memberships is one thing that I caught. I had distracted for a little bit. Non-fired payload was strong, reading in May, construction leisure, and one thing she mentioned, weather was good in the World Cup. But she does expect that to be diminished by the end of the air, and she's actually expecting more likely to be rate cuts later in the year, which is completely against consensus. I think Dave likes that. Ira Jersey thinks it's difficult for the 10-year-old yield to continue to decline, even if we have risk off or lower oil. But she's slightly lower inflation later. Markets right now pricing for CPI to be higher than what Ana expects. And she expects the young year, the uptrend and 10-year yields to continue, potentially testing 4.6. But 2% in the 10% in the 10%.

but not really trading much high. Point out Japanese yields are rising. And what else did he say? We'd take, so just point out what's watching the rest of the world. Chris Kane, our equity guy came on. He says what you might expect from an equity person. One day blip does not make a trend, remains bullish, pointed out the market was just overbought for two months.

What he said pointed stand it out was we had, Friday was basically the worst thing. since October 9th to last year. We remember that one. Mike is cutting in and out of him. I know he's going to glitch right back in. But, well, okay.

So what I do is I'm just going to cut off some of my. I have stuff running in the back running to me. No problem. Yeah. I think we covered the gist of it there. I want to go right to oil. Obviously, actually, I was just comment. It seems like a lot of people in your morning meeting actually are taking contrarian views today.

you know, the fact that we'll likely get rate cuts, I think, you know, the polymarket and such are now looking at rate hikes. And a lot of people think that Warsh is backed into a corner. Today we have, you know, oil up, which makes sense considering we see this trade like an alt coin, depending on what happens on any given day. So I don't think, you know, up 4% one day means nothing in oil, but it is notable that it's rising. And still, I think, consensus over there is that it will fall. I mean, Peter, how do you, what's your outlook on oil? and maybe, you know, it's always the perfect day to bring you on when something happens in Iran. So we had basically, you know, Israel, I believe, you know, attacked Beirut and Iran attacked Israel as a response.

And that always kind of, you know, makes up shake our heads about the potential ceasefire. Yeah. So one, I tend not to bother with, you know, front end of WTI or Brent. I've been looking really focusing on January 2027. Just, you know, it's steady right around 80. It seems to have trouble breaking. I think the oil market's pricing in higher for longer. I think that's going to have repercussions for diesel and all these other things. You pull up the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in the U.S.

We're back almost near the Biden lows in terms of how filled we are. There are limits to how much we can drain. So I now think this is going on to at least September. You know, I think even Trump mentioned Labor Day in a recent interview. We don't like what we're seeing. Israel clearly wants to continue to push this. Iran, I think, has been stringing us along. And the president, I think, is incredibly unlikely to risk more life.

So I think we're kind of stuck in the status quo. So with all that, I think you're seeing inflationary pressures. They're going to mount. They're going to stay there. You're going to see diesel prices. All those things kind of rise, largely because of this. It's going to be higher for longer. I think that's going to impact yields.

Or you're going to see bond yields go higher, all of which is kind of a headwin for risk assets. Interesting because Trump's saying that both Israel and Iran are looking for it. Yeah, you know, I think he told them last week not to do anything and they did anyway. I think Iran is very good, you know, as our generals all point out, I think I've said it on this show before, Iran has never won a war, but they've never lost a negotiation. And they seem well on their path to doing that again. That's absolutely wild. I mean, Mike, any response to that? Dave, any thoughts on that before we move on to other topics?

Well, just with Peter and I, we'd make a great market because I think the exact opposite, I'm looking at the similar contract. He pointed a contract that's $79 a barrel right now. The number one contract in WTI in terms of open interest in December. It's at 80. I feel expected to be closer to the 50 by midterms than 100. And it's not closer to 50 by midterms. We already see what the sweep that's getting Mr. Trump or the Republicans voted out of office. And if it doesn't get fixed, certainly by 2008, we're going to see the next president being a Democrat.

To me, this is the point we've reached now in markets is if Mr. Trump hasn't figured it out yet, I don't think that inflation, it's great. Pump up the stock market. It creates inflation. Highest in 100 years, that's what gets you voted out of office. Gold has figured it out. Silver has wiped out a 60% rally in the year. It's down in the year.

Gold's hovering unchanged. They're all following Bitcoin. Natural gas led the way up. Same thing, Peter, you should note. In 2022-23, natural gas led the way down when most people call him for crude oil to be above 150. And idiots like me said it's going to go to 50. Okay, we got the 54. I feel expected to happen.

The bottom line, though, is. there's one person who did this invasion. There's one person who really needs it to be cleared up. And there's one major person who's got the, you know, he's the leader of the world's largest energy producer and a net exporter. And he's prices lower by the midterms. It'll happen. Yeah, that makes sense.

So really quickly, I just, okay, go ahead, Dave, if you have a point on that before I move on. Well, yeah, I mean, I think, I think that, you know, there's some self-contradiction in what you just said, but ultimately we end up in a very similar place, right? the notion of that oil needs to be down at 50 for the midterms. I mean, that'd be nice, but that would be ridiculous. The cost of production is still 55. So oil really needs to be around 60 to 70.

That's the sweet spot. Watch Landman and listen to Billy Bob Thornton, and you'll get probably the best explanation of it because he's right. And it's actually, it's a brilliant show, and his character is amazing. But the truth is that you really want it to be there. We're not that far from it now. you know, where it currently is now is far pro-catastrophic. Inflation would be, you know, the inflationary bump for gas prices to be between

$4 and $5, that comes back down to between, I don't know, you know, 3 and 4, 3 and 3.350, that will put inflation metrics moving in the absolute right direction and give the Fed the air cover they need. This notion that markets, that consumer inflation and asset inflation are linked, however, is maybe one of the most statistical, biggest statistical misstatements I've heard out of you, like literally ever, if there's no correlation over the last 25 years. I mean, none. If anything, it's been inverse, if you consider baseline CPI between two and three percent as a non-event, which, by the way, I don't. I think that's one of the great big lies that the Fed

has done and Keynesians have done to people. It's why your rant on Yahoo for minutes on, you know, on Yahoo finance on Bitcoin is so goddamn important. But take that out of the mix and understand that asset inflation well in excess of consumer inflation is exactly what they want. That is what they're trying to engineer that and reinvestment in America to actually create jobs, which, by the way, that can't happen with higher rates. And so, you know, that's what's going on here. And that's what they're trying to engineer. And if you ask yourself, what does that mean for assets? Well, it means risk assets that have some tether to reality will probably do pretty. well, risk assets with an incredible narrative and story, we'll see. The good news is, is when we come back next Monday, I think we're going to know the results of the SpaceX IPO,

right? Is that true? Yeah, I think three or four days. So we're going to have a really good idea of how the markets are responding to narratives, because that, my friend, is a narrative. Maybe the narrative to endable narratives. One thing, can I, I guess maybe not push back, but maybe expand. When I'm talking to people, honestly, gasoline prices are right. relatively low in the list of concern. If you want to get people riled up right now, talk about electricity prices. Like, electricity prices, I think, are far more important to the average person right now. It doesn't matter who you're talking to.

And companies, too, are facing this, right? If you have a cell phone tower, you're expecting ex-profitability, and that's not there. I think electricity prices are the biggest issue. And they're kind of under the radar screen a little bit because unlike oil, where we can look at futures contracts and get a quick price and you go see gasoline, I feel like that's the bigger problem to address on afford. And I don't see any progress really being made on that. If anything, I think it's kind of continues to deteriorate as we ramp up more and more data centers

than AI. So, I think- Well, can we quit pulling that thread a bit because there's a few different pieces. There's in any cost, there's inputs and there's distribution and where the choke points are. So when we saw the inflation that happened after COVID, you know, look, there was a push and both of them were in play. And that's why it was so explosive, right? The push was people were given stimmy checks, and so money went right to people.

We all know that, and everyone focuses on that. But just as important was the supply chains were so fucked up that there was way too much money chasing, so many goods that people, you couldn't do anything. With electricity, there's the inputs. With the primary interest is natural gas. And as Mike has so well noted, natural gas is meaning really muted. So you could produce electricity. It's not your cost of production. The issue is the grid is saturated.

and there's just a certain fixed amount of it, and we now have increased demand, and increased demand that's crowding out, and that's causing all these populous nonsense, so the data centers, the data centers, the data centers, right? And you're right, that's a very big deal. It's also a political issue, and we'll see where that goes. But I'm curious, because you guys have probably studied it,

particularly regionally where electricity prices are highest, how much of what's going on has to do with the lack of ability to produce it and how much of it has a lack of ability to distribute it via the grid because production you know they probably could do something about i'm not sure that the damn thing they could do about the grid i don't have the answers obviously so i defer to my no i was talking to peter i mean i don't know you've got no i think it's a mix of things i think one is you know adding to the extent that places are running at peak it's difficult to add more um the grid though is definitely a major problem and again you're seeing companies i think move and what our biggest theme is

in terms of growth in America. It's happening in the heartland. People are chasing fresh water and electricity access much more so than over the past few years. So I think it's changing the Heartland of America kind of defined between the Appalachians and the Rockies outperform the rest of America last year. I think a big part of that is this kind of re-industrialization

needs access to fresh water and electricity. That's the other part is not only are we trying to do the data centers and electricity, but actually almost any manufacturing facility requires heavy amounts of energy usage and for 10 years or longer we were reducing that usage that demand starting to pick back up so I think it's a real issue people are able to solve it part of this is going to be you know where we situate I think northern Virginia there's only so much you can do now with electricity in northern

Virginia with the data centers you know Iowa has become a great spot you know you're seeing you know it was just in Milwaukee the other day you're driving to cola and there's this massive mass of data being built and it makes sense because there I think they have that surplus of electricity so it's reshaping the narrative. It just seems like it's one of those things that's grounded on everyone. And like everything else, it's less about this year's inflation and the cumulative effects that people know they're paying $500 a month now instead of $300 a month or whatever the numbers are a few years ago. And that's the hard part, I think, to address. It's kind of you, we've been cut by, you know, a thousand cuts and you wind up with this place that people are just saying enough's enough.

Yeah. And I do agree with you. It's going to be potential of political issue. And I think the biggest risk of the AI growth story right now is some sort of political movement to heavily tax them or do something to them. I think it's interesting because we have disjointed global markets at the moment, kind of alluded to in my title here. But I went to check because I assumed things were down when I saw what happened in Korea and Japan, which we can get into at a moment. And they're not. Right. I mean, stock market today. Nasdaq futures point to rebound, right? We had a terrible day for NASDAQ on Friday. Now it's bouncing. The reason I thought it would be bad is because AI trade unwind rocks Korean traders leverage for one way bet.

I actually talked about this on the Daily Wall that retirees in Korea three weeks ago. There was a huge story that retirees in Korea. I've basically gone all in on two stocks and sold off all their insurance and savings to leverage the AI trade. Well, here they are getting wiped and circuit breaker, very predictable. But I mean, Japan also having an absolutely horrible day. I mean, 4.2% down. And here we are.

the narrative is that those are selling off because of tech and our tech is bouncing including bitcoin which we can get into you need to remember this pattern is fairly common remember when we our market when we open when we open before us we well it's not before i mean well we had a day on friday where they're closed and so they react and then we open on monday and laugh at them that's right well it happens a lot and it's it's fascinating I mean, look, you said it yourself. There were a lot of people. I mean, I laughed at them, but there were a lot of people calling for a Black Monday again.

Every time you have a really bad Friday, I mean, it goes back. It's funny because, I mean, I was there. I literally was there in 1987 when the Friday before the crash happened, and it was down a pretty significant percentage. And people were worried it was a bad week, et cetera. And, you know, we came in and Monday was a disaster, yada, yada, yada. And I understand the differences today. And so every time people make these idiotic comments about how, you know, well, look, there's going to be margin calls. Everyone's going to tell their brokers they need to sell, sell, sell over the weekend.

The other thing that's happening over the weekend is if to the extent that that starts to happen, those same brokers are on the phone to our friends at the Fed and our friends at the Department of Treasury and determining is there something they need to do they need to do anything. And pretty much every time the answer is no, except for the first time when the answer is yes, they will do something. And I think traders kind of understand this. Now, Japan, they don't know what's going on. And so it was just a catch-up trade. I mean, NVIDE was down 5% on Friday, right?

So Japan being down two or three percent today, that's not. They'll bounce massively tomorrow. I mean, assuming that we have sustained, like, you know, even flat or slightly up or not catastrophically down. To your point, I mean, I tweeted. this, as you said, I don't think I've ever heard a person call for a Black Monday correctly. In fact, I would say that it's the greatest bottom signal there is if people on Friday are at that point of fear and panic. I think that's right.

I mean, and that's why I think that, you know, and I gave the thumbs up to Anna Wong's comment, but I think that that will be the dominant narrative at some point over the next few months and when that switches to dominant narrative, Bitcoin will probably be somewhere between 80 and 90. And we'll see. You know, that's my guess because there's, to me, logic has to rule. I mean, James isn't here. It's not that the Fed is trapped, although they are in a sense. They've been trapped for a very long time. But to not understand what they need to accomplish, they need to to use Mike's words. They need, or he focuses on consumer inflation, but what they need are people to not be afraid for their jobs. They need for reshoring and manufacturing to at least be starting.

They need for people to think and to have positive expectations. And the only way for that to happen is to start getting shovels into the ground. And the only for that to happen is to be able to spur investment. And, you know, I don't think anything else matters because that's the only way you can win the win midterms. I mean, you can't win, but Mike is right about inflation. You can't have an oil shock. An oil shock is disastrous, so they have to get rid of it. And, you know, they started it, and now they have to end it. And, you know, look, I have very conflicted and very, very nuanced, deep opinions on everything that's going on over there, none of which have anything to do with economics.

The economic part point is, however, going to be, to pardon the phrase, the Trump argument, because that's what's going to dictate what he does. What he does is he needs to get oil prices to a reasonable level. have to be down where they were pre-war, but they have to be moving in that direction. And gas prices have to be seen to be moving lower. That's what he has to have happen. And all of that is important to understand. As long as you understand that's what they need, then you can predict what the Fed will do, what the Treasury will do, and what Trump will do. And we'll see. And we've been wrong before. At least I have. I do think he picks and chooses what he hears, right? If you go back, it was about six weeks ago,

the big talking point was in three weeks, it'll all be over because, Iran's going to have to turn off their pumps, blah, blah, blah. And Bastian came out with that across the news media six weeks ago, right? Iran has not been brought to its economic needs. So I think he picks and chooses what he wants to hear. Tell you a quick story. One of our generals was with recently in London, and he recited this. He had to testify in front of the Senate Committee on intelligence.

And at the end of it, there were five of them who have to testify. The leaders to ask them, will North Korea give up their, nuclear weapons. Yes or no? All five of them said no, immediately said no. The next day, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post comes out. Trump says all his intelligence officers need to go back for training. So he doesn't always listen to necessarily what he's being told. So I'm not sure what he's being fed on how while this goes, how alternatives are coming through. That to me has been the wildcard. I think he has misplayed this and may continue to misplay that. And that's why I think we're actually going to see this higher for longer rather than some sort of retreat.

Yeah. That fit terms are going to be wild. I don't, I, maybe I'm just like not politically attached enough to understand, but it seems like there's no chance that remains entirely Republican. I mean, even in past midterm years, it's very rare, right, that one party retains the executive in both houses just because it's really easy to scream from the sidelines and really hard to govern. Right. So, yeah, I don't see it. Yeah, yeah. Let's pivot to this Bitcoin rally because I think it's what a lot of people want to talk about because it's not just Bitcoin, it's strategy and sailor and a whole lot of nuance here. So Bitcoin's rally to 63,700 triggers 504 million losses for short sellers, most since late April. So first of all, that's a rounding error versus the longs that were liquidated. And once again, when people are calling from Black Friday, you probably have a good opportunity to trade a technical bounce and liquidate some shorts. So that's all I'm viewing this. as right now. Interestingly, though, I think a lot of people were holding their breath, waiting to see what strategy was going to do. He sold 32 Bitcoin last week. I saw a lot of takes

that what strategy should do is sell off, you know, 5% of their stack this week, raised $2 billion to make sure that the dividends are covered again for a couple of years and move on with their lives. What he did instead was buy some Bitcoin, as is Michael Saylor. Strategy is required 150 Bitcoin for $100 million. To my knowledge, that's a lot more than selling $32. To increase their Bitcoin reserve, and they've also increased their USD reserve by $100 million to $1 billion.

So I think his strategy here, no pun intended, obviously is to slowly increase the cash reserve that they sold off to close a convertible note and show the market that STRC is safe. We should have waited five minutes see where the market opens on STRC, but it was up about 2% pre-market. Last I saw and micro-strategy.

was also up. And just as a, I think as an honorable mention, Tom Lee keeps buying Ethereum and a lot of it. More Ethereum than Sailor's been able to buy Bitcoin here. So, I mean, Dave, I'll start with you. You know, what's Saylor doing here? What sailors should be doing? Is he doing this right? So the best take on strategy probably has come from my friend Mike, aka grain of salt for those who follow him. And, you know, he's like, has his finger right on the pulse of this. And what he basically, said last week was listen, guys, the investment bankers are line up around the corner to do deals to get strategy capital if they absolutely need it. And all these takes that the capital markets have been cut off for them are completely wrong. So once you understand that, then you have a

question in your head. Okay, so what is that, what are their choices? And their choices become very, very clear. And he's basically picking this one, right? Which is, yeah, he'll dilute his shareholders a bit, they'll maintain STRC, and keep it going. And you can call it whatever. I mean, calling it a Ponzi scheme is a funny thing. Because Ponzi schemes are characterized by the people who are buying into that scheme, having no idea of what's going on and they think there's a business, they think something. And in this case, it's 100% transparent.

So every time somebody uses the word Ponzi to describe strategy, their credibility is more or less flushed down the toilet. because it's an absolutely absurd use of the term. The term is there's no, no scheme here. He's telling you exactly what he's doing. And there are, and I tweeted this last week, there are two, the investment thesis for MSTR, the stock, and the investment thesis for STRC, the stock,

are very clear. MSTR, you're buying managed leverage, you're going to get diluted, and you're going to underperform in periods of time when Bitcoin is range bound, and you're going to weigh underperform when Bitcoin drops, and you will outperform if Bitcoin goes on a sustained rally. That's your investment thesis.

You can like it or you can hate it, but that's the thesis. And it's perfectly reasonable for people to say, I think Bitcoin's going to be range bound, therefore I want to sell strategy. I get that, but that's not calling it a Ponzi. STRC is essentially a high-yield perpetual debt instrument where instead of believing in the potential financial turnaround of said company that raises at a triple B or whatever credit,

you believe in Bitcoin's long-term appreciation to guarantee the dividend. Full stop. That's it. You don't have to think farther. And calling it anything other than that is wrong. And as long as you understand that that's the case, there are a lot of people out there, a lot of people out there who believe in Bitcoin long-term to survive, thrive, and grow and don't want to trade the chart squiggles and want to get a yield.

And those people, SDRC, makes a lot of sense for it. It's that simple, Scott. And every single take that's different than that. that is going down to crazy town. You know, there's a lot of it. I mean, I saw there's a finance professor who you and I both know, Austin Campbell, he missed that thread last week. I mean, he kind of was, you know, most of what he said is reasonable because he's a

smart, reasonable guy. But he's starting to lend to others to take it down one level more. And it just disturbs me because that is what's going on. And when you see that, and I'm landing the plane now, when you see that and you see that, and you see the market sell off, well, there's two conclusions here. Conclusion one is if I'm sitting in strategy C-suite, I now know that I can acquire Bitcoin cheaper if I sell every once in a while and spook the market when I do it.

And so they're going to do it again and again and again until the market is fully inoculated against it because you can't do that kind of manipulation, positive manipulation, legal manipulation, more than a few times before people catch on that they're going to get their faces ripped off by shorting against it. But I learned something, and they learned something last week.

They probably also regret paying back the convert, but that's a different thing. The second thing is, if you're predicting a market to fall below its very clear support at the 200-week moving average, when it is already at a steep discount to every value model that everyone in the Bitcoin world uses, and you're doing so on the basis of something that is wrong, aka forced liquidation, you're going to get hurt.

And that's what tends to happen. Now, Bitcoin can go down for sure, but is it going to go down because micro strategy is going to implode? Not any time soon. In fact, not in this calendar year, not next calendar year. And I don't think anyone who's trading Bitcoin gives a crap about what happens the calendar year later or beyond that. So that's my thought process.

Any thoughts there, Mike? It's Peter. I was waiting my turn to point out anybody buying cryptos or Bitcoin now is picking a pinnies in front of the steamroller. The market's the bear market, respect. We're at support again. You got to have the stock market go up, number one, for cryptos to just say stable. I say the same thing about metals.

Silver was up 60% in the year. As of yesterday or as of Friday, it dropped down 5%. This is just getting started. I look at the macro as cryptos are just have to do. Dave, you pointed out pattern recognition, this typical pattern recognition. In markets like this is typically you have to get to a low, price cure. You have to purge all the excesses. We've just gotten started. There's so much excess is going. And one key pattern in cryptos has been tether flipping and everything. It flipped in Ethereum this

weekend. It's probably a good sign of good support in around $1,500. Remember doing that with with Ripple, just, or XRP just a little while ago and then XRP dropped down. It's just a matter of time. Tether keeps going up and eventually flipping its Bitcoin. The bottom line also is we have never seen. Let me finish. Is I giving you all your time? I was going to say that it did flip Ethereum temporarily last week. I don't know if it's hilarious. But yes, it's it. Yeah.

It happened on the center. I wrote about it. But it's my point. There's what's talking about pattern recognition. That's a trend that's going to continue. I don't see why it's going to stop. So we can talk about cryptos forever. But my point is that's a bare market respected.

You just got a decent rally to 200-Dade moving hours are back at support. Why does Dave keep picking up pennies in front of the steamover? Good luck with that. You need the stock mark go up. It's not just cryptos. It's metals. They have to have the stock market go up. The Bloomberg all metals.

index was up 25% in the beginning of the year. Now it's hovering around down, almost 7% is hovering and silver's gone down. That's heading lower. It needs the stock market go up. Crude oil was up 100% in beginning here. Now it's having around 6%. I can see it going towards 80 or lower, just the way things are going. Bottom line is everything depends on that stock market going up, and we have never seen had stock market volatility this low with gold volatility and crude oil volatility this high. So to me, it's just a matter of time. Also, you look at the end game. Mr. Trump hasn't figured it out yet. We've figured out in cryptos, once he tilted, that was great, that, oh, it's pop up the stock market.

That's great. That means inflation. It means rich people make more money. You're not getting voted. You're going to get voted out. Even, and that's to lose, lose. So we've reached to lose, lose in the stock market. It's too high. It goes up. It creates more inflation. It's 2.5 times GDP. A good example is that since the Fed first started cutting rates in September of 2004, S&P 500 is up 35%. The Bloomberg Energy Spot Index is up the same. It's nothing compared to stock market. That's the 10 on inflation. So here's the lose-lose. If it goes down, everything goes down, inflation goes down, which might help those people who voted for you, but this is the end game. And if you talk about Monday morning bounces, that's what markets are supposed to do.

But to me, this is just the beginning of the end, and I still stick with the key theme this year is if you're bullish, any crypto's, you better hope that stock market stays up or else you're going to continue losing and lose a lot. It's just getting started. In my opinion, as a trader, though, last week looked like peak fear and insanity. And I wouldn't be surprised to see Bitcoin float right back up into the 70s. Even if it's heading back down, I mean, oversold on every single time frame. Everyone's saying STRC will never return to par. Michael Thaler's finished, strategies over.

I mean, it's up 3% today. Right? So I bought very transparently. My bet in my mind was if SCRC isn't going to zero, it's eventually. going back to par, so I bought it at 92 bucks last week, feeling pretty smart at this moment. We'll see how smart I feel in a couple days. But, you know, a trade when you know that the person who is controlling it is looking to send it back to a hundred bucks and you get 11.5% yield, seems like in the short term, at least a very good idea to me if you don't think it's going

to zero. Right. Obviously, just if he wants, add to the dividend yield. Having said that, I would say, you know, talking to the institutional side of things, I think this further slows institutional adoption, right? It's so bizarre that one person selling 32 Bitcoin creates all this noise, right? So if you're an institutional investor, I think this just keeps focusing everything back on Sailor and MSTR, which I don't think is healthy, right? I think this market would be so much healthier if there wasn't this kind of, you know, behemoth in the room that seems to have so much driving force. And whether the de-leveraging risk is real or not, it's out there that

tends to be a magnet for markets to think about. I just feel like if they were this whole week and the fact that it was 32 Bitcoin. It wasn't like it was 32,000 Bitcoin or something sent this whole thing into it. I think that really slows down institutional adoption. I know no one will buy it at 60, they'll buy it at 100. I think that's even more true now. But, you know, to kind of to echo Dave's point, but two things. A, if Sailor hadn't been buying for the last five or six years, I shudder to think about what the price for Bitcoin would be anyways. So without him, I very seriously doubt we'd have the same institutional level of adoption. And kind of to echo Dave's point, he literally said a month ago, I'm going to sell some Bitcoin to

inoculate the market and sold 32 of them. You got to imagine that now, if that was the worst reaction to him selling once, that that reaction minimizes each time he does it again in the future. Now it's out there that it's a possibility. So I think those people will be back. I think. Maybe I'm too bullish. But I think. think those people will be back. Dave, you're muted. It's not about bullish. I mean, it's about, look, value matters. What's going on, the Fed matters. So when Mike made a point, he said that energy is now the same as the S&P. That was not the case before the war started. And the reason it was not the case is because of something very, very important. And a bunch of people have talked

about this recently. I'm going to, I'll screw up the attribution. But the impact of technology on price, and productivity is not uniform. Oil cost of production in current dollars at 55 is a dramatic improvement over what it would be based on inflation, you know, because of fracking, et cetera, and better and better technologies. So, you know, oil prices and energy prices will, in point of fact, trend down versus high tech prices.

I mean, for lack of a better, a letter, better word. But that said, the percentage of market cap to GDP is certainly concerning. People are using words that really scare the living hell out of me, such as this is a new reality. This time is different. You know, we heard the same thing in Japan. I remember it in 88, 89, and 90. You know, they were saying the same thing. Now, in this case, there's a bit of, it's not nearly as disastrous sounding as it was in Japan

when they were trading on a 50, 50, 50, price to earnings. when the rest of the developed world was in the teens. And so it was triple the most metrics. I picked that one, but it doesn't matter. Any metric you picked in those days, the Japanese market at the heights were trading at three times the basic fundamental value of most of the rest of the world. And it was based upon this idea that they had figured out

how to make everything so much more efficient that they will continue to win. And people missed the fact that the reason they were more efficient was because they were incredibly hierarchical, and they were brutally efficient, but had absolutely no way to adapt. And so Japanese companies were terrible at adapting to newer technologies and new things that changed. And as a result, they fell back. Now they figured that out eventually.

But the truth is, is they had decades of pain when the narrative that they were more efficient drop. Well, the narrative today is not just a narrative. It's true. I mean, productivity coming from AI is a huge driver in corporate profits. And it's just getting started to use Mike's words. So I do think that there are certain, there is definitely risk in the stock market. Where I keep coming back to it is based on strength of network and adoption from power law. And you had Mark Yusko and he went through the math.

You can rewind to Scott's show with Mark. I don't want to go through that whole thing. But more or less the best models show Bitcoin's fair value at somewhere between 120 and 140 right now, depending on where you look. That's a 50 plus percent undervalued. Most stocks aren't trading anything close to that. They're generally at 2x what most people's fair value models are. So if you look at that and you could laugh as much as you want, Mike,

I mean, you know, that's just there's a lot of people who are looking at it that way, myself included. And look, I'll continue to say Bitcoin trades like an option, but, you know, I like buying things that are cheap. And what happens in bull markets? What happens in bull markets are when there's market turns are people look to buy laggards, the dogs of the Dow kind of, idea, I think institutions will look at Bitcoin in that exact way over the next couple of months.

And I think that that's what will be the driving force. So there won't be any fanfares or music and you won't necessarily see it happening, but you will see Bitcoin, as you said, it's got float up. And the floating up is going to be people buying because they're buying a laggard. And then the narrative will see where it shapes. And I think the key to all of this is what happens, not just in the SpaceX IPO, but happens to other stocks where the source of funds are, what the market is doing. And I think over the next few weeks, we're going to have a really interesting idea of where narratives are emerging in markets. And I think that that's what matters. But this MSTR narrative, it was just overdone. And it allowed it to get to, you know, a place on the

chart where everything gets oversold and it allowed for exactly what you're going to think. Pete, Pete, bud, when you're kicking someone when they're down, usually needs to a bounce. Mike, go ahead. So I got to share a screen about fair value. Be careful. When you point out fair value from a biased person, not saying you, Dave, who's got invested interest in Bitcoin go up. This is a model created by one of the smartest guys I know at Bloomberg, Josh Daniels, he created a couple years ago. I've been pointing it out for almost two years now, pointing out the price of Bitcoin should drop in half versus the S&P 500 based on this unbiased, fair value who just goes from a ghost and checks out all the data and what really matters for Bitcoin.

I'm using Bitcoin versus S&P 500. So be careful when you point out someone else's fair value. For those of us who are looking at the chart, what are the two, What's the orange line and what's the lighter line? So the actual orange line, that's the amount of S&B 500 it takes for one Bitcoin. Right now it's 8.6. Remember how I got since when I was at near 18 last year. I said, that was just silly. To be selling your stocks to buy Bitcoin.

Now, those people are getting stopped out. They learn the lessons ETS. But what I show you in this gray line is the fair value match that shows a fair value of Bitcoin versus the S&B 500 should drop in half. What is that line? What is it actually? What's it based on? Okay, right now it takes 8.6 S&B 500s for one Bitcoin. The value, the fair value should is closer to four, which means it should drop in half. That's a fair value model. How does one calculate that fair value? Exactly. That's the stuff that I can send it to you. It's a quant person. It's a co-quant team at Bloomberg had figured it out. Okay. So the point is it's a fair value metal. It's not about argument. Just point out, be careful when people talk about fair value, but a number of the screen that tracks nothing. It has a million competitors. That's why I want to. Okay, well, I'm going to ignore that line because it's insane. So it's a fact. There's millions of competitors of Bitcoin. Why did Tommy Lee go to Ethereum? That was a good sell signal last year. Tom Lee went to Ethereum because he thinks Ethereum is going to be a mate is going to be in huge demand based on its utility. I don't agree with him. I didn't.

agree with them at the time, and I sold all my Ethereum when he bought his. So that's okay. But that's besides the point. But it's immaterial. They're totally different use cases. They're totally different investments. It's like saying that SpaceX has thousands of competitors because you can buy any other stock.

And in point of fact, that's true. But there aren't, there's not that many competitors to SpaceX's, you know, long-term vision. There are a few, but not a lot. So we'll just point out, we've had some major sell signals in Bitcoin just a week or two ago. When it's broken down, stock market going up, stock market's starting to follow. And you still chose to pick a pennies in front of the freight chain, in front of the steamler. I say, you know, I'd probably best to acknowledge the beer.

It's breaking down, let it break down, and look for things to pan out, follow pattern recognition analysis. Like, don't quote Billy Bob Thornt. He's clueless about markets. Crudeau always goes below a cost of production before it bottoms, just a history, a fact of history, maybe it will happen. And you fully expect similar in cryptos. You fully expect a complete purge of all the other stuff as tokenization happens. And people get on the same chain and say, okay, I can get a return with this. I got a history of this.

And boy, by the way, why am I what's up with this Jewish coin? I'll short that one. It's just getting started. So the thing that bothers me about this conversation is half of what you're saying I agree with. I mean, I think there are many things in crypto that have no value. And the market needs a really good flush. We say that every year I've been saying since 2017, and it never happens. Now, will it happen?

I don't know. I doubt it personally. But the fact is, there's a lot of, there are a lot of tokens that there's no beef there. There's just sizzle with no steak. Then there are a bunch of others with real possibilities and real potential for revenues. and people are buying that on similar stories that they're buying, you know, SpaceX or, you know, Nvidia or any other company based on a future narrative or Micron. We'll pick that one because that's a good example.

Bitcoin is different. And honestly, I don't want to relitigate that argument. I think we have other things to talk about. So let's just put that one on the side. But the point that you make about going below cost of production and the reason I talk about value has to do with the conversation like where and how do you value Bitcoin. And the truth is, you value it or you should on the percentage possibility or percentage likelihood that a growing number of people will use Bitcoin as its monetary hedge as it goes

forward. And right now, that percentage is somewhere between 3 and 4%, right? Depending on how you calculate it based on what you think is the monetary premium of gold versus everything else. and to me that's a very big deal. Now, I've written about this extensively. I've talked about it extensively, but the bottom line thesis is Indian Housewives

buying gold in Duwale are not buying it to have more necklaces that they wear around. They're buying it because they're as a way of savings that the central banks, which have been buying absolute shit tons of gold over the last month that started up again, are doing it to improve their monetary reserves against rampant debasement that's going on in the fiat world.

And the question is, at what point do investors say, hmm, this Bitcoin has the potential to be that and take it on its next leg up? So when you talk about picking up pennies in front of the steamroller, I would say that shorting at the bottom, I mean, if you had a really tight stop, you're already stopped out, right? 60 days and all the place to try to short the euro. It's a clear double bottom reset, you know, retest. Now, do I care about it?

Not really. So, Dave, are you still long gold? Are you still long silver, $100 an ounce? Come on, seriously. I'm long silver from $4. I've been paying gold. Right. Okay, but the point is that I think, I think that you're going to be right in

Bitcoin from $10,000. Okay. Well, whatever, you know. I think, I, I, I, I think, all I say is, If dollars were, if 2026 and $2017 were the same thing, then I might be able to somehow mentally twist my math into that, although the Bitcoin network is eight times what it was back then and six times what it was when FTX crashed. And so to me, you know, looking at the price of Bitcoin as lines on a screen without

understanding what's going on in terms of its network effects is chart malpractice. But that's besides. Guilty. Guilty of being bearish of asset as unlimited supply of competitors. Look at the price of corn. The price on the screen was first traded in 1974. There's not as many competitors. I'm sorry.

That's just what happens when you have a lot of supply. Prices go down. And prices are going on on in cryptos. I say, good luck. I still expect to go to $10,000 and Bitcoin. Okay. Well, you've done yourself in. If your key argument is competitors, then you effectively are bearish.

every single asset on the planet because the one thing that we're seeing with SpaceX, that is the granddaddy of all competitors between SpaceX has revenues. What are you missing about something? It's no, it's a number on the screen. It creates stuff that helps society do better. Bitcoin, how about we just go buy a little bit of more Cardano or Montero or Chainley? Okay, so. Honestly, there's no revenues in the space and the game, the game's over.

The game is in stocks for now. The basic example of that. They have revenues and earnings. There's no revenues in gold. Exactly. That's why gold's going down. It's why silver's going down. There's only one game.

It's the stock market. Yeah. Well, over time, that's not true. But let's go back to one thing. You said there's no utility. We just talked about, and Peter, who's been very quiet here, I'd love to hear. Peter. Peter made a point that electricity may be one of the key things going on.

There happens to be a commodity out there, which is one of the most important. important commodities for stabilizing grids and building out renewables and bringing supply online, which happens to be called Bitcoin. It's the narrative that we know is true and we see it playing out in real time. And when you say that and you talk about revenue, I mean SpaceX at a hundred times say revenues is an insane number. Actually what we've seen in the internet bubble, we've seen it many, many times when you start showing revenue when your numbers look ridiculous. Exactly. So I don't the revenue point is true. I actually think that is absolutely the accurate problem with all of crypto.

That's why I think Tom Lee might be the world's biggest fireball. If anything is going to blow up, it's going to be bitmine. Because Ethereum, you can't justify a market cap that he wants to justify on the basis of its utilization. But Bitcoin does have utility. And that utility is important, right? And that value is based off of monetary premium. And that does exist.

You can't say that gold, you know, at $4,000 an ounce or $4,500 an ounce, isn't is that's its utility price. When platinum is trading at half that and has for human history been considered more valuable in jewelry and it's 30 times your error. You just can't. It's monetary premium. So if you think the monetary premium is gonna collapse,

cool, you can make that bet. I personally think that we're about to get another round of currency debasement globally in competitive devaluations, in which case, I think monetary premium is gonna explode. And that is where it's bullish for Bitcoin. And that's where the difference is. So I would say one thing in terms of the electricity, you look at some of the, I almost call them former Bitcoin mining companies, right?

Some of the stuff have done phenomenally well, but they've done phenomenally well because they've transitioned to the AI and data center story, right? You have someone right now the data center at AI who is willing to pay a lot for electricity versus Bitcoin mining where you're kind of dependent on what you get, how much is trading for. So I think that's one thing that's just driving all this electricity problems for the nation. And I think it's for, you know, the Bitcoin miners have figured out how to take advantage of it to a large degree is Google, Amazon, then they can pay 100x for electricity right now, right? They are generating so much market cap on the back of it. Unclear how much revenues being driven on the back of that or how much profitability. But certainly with market cap, they're able to pay 10x, 100x,000 we're willing to pay. That's driving everyone towards that side of the electric.

production. So I would say again, the Bitcoin mining, the network has built up. But it's interesting to me that most of those companies, and one of the guys, one of the generals I work with, he's on the board of one of them. It's really been driven lately by this transition of finding ways to take advantage of the data center AI needs. So again, I don't know that's, to me, that seems not a great story for Bitcoin in the near term, right? It's people are pulling away. And I do think there's, you know, this group of, let's call it more gambling money that they search mean stocks. They search wherever they think they can make 100x. And Bitcoin is not in that list right now. I think they've, you know, occasionally will come up. They'll play around with it. It's, you know, Korean tech stocks

became on that list. And there's some amount of money, whether it was an ARKKK disruptive trick. It's hard to figure out where it's going next, but they feel like they've left the Bitcoin community. I think that was, you know, this group, it's helps. They're really momentum traders, right? And you saw them in, what was it, Avis or the car, you know, all of a sudden that goes up. So I don't know where they're headed next. But I feel they kind of. let crypto behind. I don't feel like they get that bang for the buck anymore and they're looking elsewhere. Maybe they come back to crypto, but I think we need to see that kind of price increase be a little bit more steady to push them back in. I did a share screen. I think you need to look

at that. So this is Bitcoin hash rate versus price. And if you look, you see at the far right, you see that hash rate has indeed come down because of the AI trade. But if you look, you'll see we're pretty damn close to the largest in its history gap between where price is underperforming. And it's been for a sustained period of time now. And this to me is not something, you expect those two lines to converge. Now you might say it'll converge if you're Mike saying, okay, well, it's going to collapse and the hash rate's going to get cut in not just in half, but by 80%, or 90% for what you say is going to happen. I think that's highly unlikely. I think given all the body blows that's happened,

given what's going on in the world of AI, and given what's going on with the cost of electricity, it's pretty clear to me that the hash rate is resilient in this. Now, we can debate why, but I think it's from sovereign adoption and people who view Bitcoin strategically as why, but it doesn't matter, because eventually this chart will normalize.

It's happened before. And by the way, just the other thing I like about this chart that's really important is the last time we were at 60 with those two black lines, look at the difference, and between how high above the blue lines it got in the height of that mania. And it was a mania, and it was driven by exactly what you're talking about, Peter, literally, people who were buying Bitcoin as a lottery ticket and thinking it's going to go to the moon.

And so we saw that mania. And since then, we haven't seen anything even close to that. We saw a little bit, you know, you could see back when Trump got elected, people think it was going to be a strategic Bitcoin Reserve, all those narratives. My thesis, Mark Yusko's thesis, a lot of other thesis, is that you're going to be get convergence and that convergence is going to drive a more sustainable hated rally and that's what's going to happen and we just had another shakeout and you know look you know shakeouts are good in a sense but don't short the bottom of a shakeout when you get capitulation and by the way it's entirely possible

that it will continue to fail at at resistance and this rally is going to be very very difficult but it's a question of what what you are doing and so i think this is an important way of looking at yeah peter i mean where do you Let me share a screen if I can. Go ahead. No, you go ahead. I just, I'm on here. Sometimes the screens don't share right when you have multiple people. There we go.

Yeah, I got rid of mine. So one thing I want to mention to you, Dave, you've been using the hash rate. It's been wrong for almost two years. I stopped using in 2024 for that reason. The facts have changed. We've dropped. We've had the correction. We've had the launch of ETS.

We've jumped by the best fact in history. We had the mainstream jump in and Trump pump it up. The trade is over. And I want to point out, when you point out there's going to be a big pump in liquidity, I have to show you what's happening with gold versus treasuries. If you think that's going to happen, this is the key thing that got me off the horse of gold a little bit too early. Of course, gold is now the most expensive versus the basket of treasuries or the U.S. treasury market, the cheapest versus gold since 1983.

At the same time, we have stock market cap to GDP in the highest in a hundred years. So if you expect that to kint you, I said good luck to me. All the cracks are happening. Silver is up on the year it's down. Bitcoin is up on the year. It's down. Volatility, it's just getting started. I'd say jump on the best trading year ever.

We had a great opportunity to sell silver up on the year. Now it's down. Had a great opportunity to sell Bitcoin up in the year. Now it's down. Same thing in corn. Now it's down. Crude oil, probably next. It's just getting started.

The bottom line is here's one simple little thing. If the stock market drops, we can say these are great leading indicators. Okay. So now let's say, let's just say hypothesize. what happens if gold stays at the current price, give or take? You know, I've said it many times in the show. I think $4,500 is roughly equilibrium with the current level of monetary stimulus. Now, let's say for the sake of argument, they're successful and they can do,

and they're able to push treasury yields down from, you know, wherever they are, four and a half percent on the 10-year down to 3 percent. Let's say they can do that in order to, you know, pump the mortgage market, pump the asset markets, et cetera. In that particular case, and gold stays where it is. Now, frankly, gold will probably rally in that scenario, but let's just say hypothetically, what would the orange line be for a rate fall of, you know,

from 4.4 or whatever we are to like three? What would that line be? It would be probably right in the middle, right? I'll let you play with hypotheticals all you want, the number one way to get yields lowers for rates to go up. Maybe Mr. Trump's starting to figure it out. Maybe Mr. Worse is going to go. down in history.

Yeah, I don't want. When did that ever happen? The last week, we started cutting rates in September of 2024, and the long bond is up 100%. And the stock market's up 35%. Inflation's above the target because the market's telling the Fed, you were wrong. Duh, that was a mistake. And now we're starting to see Mr. Trump maybe pushing back a little and realizing Mr. Pestant might be saying, oh, by the way, Mr. Trump, if you want inflation lower,

if you're going to get reelected, if you want, One in mortgage rates lower, if you let the Fed do their job, maybe hike rates, which I don't think they will. But if you do, then that's going to happen. This is the way we are right now. We are at the end game. Stock market's too high. It's creating too much inflation. We're there.

You know, I'm reminded of the Maginot Line scenario. I mean, thinking about the Fed, the Fed's job to hike rates, when you hike rates, you know, how that brings down long rates, it does it because you crush consumer demand. you crush investment and you push into recession. And people then think, oh, well, the government's going to print less. We are in a scenario now where both parties, doesn't matter. Both parties, guaranteed in a recession, you're going to print more or not less. Hiking rates, in my opinion, would actually trigger significantly more monetary printing. And this is something that James and I talk about.

And so I actually fundamentally disagree with the thesis that hiking rates would actually be good for inflation because I do believe it will create far more monetary stimulus because our budget deficits are structural and the revenue side is not and that's important. I mean, I can't phrase it any other way. I mean, it's a difference in monitors versus Keynesian. I'm a monitor of Syrah Keynesian. I get that. That debate's been going on for decades and it's not going to, we're not going to resolve it here. But I want you to understand there is another side to this argument, whether you agree with it or not. And I think that's that's a large part of where we disagree, Mike. And it's perfectly reasonable. understand your point of view.

The main reason we disagree is where prices are going. I think crypto's going lower. I think gold's going lower. I think most commodities are going lower. And I think the stock market, when it goes lower, it's going to lead everything lower. That's where we disagree. It's simple. And things are going that way.

Just starting to tilt that way. You keep fighting it. I wish you just join out. Not no wish. I just wish you luck people who are fighting the steam lower. Probably best not to fight the steam row. The thing is one, I think I pay no attention to the valuation models right now. To me, there's always a tell, right?

There's something you wake up every morning and you want to look at that. It's been anywhere from Turkish Lear to 10 year yields to gold to, you know, oil. I just find none of the kind of valuation models seem to be working in crypto right now. We're getting all these deviations, right? So, okay, I'm just going to ignore that. What else is moving it? And I would say this is going to sound more pessimistic than I mean to, but I'm watching, you know, the MSTRs of the world, the crypto companies.

But then on top of it, you're seeing a lot more effectively asset back lending against cryptocurrencies, where people are taking leverage loans on these things. And it's starting to smell a lot to me like back in credit derivative days, LSS, leverage super senior, CPDO, constant proportion of debt obligations. You had all these kind of instruments that set up layers of failure. And you would kind of go through one and instead of being able to buy the dip, it caused selling. You get to the next level.

It doesn't cause buy the dip. It causes that next selling. I think we're ways away from that. I don't think MSTR will be the trigger. But what I don't like is you start adding in all these other kind of leverage products into it. And you set up this kind of mechanism for guaranteed failure where people trigger one, two, three, four levels down. And that's the only way I see it getting to kind of Mike's 10,000 level. And I don't think there's enough esotericness out there, though it's hard to tell.

But to me, that's always the risk. You build these structures that have market value triggers or price triggers. That's where it's in trouble. I'll go back to this, you know, my expertise is, you know, the credit derivative business or the CLO business, right? The CLO business, everyone gives a bad name. There's never been a credit loss to investment rate tranche of a CLO on market value ones. They've been wiped out. And that's always the difference is those trigger mechanisms cause problems. And it's starting to show up more and more in crypto when you look at these crypto based loans that are being made and bond deals. That to me starts

building, I think, an infrastructure that is susceptible to kind of a rapid decline. And I don't like that that's building up because it creates this risk. And that's how we saw investment grade credit go from 30 to 200 is these products that helped it on the unwinded it all the reverse. And it's always about mark to market or value triggers, not about ability to absorb it. Because that kind of creates this inherent leverage that cascade sometimes. Again, I don't think we're there. I don't mean to sound that pessimistic. But I feel like that is one of the risks that's going on in crypto is it's building up these inherent levery strategies that are susceptible to kind of liquidation. I can't wait until somebody just sweeps the floor of these treasury companies and consolidates

them at a massive discount. That would be the best time to buy ever, I think. I don't know that it happens, but it just seems like it's become a, you know, kind of an anchor to the market rather than this big help. No doubt. And I think we can unpack a lot of that on Crypto Town Hall in 13 minutes. Thank you, Mike, Dave, Peter. Appreciate it. Another great show.

Seeing the Mike and Dave fire brought back memories. Thanks for having me. Okay. Thank you guys. We will see you next Monday, obviously. And, yeah, Dave, Cryptotown Hall, 10, 15, and then I'll have the Daily Wolf of 12. See you guys. Later. Bye.