The Wolf Of All Streets - Bitcoiners Holding Breath Ahead of Trump Speech #CryptoTownHall

Episode Date: April 1, 2026

In this episode, we discuss Bitcoin’s worst Q1 since 2018 (down 24%), the risk of a rare 6-month losing streak, surging alts, and exploding AI hype. We also cover Ripple’s new partnership with ex-Western Union, oil market tension, quantum FUD, and institutional adoption with Franklin Templeton and Fannie Mae accepting Bitcoin-backed mortgages. Ledn’s Maurizio joins to talk Bitcoin lending and lower rates. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

So let's get started. Yeah, go ahead. You jumped in, go ahead and start us off. I mean, I think, you know, we're all just wondering what Trump's going to say tonight. And all I have to say is when I see posts today, I'm not sure that the level of bullshit will be any higher than, than it will be any higher than usual. So, you know, we got that going for us. Yeah, that was my comment this morning was like, why celebrate April Fool's Day?

We just had March Fool's month. Yeah, I mean, you know, it's, it is. what it is. You know, we'll see what they say, you know, various and sundry addresses this afternoon. I mean, the markets basically seem to think that, uh, that things are going to get better. I mean, oil prices are sitting where are we? Yeah. Well, wow, it's down under 99. It's 98 on the brand there. And more importantly, Brent is, is only like $3, you know, actually not even three full dollars higher than West Texas, which is that, that's unique. I haven't seen that before. So, you know, and that actually matters, I think, in terms of what, what the world is thinking.

So I guess the markets believe there's de-escalation happening. At the same time, you know, Bitcoin's been in the same range. I mean, it's a, I mean, the Bitcoin is definitely turning into both good and bad, the honey badger of, of, of, of assets here. I think that we should, the talk on Bitcoin should be about quantum. There was actually a pretty good space last night. Jamie was hosting. I don't see them up here, but Bitcoin tonight with core devs from Bitcoin talking about quantum

in a very specific and rational tone. I think that, I mean, I know you were talking to a very conflicted person on your show this morning. I'm not saying they're wrong, but, you know, when someone forms a company to, you know, basically protect.

Bitcoin from quantum. I'm not sure that I want to, you know, how I listen to that. I think that, you know, and I actually look at Nick Carter and what he's doing, which he's invested in the person that you had on your show. And I see it as someone putting his money where his mouth is. But yes, that makes them somewhat conflicted, yada, yada. I think the bottom line is that there's enough innovation going on and Bitcoin will become quantum resistant. And there's a lot of fud that goes on. people who treat this as an existential risk and are not investing because of it are going to end up being sorry is the short answer, I think. And I think that's kind of what we probably want to talk about that and what the hell is going on geopolitically. I see we have Robert up here. I mean, Robert,

you know, you've been calling for the, you know, $200-some-odd dollar oil and disaster if all this happens. I'm not saying you would be wrong if it stayed this way. I mean, what do you think this morning? You think this is an opportunity to reload on oil longs and other shorts? Or what do you think? Yeah, I want to trade oil. I mainly trade options and OVIX is really high still. So, yeah, I'm not trading it. Also, you could have the potential for intervention, capital controls, all that kind of thing.

And, you know, if you go back to 2020, that was kind of the last. time that we really had an imbalance between supply and demand of this scale. And remember, oil went negative. But that happened. Oil went from like 20 to negative 40 and then back to 15 by the open the next day. It all happened, you know, in a day. And so, you know, trying to catch, there's, I think, a number of reasons, you know, not to try to trade oil. But at the end of the day either there's going to be much higher prices causing a significant amount of demand destruction or there's going to be shortages. It's really that simple.

Maybe we don't get $200 oil, but we get shortages like we're seeing all over Asia right now. So yeah, look, like by my math, it's 18 million barrels per day once you include the Russian refineries as well as that Valero one. Texas. So that that you know you have to go back to Q2 or 2020 to to you know find a point in time where we had that much demand destruction, that much reduction on the demand side. The world is going to have to look like that because at the end of the day you can't print oil. So the world is going to have to look like that so long as the disruption to supply is, you know, 17, 18 million barrels per day. And, you know, with Yanbu, uh, that, that, uh, you know, could take it up to

25 million barrels with, you know, one drone probably would do it, you know, if you get the pipelines. So it's really, yeah, it's not good, you know, like, oil's going to move around. So what do you think oil is kind of sitting here? Do you think it's been, you claiming manipulation? No, I hear you. I just, I just look at the actual prices. And to quote my friend Mike McClone, I mean, where's the beef? I mean, you know, oil is, it seems to be pretty stubborn right here. Yeah, I think, I think there's a tremendous amount of optimism being priced in, not just the equity market, but oil. If you look at the forward curve, you know, like we're at, what, 99 here front month.

But if you go out to December, it's down at, you know, 75-ish. So at least last side I checked. So, yeah, there's, there's, you know, the market is indicating that it believes. that the conflict is going to be over. You know, I would just point to the fact that over 8 million barrels per day are shut in, probably, you know, much closer to 10, 11 million barrels. So even if the Strait of Ormuse opened today fully and completely, which I think is extremely unlikely, even if you remove that 20 million barrel per day disruption,

even if you were to do that, there's still, you know, in the GCC, there's still between 8 and 11 million barrels shut in. They'll take months to get back. And there's, you know, a huge escalation going on with Russia and Ukraine and Russian refineries that not many folks are paying attention to. So, you know, I think that I think we're, you know, if you open the Strait of Hormuz today fully and completely, if that's, you know, what you believe is going to happen, then, yeah, maybe oil goes to 85.

But it's not going back to 55. I think that much is for sure, at least not. Again, either you get much higher price. Oil is very, very inelastic. So you need a very, very high price to destroy demand. Or you get shortages. And with oil at called 100, we're already seeing shortages in Asia. So, you know, there's definitely the possibility that even without intervention,

like I'm generally not one to go down that road. and claim, oh, you know, the market's not doing what I think, so it's manipulation. You know, I don't really do that. Now, both Japan and the U.S. have talked about intervening, right? And I think that it is a card that Trump may play, but I would be surprised if they've done it yet. I just think it's more an optimism story. I mean, you can look at, you know, the equity market and see kind of a similar picture, which is there's a lot of optimism, I think.

that in my opinion is misplaced, but, you know, I'm also not a geopolitical military expert, you know. So, you know, maybe it's really not that bad, but I'm falling very closely, you know, every day. And it's not looking very good on either side, right? So it sounds to me like, like, like, you think buying a straddle is there? Like, you know, you're basically saying that that oil option volatility and arguably volatility, across the curve is, is price too low, and it's either for up or down, depending on whether we're talking about oil or what, or inverse. I mean, the correlation, the inverse correlation between oil and silver is actually one of my favorite ones now. I don't know if you've noticed that, but silver is a proxy

for, you know, for the new digital economy. And every single time oil dips, silver goes higher and vice versa with high volatility. So I'm sure there are a lot of people playing that. Yeah, well, it's going to, it's you know higher oil is going to trickle down into everything we focus on oil you know that that that's kind of what everyone is is talking about but man this is going to be like it literally the world is going to look like q2 or 2020 like i don't think people understand that is what must happen you cannot print oil well and it will if in fact the war does not correct correct yeah yeah if it's all over then yeah maybe everything's fine i i tend to think that's not true Yep. Well, you know, we got a bunch of people up here. I mean, you know, Gary, what do you make of the optimism and the way things are? People crazy?

Well, like I said earlier today, I don't really understand this market at all. It's bizarre. The amount of money these AI companies are raising. To me, that's the shart to put on. It's short the AI companies. Don't mess with crude. Look, you got, I think you've run out. of gasoline diesel in in France. There's going to be lines everywhere. LPG shortages are going to start to happen. But you're going to have demand destruction. I mean, it's happening right now.

I think trading this thing right now. And what do you think the governments do when demand destruction starts to accelerate? What can you do? You know, you can't, you can't force somebody to buy $10. $10 gasoline in California. I think we're going to probably get close to $10 gasoline. That kills California. And they have severe issues.

You can't just get gasoline and unleaded to California. It has to go through a refining process. It's highly limited. So we'll have issues, you know, but we'll work through it, man. All companies are really good at getting shit back online. And I just want to remind everyone, COVID, COVID, in 2020 really, really taught the world how to respond, you know. And so we've had, we've had a trial run on at least getting things back online.

And I suspect we'll do, we'll do an okay job of getting things back online. But most certainly this is going to, I don't know how this helps GDP. If that's the key metric GDP, GDP's got to follow here. Yep, not clear. Seems very clear. I mean, to me, I don't see the government doing anything other than putting on, getting the political ability to stimulate the economy, both fiscally and monetarily, seems incredibly obvious once, you know, if the war ends and people have to deal with with the aftermath, I mean, it depends on on what and how. But that to me seems obvious. And, you know, that's where we get back to Bitcoin. It's, it's. like, you know, where are we here? And can you get more bullish than I am in terms of where it is? And the answer is no. I mean, the narrative of quantum as a reason to hate Bitcoin is absurd. Scott, I think you and I are going to do a long form and talking about that from the market's point of view in the next couple days. I mean, I know you know your guys reached out to me. So we'll talk about that. So I'll leave that.

Just the teaser is that the math says, and here is a hot take. actually think that whether or not the old wallets are resolved, however it's resolved, resolving what's going on with the old wallets and the frozen coins is massively bullish for Bitcoin in the long run. And I know that that is exactly the opposite of the way both Bitcoiners look at it. But I think that when you understand it, when you look at it through the lens of the people who matter, which is the new money, the traditional financial money that's going into Bitcoin that is driving the adoption that it needs, I think it is massively bullish, and that take, I think, is important. But I'll leave that for a longer form to go through why.

Austin, you haven't been up here in a while. What's on your mind between all of this, or should we be talking about ethics provisions and clarity and whether we're going to actually get any regulation that makes sense? I mean, so an interesting detail on the clarity point, Dave, is, and this is one thing that I think a lot of people forget in crypto. This is probably item number 62 on the list of most senators. I am skeptical on anything getting done until the Iran thing is resolved, because as we look at what they care about, I don't think clarity is at the top of the list.

I don't even know that we have a deal on the banking stuff, much less being able to get this to a vote. But to me, like, you know, and I know you guys were already bringing up many of these points, So I'm not going to retread all of that ground. But the core issue is until major geopolitical and macro things are resolved, I think it's hard for markets to figure out what they want to do. It's hard for legislation around those markets to pass. It's hard for material progress to be made because it's the simple problem of you're trying to make a decision in the face of truly tremendous uncertainty. Like, to be honest, Dave, I'll throw this back to you.

Are we not living in the most uncertainty we've had since COVID right now? Oh, 100%. Ever. The data says that very specifically. I mean, Scott put up the chart yesterday. Ever. Yeah. Right.

And so as I look at that, the natural human instinct on all of these things is like punt, punt, punt, punt. So, you know, this sounds weird to say, but since presumably most people on this call are not directly involved with this were kind of in a hurry up and wait situation. Well, yeah. I mean, look, but here's the thing. Bitcoin specifically, at this point, there is no regulatory risk for, brokers are realized there's no regulatory risk in trading Bitcoin, cusseting Bitcoin. The models are developing. You know, we just saw Chris Perkins going over to Franklin Templeton.

I saw it this morning. I don't know when it was actually noticed. This, and I'm going to be, I'll be moderating a panel. Security Traders of New York on digitalization from, we're doing two panels. We're doing one from the perspective of legacy finance and how tokenization is impacting them. And they're doing one from the perspective of the crypto markets of how legacy finance is impacting them and the market structure, et cetera. And then there's a fireside at the same conference between the New York Stock Exchange and, you know, on tokenization. And it is understanding that this is not theoretical anymore, that clarity is not necessary for that.

The real thing the clarity is necessary for is for real innovation in DFI, in various other verticals, is for understanding of how economic models can use, can use tokens. And even there, you know, it's almost like we're going to get, we're going to get a bill after the regulation and the basic general. basically everything is kind of set and moving from the CFTC and SEC. I mean, I'm not saying it's unimportant, but the importance of clarity compared to what people think it is, there's just a massive differential there. Yeah, I mean, look, first of all, if you look at Bitcoin prices, it kind of bears out what you've been saying.

That's performed relatively better compared to many of the other assets. But two, if you look at the arc of like U.S., call it legal actions and what's going on, the most important parts of clarity, which to be totally honest, if they have to, could probably be stripped out and passed on their own, are defining what abusive trading is in the crypto space and what obligations people have. I don't know if people saw, but the DOJ just charged like 10-ish, off the top of my head people with various trading-related offenses in the crypto market today. Primarily washed trading, right? I just saw the headline, primarily wash training. And they were all forwarded, right? So they were actually.

extraditing people from Singapore or something. Yeah. Correct. And like I think there's going to be more of that as they set the rules. And then number two, and this one, I think the crypto community has been up to speed on. I'll give a shout out to like defy education funding coin center and some others is the developer protections. Like having a clear line on where rules attach and where rules do not attach is going to be incredibly important. Yeah.

I think that's true. I think that the real question is there's likely a wave of M&A, and that wave of M&A is waiting to see, has been waiting on clarity for so long that at a certain point it seems like it's not going to care anymore. I mean, you know, which is unfortunate because what really needs to happen is our security rules and we'll call them commodity rules because they don't really exist. derivative rules, whatever, are old. They're just old. And it's not quite as bad as the analogy that people used about using hot air balloon regulations to regulate airspace, which I saw in a tweet this morning. But the truth is, is they're old and they need modernization.

We have lots of stuff in the system that makes it impossible for founders to get immediate liquidity without spending enormous amounts of money. I mean, the cost to go to IPO is insane. and there's no staged way of doing it. It's either national market system, which is what the IPO is really expensive, or bullshit OTC that used to be the pink sheets, that still has ridiculous rules involved with it and time breaks. That maybe it's not as expensive, but, you know, it's just not good.

And so one of the things that crypto showed was you can raise money quickly, and maybe too quickly in many cases, because there wasn't enough disclosure, but that needs to change. And I think everyone in the regulatory complex kind of understands that. I mean, I don't know what you think. But to me, that's the real issue there. In many ways, right, like, it's funny, but the existence of crypto is raising what are actually a lot of structural problems with fundamentally Sarbanes Oxley.

Right. As a reminder for everybody, we had some large financial scandals in the very early 2000. thousands in the United States. You've probably heard the names of like Enron and WorldCom, etc. That provoked a bill called Sarbanes Oxley that basically makes it incredibly onerous from a reporting perspective to be a public company and thus only really large companies want to do it. Used to have a lot of IPOs of companies that, quite frankly, are now remaining in private markets and doing like Series C, Series C, Series D type funding. And crypto's existence and the ability to tokenize private shares or looking at private credit, I think is really sort of forcing that distinction.

Dave, I don't know how well policymakers understand that yet. I don't know how equipped the current SEC is to grapple with that. But as you said, we have a lot of either antiquated or call it incorrectly parameterized rules that are all colliding at once. Yeah. Ryan, I see your hand up before I go off on an answer. So, funny enough, I had been working with a law firm on Air, space using our hydrogen derogibles. So that is pertinent to me, but probably not a whole lot of other people. I love it. But, oh, 2.0, man, 2.0. Yeah, floatair.com. I'll plug that all the time. Yeah. No, but, you know, crypto is, it's just, it's, it's, it's, it's inherently risky right now to people. and when you're looking at oil, you're looking at crypto, AI does seem like it's the pretty girl at the ball.

It's safe. Like people are going to throw money into that. And that's where all the money seems to be flowing right now is any startup that I see pitched, they throw AI into it. It used to be they threw blockchain into it. Now it's like, does it have a token as kind of an afterthought? Now it doesn't have AI. I think there's going to be a point where AI does crescendo over the next year. where some of these private models just blow out everything public.

And then all these startups and projects that have AI tacked into it are going to become risky again. And then I think the money will start shifting back into crypto. I think it's just a risk profile right now. And crypto is just inherently really risky. I mean, you know, it's funny that you say that. I mean, like Gary, we talked about shorting AI. I mean, look, shorting hype is always a good idea. Dave, though, how can open AIB be worth $858 billion?

It hasn't made any. Oh, I understand that. How do you short it, though? It's not public yet. Yeah. That's the problem. I mean, if you can short it on the private market, then cool, but I don't know how. I wouldn't know how.

I get it. The only thing that I think, and look, here's the reality. If you had shorted, if you had done intelligently shorted, like why I have put options so that you didn't take limited loss on a basket of internet companies in the 90s, you made an absolute fortune, even if you were shorting Google when it was public alongside. Of course, you'd have lost all your money on that particular trade. But the net totality of all of these things, there isn't going to be five, six, dominant-day icon that are monoliths out there.

I mean, there'll be a few, and then there's going to be a lot of private companies as we get more distributed data, right? I think that's what you're saying because it just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. But that's on the consumer side, right? Yeah, I think that just like we had a Cambrian explosion of alt coins, you know, and that cycle, the alt-coin cycle, we kept expecting the also coin cycle. We're in the equivalent of like the AI alt-coin cycle right now, where you have all these AI companies, all these AI startups.

To be, you know, to Gary's point, exactly, like you have these massive centralized AI companies. I do think that, you know, they're going to IPO. They're going to explode. It's going to be this huge blow off the top. But I think they're going to become a overbought, very risky asset when they realize a lot of these alt-coin AI companies, essentially, just aren't worth what people are throwing money in at them. You can short the suppliers, right? Like, what do they need to operate? Yeah.

That's done very well over the last few weeks, but I think without the war, that wouldn't be the case. I think with AI, it's still, Dave, it's still so unknown, right? Like we really only hit this moment with like Claude 4.5 in December, right? And now in the last, we'll call it quarter, you've got people, you know, that 95% of the time, you know, they were typing into their computer. Now 99.9, they're just talking into it. Like these are pretty big behavioral shifts in how we interact with computers that are happening. Now, I think there's going to be winners and losers. I'm more appalled.

They're still got to make money, dude. No, I know. I'm more appalled with the valuation of Open AI just because it sucks compared to what else is out there. Right? Like, I know a lot of people that literally just don't, well, they don't even use CHATGPT anymore compared to some of the other tools out there. So, like, that to me is actually one of the more interesting things is, you know, people aren't even utilizing it. Right? They're moving to other providers.

I just I think the the opportunity is still so huge I 100% agree like I don't know if they fired you know 10,000 people they become profitable and they can kind of build from there than what the use case is but like people are using chat GPT just as kind of like a search a little bit of a better search or writing things with it but they're using things like clawed and anthropic to literally be a new operating system on the computer right you know most people are using it for, hey, did Gary Cardone's, is Gary Cardone's post correct? I mean, it's the dumbest use of fucking energy on the planet. I just, like, I see all these guys racing to this, and I, I don't see where this ends.

I mean, I could short Navidia, Dave. I think Navidia, like, if the AI world implodes, does Navidia implode? And why hasn't Navidia's price change as we have a helium problem and an energy problem, both of which they need, and they have no business? without either of those. None. Zero. It'd be like destroying 8 billion consumers. If you can't get the energy input, how the fuck can you do all this stuff? They only have like 11 days of LNG. Totally. Taiwan. Like they were claiming three months ago, they were going to use 80 gigawatts in 2027.

80 gigawatts. Somebody should go ask themselves, how much natural gas do you need for 80 gigawatts or nuclear? and how long will that take? France is talking about building 14 nuclear power stations. What are they going to do between now and four years? Well, here's a fun time. By the way, once they get all those nuclear power stations? Yeah, exactly, Doug. But once they reach all that new power, whether it's super green or nuclear, what's going to happen to the energy complex?

It's going to get crushed. This is the most bizarre market I've ever been in my life. life. I got to tell you, it's, I don't know what to do, and I've been here before, but this is, like, I can see putting a big short on the Vittian getting clocked, but I know that's the right trade or a trade like it. This thing cannot. I mean, this is just so overcooked, guys. I don't get it. I'll be quiet. I'm looking for answers, really. Isn't that what happens in markets, though? I mean, you know, it's like, I can remember people shorting all the internet shit in, in late 99 and 2000 and getting carried out, saying this is, this is crazy. And then eventually within six months, they were right or eight months later, they're right.

And, you know, it's like things get, they get overblown. You know, trees don't grow to the sky. A single company is not going to dominate the only way of making chips. I mean, people may not have noticed Tesla's making their own chips now, right? You know, it's like, Nvidia has certain competitive advantages, but at what point is that going to matter? I mean, honestly, the most, the closest company to creating a vertically integrated stack is Elon's two private companies, right? I mean, by far, it isn't even close because, you know, the physics is, is data centers in space is by far the most efficient way to do compute. And it's just a question of getting it up there.

And so that's where SpaceX is going to be massive. And sounds like a long-term problem, though. Yeah, no, no, it is. Absolutely, of course. Markets don't care about that in the short run. You're right. I'm with Gary, though, on Invidia. It's like one of the signals here is, you know, I know it's like an older company.

A lot of times, you know, when things grow so fast, like, you know, ChatsyPT is not even that old of a company to see it can be that big. And you can build that big of a company in such a short time is probably a reason to be an entrepreneur in the first place. but one in three, I read that nearly half of the employees at Nvidia have a net worth of over $25 million now. Like one in three or something's over $20, like $20 million. Like it just seems like that's a staggering and outrageous number to have that many people. It's like that wealth concentration in the runoffice. And if you're running that company, try motivating someone that has made $20 million.

and they're 28 years old. Motivating these people, they're going to, like, the trick with building companies is to keep everybody in debt, okay? So you keep your staff and you give them long-dated options so they stay with the company. No, like you don't want people making so much money. They're like, oh, wow, I don't think I'm going to come into the office today. There's just no motivation. This is why.

I'm trying to parry that. Even if Open AI was able to get rid of all of its overhead, how does it ever pay back $858 billion to the shareholders? I mean, run the math. How much am I going to pay Open AI to use their shit? $20 a month, $8 billion times 20 if they get the whole addressable market. It's crazy, man. And then that means everybody else dies. I think people will start to have to pay more and they will pay more because it's starting to operate the companies like.

Like the transformation that it's created at like a small startup like ours has been unbelievable. But that being said, you know, I'm trying to parry that with the idea that like, you know, a company like Whisperflow, you know, that raised $80 million and it's a voice transcription software and A16Z and Andreessen's behind them. You know, it took one prompt and like 32 cents to replace that software on my computer. Right. Like, why wouldn't, like, and I'd cancel that SaaS product, right? And it's like you're seeing some of the layoff.

So it's like I'm trying to kind of figure out what the productivity gain is. How much productivity. There's no way you're going to pay more tomorrow for AI than you're paying today. It'll drop in price like everything else. Yep. Unless it destroys all other businesses. Like if it can then replicate Netflix and HBC and all these entertainment centers, but then you don't have any other businesses on the planet.

This is why this is a really crazy... I think the gap in models is going to get bigger than people think. Like, again, I can have something like anthropic, like an operating system. Like, it doesn't, that doesn't work with chat GPT. Right. People are using chat GPT to, like, pretend to be their lawyer right now or to ask, you know, where does, you know, how much Bitcoin does Gary have? Like they're asking things like this.

They're not, you know, saying like, hey, you know, work for the next 24 hours with these three other agents to create like a new brand identity for this company and then launch the website and find our first customer. Like one can do one of those things. The other one can't. And so I think the gap is there. So I think potentially people will end up having to pay more for certain models in certain in certain periods. Now if Claude, if Anthropa keeps shipping so fast that they like ship actually. accidentally ship their source code. Like that's how fast they're shipping. I don't know if that continues. Yeah, well, speaking as someone who's seen that happen before at other companies,

you know, we also, the source code shipping is, it's, that's not the first time I've ever seen that. We'll just leave it at that. But anyway, Tomer, you've been incredibly patient. You've had your hand up for a long time. You there? Still there, Tomer? I don't see the, maybe glitching. You there? I see the little mute button going up and down. Okay, well, we can't hear you, so not really sure, but Austin. So on the topic of AI, to me, one of the most fascinating companies in the space right now is Apple, who basically said, well, hold on, we've got all the users and we've got all the devices. They spent rounding error on zero on all this stuff, and you'll notice that they're now forcing all of the companies to compete to plug their AI. into the Apple ecosystem.

So to the previous point of this stuff is only going to get cheaper and like where the valuations are. My other question for the model companies is, yeah, you're making cool stuff, but is that where the value capture is? Right. Like if you're not really deeply integrated at the enterprise side, are you going to have any customer loyalty or stickiness? Or is it going to turn out that Tim Cook by doing nothing and having all the customers was

the winner here? it's a good question the same question is it involves crypto as well right you know like you know people building stuff that gets used and the people the people slavishly buying the tokens because the network might get used could end up being cut out of the the actual profits but i've been making that point anyway tomer are you back now i hope so can you guys hear me this time okay great um i missed part of what austin was saying but i think we're on parallel tracks although not the exact same thing it's like um I'm not an expert in AI, and so I'm asking a question and basing a lot of it on indirect hearsay, because I don't have the direct experience.

But a big part of what one of the things that I keep reading about, especially in the Bitcoin circles and in self-sovereignty circles is the quality of what you can run on your own for essentially free on your own hardware is seeing leaps and bounds improvements as well, which drives down the cost. And apparently Apple's chips because everything's unified on the single chip, so the memory is not separate from the GPUs or the neural network processors that are on there, people have been able to get tremendous results, especially on the B-fear chips, which means people can do a lot more on their own, which again, only further drives down the price of what they're prepared to pay anything at all. all for and it and it makes it a lot more accessible everywhere without network connections without loss of privacy so there's it's so dynamic and so competitive and you know and these uh like awesome's just saying apple owns all the devices they've been putting if you've got one of one of their latest chips uh like from the last five years you've got neural processing units on it which which if you have

again, the beefier chips, you're apparently able to do quite a lot on your own with them. So what, like, it just feels like it's something to be steering clear of if you're at all risk averse. Maybe my question is, is there any validity to that or does that add to the validity of the concern that people are raising like Gary here about investing in AI and who the, and what Austin was raising, which is who's going to actually capture the value? But if the software becomes open source and everybody can run it for free, it becomes as valuable as a spell checker, despite how it may, it's just a really, really fancy spell checker. Yeah, I think that's true. And I think that whether you're talking about evaluating a token or you're evaluating a company, it's the same thing.

It's like who gets the value, right? That's why vertical integration is so attractive to companies. That's why, you know, I made the point about, you know, SpaceX, XAI and Tesla being together. I mean, anyone who's driven the new, I just got a new model Y. I upgraded it because I wanted, I had made the mistake of spending a ton of money to buy the full self-driving lifetime license. And it was, by yesterday you had to transfer it to a new one or it was going to expire. And the new hardware is just so much better than the old hardware.

It just made sense to do it. It is crazy how integration of GROC with a car with full self-dense, driving and all the optics, how it makes the experience. It is absolutely out of this world. And that's the kind, and he's going to charge a subscription for all of that. And you can immediately see what happens when Optimus robots have all that. I mean, seriously, you know, it's like, you understand that sort of vertical integration and where that goes. And yeah, you want to be part of the ecosystems. There will be competitors, et cetera. And yeah, some of it. And the AI agents are going to use crypto rails and they're going to want to save their cash in in intelligent ways and we always talk

about it from a bitcoin perspective people ignore the fact that if the AI agents say hmm I have this much cash flow here's what I need where am I going to put the rest of it they're going to invest it rationally and so there's all sorts of reasons to be bullish on crypto that have to do with AI but it's going to be a very bumpy road to get there right yeah maybe one one last really quick point I could make it. Execution becomes harder, the more successful that you become. And someone was mentioning that Navidia employees, there's too many of them who have $20 million in value.

You saw the same thing happen with Apple. Like Apple's innovation since the passing of Steve Jobs, despite the tremendous momentum and inertia that they have, the innovation just hasn't been there. And the quality of the product is getting worse and worse, especially on the software side. And it's because the company did so well that. Too many people who were essential to their success did too well and ultimately left. And so Elon needs to keep his enterprises as hungry and excited about innovation. Or they too will slow down.

But all these other companies that overnight made billionaires, it's hard to sustain the innovation momentum and when the innovators have checked off all their aspirations. And we saw that in crypto, right, where founders got immediately wealthy before delivering a damn thing. And then what happened? Quite a few of them never delivered shit. Right? I mean, we've seen that. And that's a story that we've been following for a long time.

Right. Ryan, was that an old hand or a new one? New one. I love this discussion. It's fallen right inside my wheelhouse. We are literally at the calm before the storm, and it's rumbling. There is going to be an explosion of these AI agents. It's going to come so fast and so furious.

The software development is coming so fast and so furious. VCs are, they can't invest in software right now. And they shouldn't be. They should be, like, waiting because disposable software is going to be a thing. next six months where no one has a static interface. But to answer Gary's point earlier, it's, you know, how is opening I going to make all this money on $20 a month's subscriptions? Well, they make a different model or they make a product that requires more of what they produce, which is inference. That's, that's why they invested in OpenClaw. It's an agent that when you

point it at a model, it will just automate and run. And it will, act on its own in a lot of ways and it will keep spending API credits and tokens and it will rack up thousands and thousands of dollars a week depending on how fast you want to move in your development so I know development teams and companies they're spending tens of thousands dollars a week on these API tokens a lot of it through Anthropic right now because Opus 4-6 is so crazy powerful but you know everyone I talked to that is running OpenClawe or Nounce Space Hermes agent. They've named it.

They've given it a personality. They're spinning up more agents for their friends and family to show what it can do. And I personally took one of these agents and put it onto a web server. And now it's taken the place of $180,000 a year DevOps engineer. And it's adminning all my web servers. It's issuing all the SSLs. It's making sure everything's locked down. It's monitoring all the Git repos and doing all the deploys.

And that was just with one agent. The amount of tech jobs that we're going to replace just with this one open claw agent that they're iterating on right now is going to be insane. And do you think Kimmy could do the same job? To an extent. So a lot of these open source models, they're getting really, really good. So like GLM5 is really, really good compared to like Opus 46. It's not perfect and it's not like exact. but it's pretty dang good for an open source model.

Would you hot swap to Kimmy right now on production level things that you have in place? No. Yeah. I just, I just want to be yes to know right now. But yeah, I agree that like they're, you know, they're going to get better, but they're just going to do maybe different jobs, right? And like it might not be, like, even when you switch to a new instance of claw that doesn't have the same context in the same folder system, you're still kind of lost.

right so it's like you need the best models and then you need the best context to operate production level instances like you have and and the goal is by any one of these you know whether it be x ai or clod or gpt the goal for their product is to create a walled garden where you started in our ecosystem and you have to stay in our ecosystem like apple was a master at that and all these companies right now are scrambling trying to figure out how to keep the users inside their world garden and not going to open source systems. Okay. So it's 11, and we have a sponsor today.

Maricio from Leden is here. Scott had to go for a family emergency. So Maritio, you're stuck with me talking to you, so I apologize. Oh, good day. How are you, man? In advance. How are you today? I'm doing great.

I'm doing great. Lots has happened since I think at last I was here, we were talking. talking about Lenin's bond that was rated by S&P this morning. We just got news from another second Bitcoin rated bond from the state of New Hampshire. We could talk about that. And so that was interesting because that was rated by Moody's. And then the other two things I think that have happened

sort of major since I was here last was the, we dropped our rates, which I could talk about. We did the biggest rate drop, I think, in the history of Levin's business. And we also saw, which I thought was super interesting, is the Fannie Mae announcement around Bitcoin mortgages. So, yeah, lots to talk about. Happy to take it anywhere you want.

Wasn't there a municipal? I saw a municipal bond got traded with as well this morning. Yeah. So that was a MUNY, that was New Hampshire. I'm actually going through it because it was really fresh. And it has a bit of a, I think it has a bit of a unique structure. It reads, the press release reads, Moody's ratings assigns provisional ratings to Bitcoin back revenue bonds,

Waiveros Finance Project, Taxable Services, 2026 to be issued by the business. is finest authority of the state of New Hampshire. So it is issued, it appears, by a state of New Hampshire body. But one of the things that, first of all, kudos to these teams for getting the rating. I mean, we just went through a similar process with S&P, and I can tell you it is a very detailed and, I would say, meticulous process. And it takes, you know, it took let in about a year to get through the ratings process with S&P. So I can only know. imagine how long they've been working on it. Interestingly, I think one of the things that I'd like to highlight is even this muni bond

from the state of New Hampshire, again, it's a different structure. There are different vehicles, but this rating from Moody's that I'm seeing here, preliminary rating is B-A-2, which is equivalent to a double B at S&P, which is two levels down from Lennon's rating. So Lennon was the first ever investment-grade rating for a Bitcoin bond. It was actually the first Bitcoin ABS bond ever to be issued, and it received an investment-grade rating from S&P. This rating that we're seeing on the Muni through New Hampshire is BA2, which is actually mid-junk for Moody's. Which is interesting because Lenin's SPV or Lenin's bond has a quite superior rating to this Moody's bond.

And again, they're different structures. But I think what I like about this whole thing is Bitcoin, has arrived as institutional collateral for these types of, you know, the highest quality. And obviously that's the key, right? You know, it's like people need to understand. I mean, yes, I mean, you know, your company is doing well and offer services. We're going to talk through a lot of that. But the meta sense is Bitcoin being accepted as institutional collateral is massively

important for Bitcoin holders and for showing where it's going, which is why I keep finding the continued selling from crypto holders to people who look more like me. And I have my real picture up there. So you get it is kind of funny. So let's talk about Fannie Mae, right? So the Fannie Mae validation is a big deal. I mean, you guys gone through a lot. You've been here a lot.

I mean, how does this, you know, help you and how does this cascade? You know, why should people care? Well, I think the Fannie Mae, and again, if you look at the recent developments, right, We have an investment grade rating from S&P Global to an ABS that is funded with Bitcoin Back Loans, Lenin's Bitcoin Back Loans. So that was like the first shot. Then you have Fannie Mae, which is a government-sponsored entity saying that they will take loans that have been, that they will take mortgages whose down payment has been financed

with a Bitcoin back loan. That's a huge breakthrough. Because up until now, I believe, and again, if anyone here has more information, but based on what I know, I believe this is the first time that Fannie Mae has okayed a down payment that was financed with another loan. And they used Bitcoin to be that first test, that first test case, which again, you're seeing a basically a government-sponsored entity that is going to be buying off these mortgages saying, I'm okay. if the down payment is held with Bitcoin and is held in a way that I can get comfortable with. And then the third one is now you have this municipal, New Hampshire, going out and saying, we're going to issue bonds back by Bitcoin. The other thing that I can say, Dave, based on our offering is that our offering was more than two times oversubscribed as a first-time issuer.

So the demand is there. The demand from the institutions that want to participate in dip their toes in, Keep in mind, there are a lot of groups that still want to participate in Bitcoin, but they haven't had the right instrument to do so. Even though MSCR is out there, even though SCRC exists, some entities, some investor groups can only invest in investment-grade-rated products and instruments. And you're starting to see the first iteration of these. Why do I think this is important? because as the institutional market starts to understand these products better, they're going to bid down the price. And they're going to price the risk of these instruments like it truly should be,

which is much lower than where they are today. And I think what that translates to is much lower rates for financing that we can then pass through to our clients. And anyone here that's ever taken out alone will tell you that I think very differently if I can borrow at 11 versus if I can borrow at 5 or 7. And I think as that rate goes down, the use cases go, like the use cases for those products go up exponentially.

And so this is why I think, again, we're going to continue to see a Cambrian explosion of Bitcoin financing instruments. So what does that mean from the perspective of Bitcoin demand? I mean, if nobody's selling it, everyone's borrowing against it, then, you know, where is the supply going to come from? Well, that's the thing, right? And so, again, every time somebody comes to Leden and takes, you know, half a million dollar loan to buy their house instead of selling that half a million

dollars towards the Bitcoin, every time they do that to start a business, to pay a bill, you're taking pressure off the order books, right? And that translates to typically, over time, a higher price. And I think that that's what you're going to continue to see, right? When somebody is in trouble, financial trouble and you need something, you look across your portfolio, the last thing you ax out is your house, right? You will ax out a bunch of other assets that are lower quality and have less upside. I think Bitcoin is going to slowly become the cornerstone of most people's portfolios, their highest and best asset, and that's the one they're going to want to sell last, right? And so this is why I think obtaining financing with your

Bitcoin will become as ubiquitous as saying, I'm going to go get a helot, right? Okay, cool. So, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, given that it's going to become ubiquitous, how is lead and different? Yeah. Well, well, the, the thing, I mean, there's, there's several things, but I think for us, um, what I think is, is, um, one of the major differentiators is, listen, we've been doing Bitcoin back loans since day one. We've been doing these since 2018. It's in our name. We've never pivoted. We've never changed.

We've never chased shiny lights. We've been doing this as longer than I think anyone else in the market. Our thesis was always that Bitcoin was going to be the apex collateral. And we focused very hard on delivering the best Bitcoin Back Loan experience in the market. And today, We are the largest consumer Bitcoinback lenders in the world. And we have the longest track record. So let me tell you how this translates to how our clients win and how I think doing so, Lennon will win. And that is, because we've been doing this for longer than anyone else,

we were able to get to the ABS market before anyone else, right? Because S&P, as they're evaluating the ratings, they see how has this company operated across several market cycles. And with Lennin, they can look at an eight-year history and say, okay, Lennin's operated perfectly. We're going to give Lennin an investment-gray rating on their first issuance because we can get comfortable with this structure, right? The first-time issuers have to pay a premium because you're a first-time issuer, right? The market doesn't know you. The more you are around, the better the market prices you.

And usually that means if you do a good job, you get lower cost of capital. So we already have a moat in our size, in our operating history, and in our regulatory plan, like a regulatory posture. Leden is, I think, one of the only firms that has a perfect track record with regulators. That puts us in a really, really good spot to continue growing our book. And because of the scale it already has and our experience in the financing side of the house, it will allow us to access better capital. And also, the way that we can, the way that we can, the way that we can.

that a company can access capital is a huge input to the risk operations of that of that company. So, for example, everybody can see our bond custody facility, it's fidelity. Everybody can see the price of that bond. You know, everybody can see the loans that are continuously vended in to that facility. It is the most transparent and scalable way to fund Bitcoin back loans. And to do this, you know, to do this, you know, You need to have a size. You need to have an operating history. And these are things that we already have today.

Most of our competitors, a lot of the ones that are around right now, haven't been operating for longer than a couple of years. And so it will be much harder for firms that don't have that track record to get that type financing and to scale that type of financing. And also, just to highlight how that translates to improvements for our clients, right? So we've been working really, really hard to reduce our cost of funding and to diversify our funding so that we can pass on basically lower rates to our clients. Yeah, you mentioned that. Yeah.

You want to elaborate on the lower rates? Yeah. So let me walk you through it, right? Like up until a few days ago, up until last week, let it have one rate, 11.99% for all of our loans. As of last week, we announced a tiered rate. tier rates structure, which means that now our headline rate, so loans up to 250K are 11.49% APR, so that drop 50Bs. For 250K to 500K, that's at 1099%, so that drop a full basis point, or so 100 basis points. Between a half a million and a million dollars, it's 10.49% APR,

so that's 1.5% from the previous headline. And loans over a million dollars are now at single digits, at 9.99% APR, which again, I think it's a really, shaving off 200 basis points off alone can change the way you think about it. And it may make a project that was potentially out of reach, now within reach. And we're going to continue doing this until we can get to the best, always getting to the absolute best rate the market can get us. Cool. I was going to have something tongue-in-cheek, so why does sailor not borrow from you instead of paying 11% to SDRC, but

that's a bit of a bit cheeky. You know, it's funny. Actually, Sailor doesn't, but we do service several Bitcoin treasury companies, both public and private. And I can, you know, obviously, I'm not sharing their names, but we

do work with treasury companies already. And to your point, Dave, you know, presumably you could get, you could post Bitcoin or pledge Bitcoin as collateral and get lower cost of capital than STRC. Again, different instruments, different risk profiles, but they're both using dollars to finance Bitcoin purchases or keeping Bitcoin.

So let's talk about the couple of things. You've done this before, and I've heard these answers, but a lot of people probably haven't. So, you know, from a, when you say fully collateralized, what do you mean by that? How do you handle crash situations? How do you handle, you know, basically what's the mechanism? and what's the fear? And given the topic of the day being quantum, I'm also curious because we're going to run out of time at some point soon. I'm curious, you know, what do you see there and how does that impact the way that you manage your, what the assets that you're custodying?

Yeah. So first I'll touch on the liquidation part of it. So the way we manage risk is every loan that led in issues is every dollar that we issue in a loan is backed by $2 worth of Bitcoin. So if you want to borrow $1,000 at Lennon, you have to pledge $2,000 worth of Bitcoin. As the Bitcoin price rises and your loan becomes over collateralized, you can redeem excess Bitcoin from Lennon and take it back to self-custody. The opposite, when the price drops, we at Lennon, well, if the price, if the LTV or the loan to value ratio of your loan, which starts at 50%, if price drops such that it gets to 70, we'll start sending you notifications and tell you, hey, Dave, you need to send more Bitcoin.

the LTV. So for those of us all old people, the maintenance margin is 70%. Well, we, the, the initial is 50. Yeah, but there is no maintenance margin at Lennon. There's only a liquidation level. So the LTV can theoretically stay over 70% for a week and you won't get liquidated. The loan only gets liquidated when the LTV reaches 80%. So our system works a little bit different. I know some groups, if it triggers over 70, they give you a certain time to post. and if not they liquidate you, we don't do that. I let in the rule is if it gets Cady, it gets closed, but before that, it doesn't get closed.

So do you publish any statistics over time, like what percentage of your loans have ever been liquidated? So we publish our book size every month. So everybody can see how our book changes month over month. We're the only lender to my knowledge that does this. And so you can see the ratios and how that changes. there are within the liquidation scenarios or within liquidation episodes, there's always voluntary repayments as well as system automated liquidations. And what I'll say is in the bond

facility, which is public data, you can see it because it was actually getting updated as the bond was getting sold and everything has to be transparent and open. And that's how we operate. So we had about 25% of that book got repaid, both between bonds. voluntary repayments and liquidations. And that, coincidentally, we were pitching that bond during the crash, during the February 6th crash. And the questions a lot of these investors had was, how do you guys manage during high volatility episodes?

How do you make sure your system will act as design? And we were popping up data in real time, showing them how that was performing. And that was actually a huge benefit because we. I don't think we could have asked for a better opportunity to showcase how the system works in the worst of times, and it worked as design. Of course, we don't like liquidations because our clients don't come to us because they don't want to sell their Bitcoin. So the last thing we want to do is have to sell it. Hence my question. That's exactly the reason.

No, and then listen, like, of course we try to work with, we send notifications and build tools like auto top up, which protected thousands of loans during this episode. about 4,400 Bitcoin float through Auto TopUp just in February 6th. And so we obviously do everything in our power to help our clients avoid liquidation. But if needed, the system will do so because if we don't, that basically risks the integrity of the entire operation for everyone else. Of course. And so it is, you know, I remember back in the day, Celsius would rave about not liquidating people during episodes. where they should have been liquidated. And everybody was saying, oh, thank you, Michinsky.

You're so kind. And oh, man, I was screaming when I saw that. And you still see that today. There's firms during that episode that were like changing thresholds and things around margin calls. And I was saying to myself, oh boy, you know, like this is not what you want to see. Nobody likes this. Of course you want to protect your clients.

But you can't just be, you know, making audible calls during these months. moments because that's how you lose the whole thing. Well, I mean, yes. Look, when you talk about it on in derivative exchanges, et cetera, it's about socializing versus not socializing losses, right? You know, when you're a lender, it's banking system integrity. And so many of the reason 2008 happened, and of course, those banks all got bailed out. I mean, I worked for a Citigroup at the time, and I know for a fact that we were, we were functionally more than bankrupt. We were actually with negative enterprise value for a while before all the bailouts and giveaways and excess interests and everything else got pumped into the company so as to save it. But the company was gone.

You know, obviously you don't have that luxury unless you have all the people in the Senate banking committee on speed dial like they did. But, you know, it's a big difference. No, and listen, this is also, I think, a big thing or a big difference in Lennon's DNA, right? Like Lenin did not come out of the gate with an ICO. ICOs are actually very poisonous, I think, to a company's culture because you raise non-dilative money. You have no board. You don't have to answer questions to anybody. You just got rich, literally.

You just got rich overnight. You know my opinion on this subject. I think that it was, there are some tokens that may very well end up having value, but the notion of non-dilutive capital was the thing, the single most poison pill in the entire. notion in the entire crypto ecosystem and I was building a company at this time when it was happening and we didn't do a token and people are saying well you don't have a token so why should we invest in I'm like well because we're going to be worth a lot more money and in fact that's exactly what happened but the truth is that you know it's about discipline but anyway we'll get

off that topic we can talk about that another time I am curious though you know proof of reserves is very important to let me yes uh you know it'd be interesting to hear you know how you handle it how you differentiate yourself and then you have to answer the question because the reason micro strategy claims they don't do it is because they don't want their public addresses being out there. You know, how do you handle that vis-a-vis quantum and other risks? Or are you even thinking about that yet? Great question. And I'm happy to walk you through how we do our proof of reserves and how we sort of bridge this issue. I wouldn't call it an issue, but what Michael highlighted, which is exposing the public addresses. So the way we do it,

is we have a, so any lending of the relationship that we have, so whether it is the bond, whether it is our third party lending relationship with groups like Tether, who's an investor in that, and we, we as a requirement, must have the Bitcoin we pledge sit in a dedicated address that we can basically monitor at all times. So in the bond, the custodian is fidelity. And depending on the relationship, you know, there's qualified custody and we have line of sight or 24-7 visibility into the address to which that Bitcoin is posted. Also, we, the Bitcoin is held in trust for Lennon. So that makes it, ring fence or protected from any unlikely event of any sort of partner issue or bankruptcy. So because our system is so clean in that every relationship

has a dedicated address, every month we have a certified public accountant, a U.S. space at CPA, come to Leden and basically guess, they get a list of all the lending agreements we have and where all that Bitcoin is sitting and posted. They verify it. They check that the Bitcoin is there, that it matches the agreements. They also see the assets we have on behalf of our clients. So basically what we owe our clients. And they make sure that the Bitcoin we have in our lending relationships, custodias, et cetera,

matches and surpasses what we owe our clients. And that is very important because this is a proof of reserves exercise that captures both assets and liabilities. And it's a complete snapshot of those assets. We don't publish the addresses where all the Bitcoin sits today, but we validate it every month through a CPA. And so that's the report. And anybody can go see it, actually.

It's called the Open Book Report. It's available on our website. Got it. And I think that's, you know, and we continue to improve on that. You know, we just started adding the size of our book month over month. We didn't, you know, that's new. That started a few months ago. And we're going to continue showing even more transparency because our clients are smart.

And you should know how our business operates. If you're getting a rate that looks too good to be true and you don't know what the funding costs, you don't know how sustainable that loan is. And so I think it's. very important for clients to have a full view of the integrity of the business. Yep, not that makes sense. So let's let's talk, you know, because we're kind of drawing to the end here, you know, from a regulatory positioning perspective, I mean, there's lots of talks about regulation. I don't know if you're impacted by, you know, how you see regulation going. Is it going to change anything?

You know, what does it look like, you know, what does the next year to two years look like, you know, assuming that we stay status quo or if there's more regulation or if it gets more into the banking system, et cetera, et cetera. Well, a few things that I'm watching are the Basel 3 interpretation request for comment that came out from the, I think it was the Fed. And that's a really big one because if they manage to change or update the interpretation of those rules, it may make U.S. banks. able to start doing more Bitcoin financial products. Like right now, it's functionally prohibitive

to do so because of the capital. Just so people don't understand this just to explain it, because Mauritio and I know this stuff, if you're basically long and short, a billion dollars of Bitcoin back swaps against each other, for example, that might be underlying some of these products. It doesn't matter. It could be a swap or rebut, whatever. You have to have two billion dollars in reserve capital. And that's obviously insane because they're hedging. other. So, you know, these rules are very antiquated. Anyway, sorry for the editorialization, but I think that's context. Thank you. It's important context. So basically, right now, it is not prohibited, but it's functionally prohibitive to do any Bitcoin product as a bank because

of the capital requirements, right? And so that comes from rules set at the Bank of International settlements. And that interpretation, so the Fed is basically challenging or trying to revise how U.S. banks adapt to these guidance, to this guidance. And so if that changes, that's going to open the door for a lot more consumer products or institutional products, any type of Bitcoin product from banks, meaning they're likely going to want to participate in this market, right? And that's going to mean potentially new funding partners for Lennon, obviously also potentially new competitors. But I think that with that comes lower rates and driving this idea that Bitcoin is that asset that you don't sell.

So from a regulatory perspective, I think if that's when I'm watching, the other one obviously I'm watching is the Clarity Act. I think there's a lot of people are talking about the Stable Coin debate on the Clarity Act. I'm actually more interested in the DFI guidance that's going to come out of that because that may green light or that may actually cause several, that might have an impact for some of these DFI models that are out there today. that are, you know, act today sort of driving through what I would like to call a gray zone where they're lending to U.S. consumers with no lending agreements.

The money that's being lent to those people is not KYC. And so there's a lot of question marks around those DFI models. And if that has an impact, that might end up driving more people to CFI or may end up driving more CFI lenders to explore DFI funding. A lot can change with whatever comes from clarity. Right. So you have, obviously, as a manager of a business, you have to be on your toes. Oh, yeah.

It's been a pretty active 2026. And listen, this thing has been, I love this business. I love what I do. I love Bitcoin. And to me, one of the things I enjoy the most is like my work doesn't feel like work. Like I love coming here and chatting with you guys about loans and Bitcoin and doing this for a living. I do this thing for fun, right? And so I'm always on my toes, but I just love what I do, frankly, and it makes it easy.

Okay, so we have a couple minutes left. Anything else that we didn't cover? I mean, you know, Scott gave me a huge outline. I think we got through most of it. No, I think we've covered most of it. I think, you know, we spoke about the Muni Bond, the Fannie Mae announcement, our new rates. We do have quite a few more things coming, but I'll save those for next time. And yeah, I mean, I think obviously the, we didn't touch on like the geopolitics.

I was listening to the show before we got on. And you guys, you know, do a great job just chewing up the macro. So I think we covered it. Okay. Well, how can people find you, you know, all, you know, all of that other than obviously you're up here, you know, as a speaker, you know, what's the way for them to get in touch or find out more about Lennon? Just follow Lennon at Hortwood, with Lennon. like it's right here on the title so just click it and follow it and that's where you get the updates from leon and myself at cryptonomista cryptonomist with an a at the end let in the ios our website

vms are always open cool well thanks a lot maritio and for everybody uh we will see you again on friday morning thanks guys cheers