The Wolf Of All Streets - BTC Dips Below 60k w/ @AxonDAO | Crypto Town Hall

Episode Date: July 3, 2024

Crypto Town Hall is a daily X Spaces hosted by Scott Melker, Ran Neuner & Mario Nawfal. Every day we discuss the latest news in crypto and bring the biggest names in the space to share their insight. ►►TRADING ALPHA READY TO TRADE LIKE THE PROS? THE BEST TRADERS IN CRYPTO ARE RELYING ON THESE INDICATORS TO MAKE TRADES. USE CODE ‘2MONTHSOFF’ WHEN VISITING MY LINK.  👉 https://tradingalpha.io/?via=scottmelker  ►► JOIN THE FREE WOLF DEN NEWSLETTER, DELIVERED EVERY WEEK DAY! 👉https://thewolfden.substack.com/    ►► OKX Sign up for an OKX Trading Account then deposit & trade to unlock mystery box rewards of up to $10,000!  👉  https://www.okx.com/join/SCOTTMELKER ►►NGRAVE This is the coldest hardware wallet in the world and the only one that I personally use. 👉https://www.ngrave.io/?sca_ref=4531319.pgXuTYJlYd ►►THE DAILY CLOSE BRAND NEW NEWSLETTER! INSTITUTIONAL GRADE INDICATORS AND DATA DELIVERED DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX, EVERY DAY AT THE DAILY CLOSE. TRADE LIKE THE BIG BOYS. 👉 https://www.thedailyclose.io/   ►►NORD VPN  GET EXCLUSIVE NORDVPN DEAL  - 40% DISCOUNT! IT’S RISK-FREE WITH NORD’S 30-DAY MONEY-BACK GUARANTEE. PROTECT YOUR PRIVACY! 👉 https://nordvpn.com/WolfOfAllStreets    Follow Scott Melker: Twitter: https://twitter.com/scottmelker   Web: https://www.thewolfofallstreets.io   Spotify: https://spoti.fi/30N5FDe   Apple podcast: https://apple.co/3FASB2c   #Bitcoin #Crypto #Trading The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own and should in no way be interpreted as financial advice. This video was created for entertainment. Every investment and trading move involves risk. You should conduct your own research when making a decision. I am not a financial advisor.  Nothing contained in this video constitutes or shall be construed as an offering of financial instruments or as investment advice or recommendations of an investment strategy or whether or not to "Buy," "Sell," or "Hold" an investment.

Mike, it looks like the S&P is a hair's breadth away from a fresh all-time high. I guess it's been only three days. But this is one of those weeks where we tend to see upward movement for stocks, right? I mean, with July 4th. Yes, absolutely. You pointed out Macro Mondays. And good morning. Happy full Friday to all the Americans.

Yeah, this is a week. I just remember trading it when I was a trader years ago and you never want to be short stocks this week, particularly the day before the 4th of July and particularly S&P 500. So kicking in but one thing we're seeing is the data, the trend and the sentiment for all the data is starting to turn towards the recession and then we get did not get last year that we completely priced out this year, all going back this year. So the headline in the Bloomberg today is U.S. services activity contracts at the fastest pace in four years. You've seen that 10-year note yield drop to 4.3 percent.

TLT is up a percent. And to me, that's going to be one of the next big trades is the complete beat up u.s bond market that's been thrown down on the mat and beat up completely is just going to drive everybody crazy and everybody gets stopped out and go up and who knows how long it's going to last but right now it's still about stocks so just don't go down i mean this is one of those uh strange weeks as well where the holiday falls on a thursday so we get a half a trading down wednesday a break th, and then a Friday. It's like having two Fridays. Yeah, exactly. I'm off tomorrow. So, you know, it's also, and so we'll see, there won't be a lot

of people on the desks tomorrow, but when payrolls print, but it's just, it can be a key question is if the key thing from economists is they expect that unemployment rate to go up. And that's a key thing they're watching or say the non-farms are somewhat ignoring non-farm payrolls are so much adjusted, but we see the trend in unemployment rates up the trend now in services is down the trend in the things I watch closely is I'm kind of shocked to point out diesel demand and unleaded gas demand are down like 6% and 5% from the highs. 2022, container board demands, all the stuff is down. All the stuff I watch from commodities is just bearish.

And then you look over the stock market and say, thank God you're going up. Because if we just get a little bit of that 10% back and feel, that's what I'm looking for. Just give me a test. Just see how risk assets perform and so far you know it's you know i think it's one of the one of these things is it's gradually then suddenly but all the data is starting to turn negative and the market's pricing for more fetties and if it's what we can't really use because inflation's high and partly it's high because stock market's two times gdp and it keeps going up imagine if we had an asset that traded 24 7 365 and we didn't have to talk about these uh holidays

and days off huh i think we're going there i mean it's one thing about tokenization that's part of the reason you know i i learned that in futures and years ago i started in the business in the night session the chicago board of trade and they first started in 1988 so we can trade japanese um future or japanese hours and to me that's what tokenization is doing i mean we can trade Japanese future or Japanese hours. And to me, that's what tokenization is doing. I mean, you can trade the dollar on weekends, you can trade Bitcoin, you can trade actually trade some gold on weekends all through these tokens. And I don't see what stops it. There's one thing I like to mention, it was that key case, where I don't know how it's going to work out. But from a token standpoint, there's a key case when the ICE exchange started trading the WTI futures exchange,

WTI contract from CME. CME sued them and they lost. And the ICE exchange claimed it was in the public domain. So you look at all these prints on the screens, they're all in the public domain. So why not have a token track it? And tokens can be more efficient

and everybody can access them. And it's just a better way that's what futures did to a lot of markets i don't see what stops cryptos from doing it but i look at the so that's the the macro big picture it's all good for the dollar and tether but then you look over at bitcoin the key thing i've been pointing out is i just since we had that perfect new highs in Q1, it's just still showing an enduring hangover. And I don't think the hangover really ends until we can just at least get a little back and fill in the stock market, get everything to kind of reset a little bit, and then see what things pan out. But these kind of levels and Bitcoin telling us there's a problem and probably should respect it.

Hey, Mike, just before you move off the S&P 500 and get new highs, I saw some really interesting data. I'd like to get your thoughts on it. This is so far 77% of the S&P 500's return this year have been in the top 10 stocks, which is basically an all-time high. And that can't be good for the market. Yeah, there's so many of those things. Those of us who remember, I mean, I used to have hair.

I just remember similar things. And I just remember being on the trading desk in 1999, and I was talking to a client about buying zero-coupon bonds. Does this sound familiar? Treasuries. Of course, they had a bit of a higher yield last night. That salesperson walked by me, stopped me in the middle of my conversation, and said, are you an idiot? You've got to buy the NASDAQ.

And I said, you know, okay. And then we got the correction. And I remember getting the same feeling in 2007. And now the thing is, these can last for a while. I mean, Soros pointed it out. You see a bubble, you join it. And that's why I just point out the alternatives and signals. I'm just looking for signals. And that's why i'm still sticking with that bitcoin the leading indicator is to

me one of the best things to watch but yeah things like there's just so many of those out and about i just look at the macro simplest simple simplistically the the vix volatility index this was one of my best signals in 2007 i mean it's it's 52 week average it's it's the lowest versus minus the t-bill it's the lowest since 2007 you look at just a simple measure of the smb 500 versus the 100 week movement average it's about near that you know 23 or so it's very stretched and then just market cap to gdp it's just one of those things you're supposed to say okay well glad it doesn't matter anymore but if you're a trader you have to be nimble and look for opportunities to make money when we get the normalization. And it's not an if.

It's just when. I saw Rand disappeared. I was going to move to crypto. You know, Mike, I guess everyone, we've got Bitcoin trading here right at the bottom of this range again. I broke below 60,000, not as low as it went last week. But I think it hit a low today, about 59,538. Anyone here seeing major cause for concern with Bitcoin at these levels? As I kind of scroll X, it seems like it's doom, death, and despair.

I just see Bitcoin kind of trading at the bottom of a range. Dave, that's red meat. Go ahead. Yeah, I'm here, red was just i was about to be doing planks which probably i would be i'd be panting so much people would think i was really more excited than i am uh look the most important point that that mike and i always talk about is where our disagreement is bitcoin if you look at bitcoin and I don't know what the numbers are, but my rough guess, maybe 60 to 70% of the people who hold Bitcoin view it as a literal hedge against exactly what Mike's talking about. Right?

So that's kind of important. Maybe 10, 15, 20% of the holders are hot money who are doing exactly what Mike is saying. They're trading it as beta. And then the rest are kind of in the middle of who knows what they're what the hell they're doing. But why do I say it that way? I think it's at least three to one, maybe it's more where Bitcoin is viewed by the long term holders as a hedge. So the fact that when he calls the version weakness, I call lack of

correlation. NASDAQ, S&P have been making all time highs, Bitcoin has been languishing here, you know, in this trading range, which has been set. The last time I got into a trading range like this, by the way, it lasted for another two or three months. So that's not terribly surprising or horrific. All the network metrics are still strong, et cetera, et cetera. The most important thing is every single news story that comes out is positive. And it's almost too much to count both in terms of corporates i mean bitcoin's at an all-time high against the yen you know that matters because two japanese corporates started putting in the balance sheet

more to come there uh you know we know the fasbi rules mean that that corporations can do that you know whether michael dell will do it or others will do it people will the real question for michael dell is is there enough liquidity for it to be meaningful to him and a lot of people are looking at that uh same thing on the pension fund side you know we saw in the etf we saw wisconsin put their little pinky toe in the way in the water but that's just the tip of the iceberg so there's definitely demand dynamics there and let's let's be faced let's face it there's no election outcome that isn't going to be money printing it isn't going to have more fiscal prophecy there's no party anywhere uh you know maybe i don't know what marine le pen is going to do in france but pretty much

every major country is tilting towards spending and that's what bitcoin is designed for at the same time what mike says about the s p is very reasonable. It feels to me like a really bad setup. And if it wasn't an election year, I'd be pretty bearish. So I don't think 2025 is going to be very good for it. But I don't see how that has any relevance to Bitcoin, which is trading on its own right now. Happily in its trading range. I actually sent a snarky tweet this morning thanking Peter Schiff for calling the bottom again, when it was trading below

60,000 calling for a breakdown. I mean, look, it is what it is. We could talk about this until we're blue in the face, but until September, October, unless there's a major catalyst, I don't really see it breaking the range. Can I ask David? I really appreciate those views. I want to ask you a question.

We all assume we're going to either get one candidate or the other in this election, and we all know what happened during the last election do you think it might be time to point out they start pricing in risks of like a hung election or where you have the shads i mean we we're getting who knows i mean the shenanigans going on with the democrats right now is and a leading party it seems to me there might be a little risk of um what happened last time and even what happened when um bush gore yeah i mean he's a hanging chad scott yeah we are hanging chads yes election but chads yes look i've said this many times i never thought that the election was going to be Biden-Trump.

I was with Vivek when he first came out with it. I shouldn't say the same thing. I still don't. We don't really know what's going to happen until we get to September, October. We just don't. You know, it's like, you know, the economics of Trump, would he really try to go to a 10% tariff would be, which would be, you'd have the smooth in the history books, looking backwards, you'd have smooth Holly,

and you'd have the Trump tariff, and they basically would effectively cause the same thing. Is he that dumb? I don't know, maybe, you know, if we get what would a President Harris do? I saw Caitlin Long asking, you know, the general Twitterverse, if anyone knows her opinions on crypto economic freedom, or any of this stuff, And the answer is nobody knows anything. We have no clue. So there's a lot of uncertainty here. The only thing that is certain is that governments are all going to run deficits as far as the eye can see. And I think we're heading towards that crack up boom at the end of the fiat experiment.

Now I hope I'm wrong. I really do hope I'm wrong. I would like to see them kick the can successfully for another 10 or 15 years, But that's what it feels like. Anyone else want to jump in thoughts there? I have no thoughts on King Chad's. Go ahead, Lou. I was just going to say the only thing that I'm certain of is that Trump is that stupid. Anyway, I'm not taking that bait, Lou.

It's not going to be me. Anyone else? Preston, you've got the sad face going on there. What do you think about all this? I mean, about what? I mean, I think in terms of crypto policy, you know, we know what one side thinks pretty unambiguously. Personnel is policy. The various things we've heard about who he would appoint if he were president into key offices are massively bullish for crypto and also for

the resolution of a lot of the litigation against companies like Coinbase and Binance. So on that end of the equation, I think there's a lot of certainty, right? And very fortunately, for those of us who are pro-crypto and want to see that result, it seems that the Trump campaign isn't taking the bait. I mean, they're not even announcing their VP pick this week, right? They're just letting the Democrats just own the news cycle. And they're delaying and delaying and delaying and turtling, basically waiting for this whole Joe Biden thing to play out. On the Democrat side, you know, sure, we don't know what Kamala Harris thinks about crypto, but we can probably guess. I think there's nothing

in her record that indicates she's anything other than a big state communist who would, you know, appoint people who are hostile to our interests. So from a crypto regulatory point of view, there are very few people, there are some, right? But there are very, like Richie Torres, for example, on the Democrat side who are really good with crypto, who are really sensible about it. But most of them, right?

Most of the DC crowd are anti-tech, they're anti-AI, they're anti-progress, like not progress in the progressive sense of progress in the, you know, you know, eternal life, infinite energy, colonize the galaxy sense. And, you know, they're just a bunch of basically awful people with master's degrees living in DC on government salaries. I mean, it's, it's, so we know the kind of, you know, yes, we don't know exactly what Kamala Harris thinks about crypto, but the reason is because really she's been sidelined for the last couple of years, um, as the vice president, but there's nothing really, there's no indication that any affiliation or association that she has, um, would be beneficial to our industry in any way, shape or form. Polymarket, uh, predictive markets where, you know predictive markets where people actually put skin in the game. Now, I believe, as of today, I read, have a higher chance based on betting odds of Kamala Harris being the candidate than Biden, if I read that correctly, which is a pretty wild place to be right now.

Carlo, then Dave. Good morning. that correctly uh which is which is a pretty wild place to be right now uh carlo then dave good morning so on the crypto legal front a couple of interesting developments um judge o'connor in texas federal court has agreed to fast track the consensus lawsuit which i think is good for bringing closure um we both know about the fight back and forth between consensus and the SEC, and they want to bring that to a head. And I think that's a good thing. I've had cases with Judge O'Connor, he's an outstanding judge, so I'm excited about that. And then another interesting development was the advisory letter that was sent to the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit with respect to Coinbase's request for rulemaking guidance. They cited the recent Judge Jackson finance ruling or holding and Judge Jackson's

feelings about secondary sales. And a great letter was written basically eviscerating the SEC's enforcement tactics and lack of rulemaking guidance. And I can pin a little portion of that letter, which is outstanding read. It really just boils down the essence of the arguments here. So a couple of really good developments and momentum seems to be moving in a very positive direction on the pro crypto front i think in the courts dave yeah i just wanted to make one point because which you know to use people as policy from preston uh i don't know how official the week or whatever but the notion that dan gallagher would be on the short list for running the sec is amazingly bullish, not just for crypto, but for market structure in general. It's hard to underestimate just how thoughtful and intelligent he is.

Obviously, I don't know. Just so people know, he's head counsel for Robinhood, direct, very pro-crypto. Right. Yeah. But he was an SEC commissioner and has a very substantive body of work. Some of the most entertaining as well as thoughtful speeches I have ever read before Hester Curse came in were from Dan Gallagher. And anyone who knows him or has met him understands that he is a relatable human being who understands the SEC's role is to work with self-regulatory agencies and the industries to come up with good data-driven policy and not to impose an agenda. Now, why am I saying this?

I'm saying this because everyone in crypto in a post-Biden world, if you want to think about voting for President Harris, you should have a short list from her of who she would put in. We already know that Biden put in Crenshaw to be re-nominated, and anyone who's read my takedown of her Bitcoin ETF for dissent would know that I think that she's clueless, and to say she's hostile doesn't go far enough, because effectively, she was willing to put in writing arguments that have been thoroughly debunked that were massively flawed and actually rejected by courts. And, you know, that's not really a good thing for an FCC commissioner yet. She was put back in. So it does make a very stark comparison. And anyone who thinks that Biden being gone means Warren gone means everything will be OK. Not unless you know.

Ed? Yeah, I was just going to say that it's almost like Star Wars, the empire strikes back on the SEC because we've got all the good news that was coming out. But we had the move to sue consensus last week. And even we had a couple of movements in the consensus, the SEC case. And there was a lot of positive reporting yesterday from this order in that Texas case that we're going to go forward on discovery and the SEC is going to allow that. But I was just digging into the briefings and that's not really the case at all. In fact, the SEC hasn't even agreed

to any of the discovery that consensus is proposing. And they just set up a schedule that nothing's going to happen until well after the election. And so that gives them plenty of time to move very aggressively against crypto in general. if, you know, obviously Biden wins or whatever team is more affiliated, if it's not Biden, whoever's anti crypto on the Democrat side, if they are so we've still got a lot of the SEC showing its hand that they're not changing at all in any way, shape or form. And they'll do things that make it look like they're softening. But they're not doing anything substantively that shows that they are. Yeah, I mean, if this administration was softening, they probably wouldn't,

the White House probably wouldn't have vetoed SAB 121, right? So rhetoric, watch what I say, not what I do, I think type of type of or watch what I do, not what I say, scenario is very much in play here. Also love the Empire Strikes Back reference because I literally wrote a newsletter on Monday called The Empire Strikes Back about the SEC coming after a consensus right at that moment. So I really love that. I mean, Lawyer, I saw you giving kind of the thumbs up over there. I think you tend to agree here that regardless of what perception is and such,

the SEC probably will keep at least showing some of these actions. I think we'll see a slow downtick as the election gets closer, maybe because it's politically unpopular, but they're not going to stop. Yeah, I think if anything, they might slow down. I mean, things aren't going that well for them in general, right? So I think they might slow down. I don't think you'll see any sort of, you know, on all those issues that Trump is sort of very eager to get voters.

I think Biden seems to be less excited, as easy as it would be to get those crypto voters. I don't think he'll he'll take the bait. Yeah, go ahead. I was just going to say, when you say that things aren't going well for the SEC, to me, if what they're trying to solve for is to fuck the crypto industry, it's going awesome for them. What do they care about if they lose in courts, if they can still fuck the industry? I think they had it better when the industry was more willing to roll over. I think there's more of a fight being put up, which I think is a loss to them, but I take your point.

Why they have unlimited funds. It's a loss for the industry who has to use our very limited funds. I don't disagree, but I mean, a year ago, it was SEC never loses. We live in terror. It's over in the United States and they've done nothing but lose in the courts, which is historic, right? i i think that's it no i agree with you but it's not but they're losing well correct but they have not lost it's not like companies can now crypto companies can now set up in the u.s and and do what they want to do we're still fighting and

fighting and fighting you know i don't think our points are mutually exclusive i agree i mean the only thing i i was just going to say the at this point post loper the sec's only hope even under a new administration and it's not a forlorn hope uh is i think their intent is to pack the court because there's no way that this is in court. Any of these cases, really, any of the ones against the good actors have a whole lot of attraction. And if the Republicans don't lose the House and the Senate, they have no chance. They're going to lose their funding for all this stuff one way or the other. But that's the issue. Do we think, listen, we have one, two, three, four lawyers, that's a really high percentage lawyer to layperson panel, four lawyers, to Lou's point, at what point do you think American

companies, Preston, I know you deal with quite a few of them, American companies would act, what would it take, I should say, for American crypto companies to feel like they can reestablish themselves here and settle with a somewhat certain future? What would that take? Regulatory clarity. Well, I mean, it depends on the company, right? Because the thing that the thing that sucks about the American regime, if you're a money transmitter, you know, it's a pain in the neck to comply with the money transmitter regime, but you can do it, right? So it's possible to operate as a money transmitter. And most crypto exchanges for the longest time assumed, in my view correctly, that that was the regime with which they needed to apply. Because remember, there was this SEC

litigation against exchanges on the basis that the exchanges were operating national securities exchanges because they were trading securities. They have been exchanges were operating completely fine, uninterrupted, no Wells notices, no nothing on this point for 12 years, right before the SEC decided to adopt this change of position, which then said, oh, by the way, you're operating national securities exchanges. So what would need to happen for those kinds of businesses, because those are the biggest businesses, because that's where you get the liquidity and that's how tokens get traded by the general public, what would need to happen for them is we need market structure

regulation, which either says, right, these tokens are not securities and we're going to move all of this activity back into money transmitter land where it belongs, right, and where other jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom have chosen to place it. Or if they are going to be treated as securities, there are certain safe harbors which apply to tokens which have been issued provided that they meet certain qualitative criteria. And one of those proposals was the FIT 21 Act, which passed the House, actually, but doesn't have a corresponding bill in the Senate and is unlikely to be enacted at least, I'd say, before 2026. So remember, the U.S. had certainty. Then Gary Gensler came along and said, actually, you know what? There's a theoretical argument that these things are all securities. We're going to proceed on the basis that they are.

And moreover, we're going to go after the exchanges for trading them because we think that they're securities. So that at least I think the earliest that you could have made that argument was 2018, right? So nine years into the great crypto experiment, when at the tail end of 2018, you started having the first SEC enforcement actions against tokens on the basis that they were unregistered securities. And that was AirFox and Paragon were the first two that went down in settlements. But you didn't have any court precedents that said that for a long, long time,

I think until like 2021 or 2022. So the SEC kind of dropped the ball. What they should have been doing if they really wanted to be regulating the space is they should have said in 2014, okay, guys, here's the deal. We think these things are securities. We're going to create some rules and this is how you're going to comply, blah, blah, blah. They didn't do that. They just hung around for 10 years and then changed their position. So I think that is the key issue which needs to be resolved. There are two ways to resolve it. Either you follow the UK's path and you treat crypto principally as a consumer protection issue, right, from just like goods and services, fraud, that kind of issue, with the main regulatory

consideration being counter-terrorist financing and money laundering, which is how, again, the U.S. operated until basically 2021, 2022. Yeah, I would just add to what Preston is saying, which I agree with. I think in the absence of the FCC being adults in the room, which, again, we don't have any sign of that happening anytime soon, the only way that American companies can get some measure of clarity is going on the offense or creating these associations and fronting the litigation costs to go on offense. And so that's obviously our firm, our HODL law case that's on the Ninth Circuit. That's consensus going on the offense. That's Coinbase. Carlo had

put something up in the nest on the Coinbase's attempts to force rulemaking. So they've got parallel litigation while they're getting sued. And then you've got some other associations in Texas. And these things take a long time. Even the new cases in Texas, nothing's going to happen until end of 24, early 25 at the trial court level. And until you start building up some of this case precedent in the absence, again, of rulemaking, you just have these jittery large companies that have armies of in-house counsel saying, oh, it's not worth it yet. Now, the crypto companies were doing that in the beginning and they were trying to just stay away from the SEC and it just obviously blew up in their face. So they're a little more on the offense. But I don't think you're going to see major banks take that type of offensive action at all with the SEC.

So, you know, it's still the crypto world fighting on its own. Going down the line, Lawyer Dancarlo, just curious how you think we could get enough clarity here that it would be basically comfortable for companies to establish and stay here and know that they'd be safe here into the future. What rattles me is that even if you get the right administration in place, it can just change back. We take for granted, I think, we talk about when Gensler's gone and we get a Hester Persh or Dan Gallagher, that's great. And we'll get a more favorable SEC.

What if four years later that switches back the other way? Yeah, I mean, it's not hard to see what a country would look like if it was inviting to crypto entrepreneurs because they exist. If they started to give off that vibe for a long enough period, I think America is preferable. I don't think it's that hard to convince entrepreneurs that that's where they should be, at least at this point. But they would have to make them feel invited.

And that's far from where we are. I think it would have to come from Congress. Maybe the White House. Yeah, that makes sense. Carlo? Not sure. Carlo, that makes sense. Carlo? Not sure. Carlo, are you there? Cool.

Simon, go ahead. Yeah, well, just based upon everything you said, I can just share what we did in the UK. So we had something called the Global Bitcoin Stock Exchange. I can't remember, GB something or other, GBSC. That launched in 2011. And everyone was trying to keep Bitcoin bonds, Bitcoin mining, IPOs. And then that got shut down.

And then Eric Voorhees did Satoshi Dice, created one of the most successful um bitcoin investment contracts um and the sec came after him then and then he had to refund everyone of a very successful investment that outperformed bitcoin because the sec protected um investors i can see your air quotes i can see your air quotes unprotected just for that. But at that stage, and then in 2012, we formed the UK Digital Currency Association. And then as a group of companies, we then lobbied. And then it went down the route of, you know, putting together. The first thing what they wanted to clarify was the tax side.

And then, yeah, we end up with the virtual asset service provider regime. It took Financial Action Task Force to come along and say, right, everyone needs to have this by this deadline. And then Europe created Mika and everything went from there. But, you know, when I think the challenge is kind of, what's the recent thing that happened? They call it the, you know, where the judges won't be able to, will take more jurisdiction over the regulators. The Chevron thing. Yeah, so hopefully, maybe that's the thing that needed to change

because you could have the virtual asset service provider regime, but then when you have a very vague, interpretable definition of an investment contract, where it could encapsulate things when the SEC wants the money, or the fine, then maybe this is the change that is needed. But it's pretty clear to me, like if you can just get that distinction between when someone is just clearly circumventing capital markets to create like a dividend security token, and it should be a security, versus people creating these blockchains that need disclosures and need market manipulation regimes, but mainly focused on the money transmitter regime

and money laundering and that type of stuff. Then, yeah, that's where we ended up. And the rest of the world has already figured it out. So it's not that much of a leap. And I think maybe this is all moving in the right direction for US, but it seems like it's just going to take some time. Will, you had your hand up. Go ahead. Yeah, I was just going to say, I think I've got a counter view that most of the folks here in that.

I don't think that the government is our biggest problem. I'm actually here because, you know, in crypto, because it doesn't matter what the government does. Because I know what the government is going to do. They're going to fuck us. Whether it's Biden or Trump, they're going to fuck us. That's what they always do. And I really think our biggest threats are what I call FAMGA, now FAMGAN, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and Netscape. They're the ones that we're fighting against for the soul of AI, for the soul of the metaverse. And they are going to, you know, the only way they get constrained,

the only rules that I think are most, the ones that are most important are our monopoly rules that are today not adequate to rein them in any way. And I think in the long run for the crypto industry, those rules are going to be a lot more important than the U.S US regulatory environment for crypto. The US government is also scared of them, by the way. Yeah. And plus, they also tried to launch their own crypto. So, you know, they tried to launch a stable coin.

Facebook tried like three times to become a bank. It created like all sorts of iterations and the regulations stopped them from launching any of their crypto projects. Yeah, I think that that's a common enemy, Lou, in a strange way. You know, and Simon, to your point, it's interesting because we've seen private companies. They're not private companies like Meta and such, have launched stablecoins. All of our stablecoins are private companies, right? PayPal launched stablecoin.

So I think it shows you everything you need to know that there was so much pushback when a company like Meta tried to do that, right? Interesting because Twitter, you know, Musk continues to talk about becoming a everything app and a payment platform. Right. And so you have to wonder what that will look like if he actually attempts it. I mean, Lou, don't you think that there'll be quite a bit of pushback if that happens? I mean, I believe to the degree that Trump is the uber capitalist, that he would let Facebook have a stable coin.

Why would they regulate it and try to determine who the winner and loser is? Because that's what they do. But that's what Trump says he wants to stop doing. He wants to get rid of all the regulators. He wants to get rid of everybody in Washington because they're all you know uh worthless in his view and you know and so I'm in my in my guess if Trump gets in the big guys are just going to get bigger yeah yeah Simon yeah I mean but imagine right now imagine Facebook launching a stable coin do you know how systemically risky that is to the US banking system?

Well, that was their point. If you can just directly go from government debt to non-fractional reserve banking via a stablecoin, via Facebook, in one fell sweep, you wipe out a massive chunk of banks. You create massive need for FDIC bail-in, and you probably end up with a CBDC. So you just end up with the social networks and the institutions owning the stable coins, government lending direct, and radical, radical, banking reform um that would result in a cbdc if you if they allowed that to happen no doubt about it um but it's it's also you have just moved and i think i share your concern because i think where you're headed is that when you have platforms like x and Facebook as our banks,

tell me the difference between Patriot Act, FICO score, and social networks being banks versus what everyone says is the China social credit score. It's identical. The interesting thing about from a bank stability standpoint, so Circle just made a big deal last week out of the fact that they're the first Mika approved stable coin. And basically they're going to have to do that. My understanding is that they really have to have two separate systems, right?

They have to have Circle USD, which is available in the United States, and then they have to have whatever is available in Europe, which is going to be backed by deposits at European banks. So I'm not sure that the stability, you see a lot of like Elizabeth Warren and the whole like MMT crowd, Rashida Tlaib, and all those folks in the US say that stable coins will threaten the stability of the US banking system. But I'm not sure that's true. Because if you just require that the deposits are held at US banks, you know, then they're just deposit liabilities at US banks. And so that's pretty uncontroversial. And in fact, it helps banks be well capitalized. So I'm not I'm not sure that that's a great argument. I'm sure we're going to hear a lot of it, particularly if Trump wins, and they start try to liberalize the market, people are going to freak out about it. But it doesn't make any sense

why you know, circle should be any more of a threat to the banking system than Venmo is. But hold on, work through that. So if you could have an account that was fully backed by treasuries, that allowed you to send a digital dollar anywhere in the world, anywhere in the world, like you can a stablecoin right now, why would you be with a bank? Well, no, the point is that the issuer of that instrument,

they're going to have some assets, and those assets will be held at a bank. So whatever fee arrangement they have to figure out. So Circle has, at the end of the day, Circle is backed by banks, right? And we learned that when SVB went down, there was a bit of a panic that, oh my goodness, what's going on with Circle? Because Circle's got a bunch of money with SVB. So ultimately, all of these- That's just for the withdrawals, right?

The vast majority. So you've basically implemented Basel III and made every fractional reserve bank a full reserve bank. If you say that, literally the entire money supply would collapse in credit creation. And you'd have to replace it with an equal amount of stable coins and CBDCs. PayPal is full reserve. They have to hold all of their customer assets. For example, they can't sit there and say, oh, we've dealt with your stuff and we've gone and traded it away. I mean, I've used stable coins, not basically as just being a better version of PayPal,

which can hook into any API. And you know that when you sign a transaction with your stable coin on, you know, and someone gives you their address, it doesn't matter what computer system is on the back end, they're going to be able to translate and understand that money's been sent to them. So there are two ways to look at it. One of them is we can say, oh, well, stablecoins are going to be a new form of money, which isn't backed by cash. It's backed by treasury and readily liquid securities, tier one capital or AAA rated mortgage bonds, that kind of stuff, right, which is readily sellable in the market. Okay, that's one option. The other option is it's backed by cash, which is

held in a deposit account somewhere at a bank. And then Circle or someone like that sits in between the bank and you, and they provide that application layer, which then allows you to go and do transactions, doing all kinds of other things. Or in the alternative, Circle becomes a bank itself. So I'm not sure that that's a huge threat to bank stability. It's just a different type of bank, which provides a type of service, which isn't universally needed. I don't need... If I want to go and buy something expensive or buy something risky,

I almost never pay for it in cash. I'll pay for it on a credit card, particularly Amex. Why? Because it's not your money. It's Amex's money that's buying it. And so then if there's some issue, if the goods get lost, if the goods get destroyed, you know what? I call up Amex and say, hey, guess what? You know what? I bought this thing. It was defective. They're not giving me my money back. Here's 700 bucks. Go talk to them. And Amex will go and fight for their money, right? Because that's what they do. It's their problem. It's not mine. So like, I'm not I'm not convinced stable coins are not like the solution, this all singing all dancing solution to every financial problem that there ever was, for like cross border trade settlements, probably a pretty

good idea. remittances, probably a good idea. If you're looking at something like machine to machine payments, where you have AI agents, which are trying to talk to each other, which is one thing where I think, crypto, I think is actually kind of like cart before the horse kind of invention, because it's machine readable payments in an era when everybody was human. And so they really didn't need machine readable payments as much as for example, two machines will write uncensorable, unfalsifiable, machine-readable payments.

So for something like that, stablecoins would be brilliant. But like, I just don't see the threat to the banking system that it presents. Let me, moving away from this, Scott, just kind of going back to the original question for people that joined late, just on the market. I know we're going to talk about it on a video show right after this. But I'll ask you the question now. A quick update on the market is Bitcoin dipped below 60k? What's the conclusion? What's your conclusion after this space on Bitcoin and how are Alts and ETH performing? look technically like they're bottoming in my mind. I mean, Bitcoin trading at the bottom of the range. We've been here for a little while. Don't see any huge reason for it.

It's a holiday coming on in the United States. It's on low volume. Just not that much reason for concern. I mean, alts are pretty wrecked. They're pretty oversold. But they've been wrecked for a while. Are they getting even more wrecked? More and starting to actually be, you like i you know i like rsi when i'm looking at technicals pretty oversold

starting to show some bullish beverages i mean nothing here is out of the ordinary to my point for the cycle i don't think we're seeing anything strange here i think it's just the longer you sit at support the more people panic and assume it's all over we know that the we know these cycles take time and we know that after you make a new all-time high you're going to have a long time to consolidate and the longer you consolidate the bigger the next move up or down should be so people should cheer for this cool off period go enjoy the beach and come back when things are a little rosier what was what was the number you mentioned a while ago you said any there's two two kind of two break through all-time highs. Yeah, it's basically like the area we're in now is support

and the area kind of 72 up to 74. So we just broke 60 if it continues. One, two, three, I'm looking at a chart. Four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. I think this is the ninth or tenth day we. We've traded below 60, you know, since the high in March and we continue to generally bounce. So sweeping it down below, I don't see it as a huge deal. Okay. If it goes, if it continues going below 60,

we know we hit signing 58, 59, 58. Right. And we were just there. Right. I mean, so like, that's what I'm saying. Like, I just think that people, here's my framing. Right. And I think most people would probably agree with this. If you just thought experiment, say, hey, do I think that in a year, if that's your time frame, five years, 10 years, choose any time frame you want. Do you think that crypto will be trading higher than it is now or lower? And stop worrying about tomorrow, well, then if you think that the answer is higher, and I think you would almost get consensus in this space that 10 months, 12 months from now, things will probably be much better, regardless of whether we go to 50, 40 in between, then you shouldn't be panicking, right? So, I mean, I think that people generally understand

that we have mostly tailwinds for this industry, regulatory environment improving, legislative, political, everything improving, ETFs. So just be patient. Cool. We're going to discuss this later on a video show. But let me go to Axe and Dow

and I've heard of DeFi, I've heard of GameFi, but never I've heard of DeSci, but never really looked into it. Decentralized science. I've never heard of DeSci. I was going to say that was going to be my first question. Probably, but you've heard of de-sci, but I've never really looked into it. I've never heard of de-sci. I was going to say that was going to be my first question. Probably, but you've heard of de-centralized science, yeah? You can guess. If I had to ask you, hold on a second.

I'm definitely going to say de-centralized science, but no, I've never heard that term. If someone says de-centralized science, what would be your first guess? What are they de-centralizing? Just guess. Even if you get it wrong, it doesn't matter. Science. Oh, fucking hell. No, so my guess would be de- be decentralizing your data, the data ownership.

And research, decentralizing research. Because a lot of research is not accessible by everybody. A lot of IP is not accessible by everybody. So my guess would be I could be wrong as well. You could be right being broad, and I could be wrong. That was my guess. Yeah, exactly. Like decentralizing data when it comes to the user,

and then decentralizing IP by a pharmaceutical company, et cetera, would be another potential use case. That'd be my guess. So I think one of the things, one of the exciting things that DeSci is solving for is a lot of diseases that don't have millions of people that have the disease, don't have anybody working on drugs to solve for that. But now that you can get all those people together and through DeSci, they'll potentially solve a lot of problems that would never have otherwise been solved.

That I've heard of and discussed before. I just didn't know it was a catch-all under DeSci, but I like it. I like it. There are other projects like HairDAO, which is going to solve male pattern baldness. I'm sure there are various other types. I'm not going to say what I happen to think about.

I don't even know when people are kidding. You're serious. That's awesome. I'm completely 100% serious that exists. I've just looked at your profile photo. I think you have more than enough hair to really talk about male baldness. Preston, do you rub a Ledger wallet on your forehead? Look, I haven't dug into it in too much detail.

One also remembers that at some point in the recent past, there was a DAO that was created to save the whales. So the DeSci thing, I think, suffers from, in certain instances of from, um, in certain, uh, certain instances of it perhaps are a little naive in how they approach that particular problem. I am not only the president of hair loss. Dow, but I am also a customer that that's for the boomers.

I'll go ahead. Okay. Well, also my, well, this whole lot of my, my favorite D-Side project, if you guys haven't heard of it, is called Moondown. And they've already sent somebody into space. So it's a super exciting project. Did they send them to the moon, though, or just space? Because space is easy. Well, they've got to start somewhere.

They sent them into space. They actually had two winners of their first round, and one of them was Chinese. But the U.S. government would not let the Chinese person go up on that Blue Origin rocket. Of course not. And Axandar, look, we've kind of taken up your time. Don't worry. It doesn't count. But we've tried to discuss different use cases for DeSci and debate what DeSci even means.

So maybe you should tell us, what is DeSci and what is AxonDAO? Yeah, thank you so much. And good morning, Mario, Scott, and all of you. Yeah, thanks for having us. I'm Christopher Cresselius, the founder of AxonDAO. Happy to talk about DeSci and really decentralized science and what AxonDAO does for DeSci. First of all, let me ask,

does anyone really know where their data is and how much has been made from it or any details around it? I've accepted that everyone has access to my data and I'll never make money off it. I've gone ahead of everybody. I'm like, this is reality. Just suck it up, everybody. So did I get it right out of everywhere? Is it data is what you guys focus on? Well, it's two sides. It's the data funds the research. And so it's like a self-funding life cycle about life science.

And it really answers the question, like, why is big tech so big? Why is big data so big? I mean, they never really, I don't think they intended to make sneaky methods of taking our data and now our biometric data, but now DeSci really solves this. And I mean, furthermore, I mean, by combining legal means of a DAO, blockchain and AI, you know, and your own volunteer data, we can now use these means combined to fund science and healthcare much easier than the traditional means. And really, our intent is to make it easy for the 90% of non-crypto users to use DeSci without even knowing they're using crypto. And also really

making it easy for researchers and other DeSci projects to find funding because there's so many problems in funding sources over the last 20 years. And DeSci really holds the opportunity for expedited process in this science innovation and funding. Okay. Sorry, I've been jumping in, but I didn't know I was muted. Okay. So you've kind of mentioned so many use cases in one, which kind of says we're all right in our guesses, but can we just dig into it one by one? Let's start with the data one. So essentially you allow someone to own their data through a token and monetize it by providing their data to research companies, pharmaceutical companies, medical institutions? Not even to the medical companies, like huge pharmaceutical ones just consider that you are

you just sorry uh mark you're with accent out yeah i'm sorry yeah okay yeah okay i saw on your part yeah just wanted to be sure okay yeah sorry as you were saying so you're explaining that data yeah not not pharmaceutical companies and medical companies can you elaborate yeah just consider that there is a plenty of really smart interesting researchers that they have some idea how they can calculate some kind of um i don't know um decision or kind of analysis around your health from the data but they don't have money they don't have the access to data and they will never win with the bigger institutions. They work slowly.

They don't have to be in a hurry. In the same time, there is a plethora of people who share the data without knowing about it or even if they are sharing the data with us, they don't ask for tokens. They just don't care. But it doesn't matter. The Axon DAO is able to pay and help researcher to make the research which is kind of dope because nowadays researchers not only they have to brag ask and follow their academia to find some something to have you know in the treasury to make some spendings on the research but also they will not be the main owner of the research and in dsi

it's basically usually contrary so researcher is the main owner of the thing that he created with the dsi ecosystem okay i need you to explain this a bit for a bit further for me so essentially um So essentially, data is fragmented and larger institutions have access to a lot of that data. Smaller competitors don't. And people are giving away that data without even knowing it. So what you guys do, I'm getting 100% emojis from Max and Del, so I think I'm doing okay. What you guys do is allow somebody to own their data, sell their data, so monetize their data, and then you allow that data to be democratized so all institutions have equal access to that data. Yep. So then it becomes a lot more efficient and a lot more competitive.

Fair? Is that fair? Yep. Yep. Shit. Okay. Can you dig into it? Can we go a bit deeper and go through an actual use case?

Okay. Let's say, well, let's see me. What data? So I'm deep in that medical world. Like today, I've been to like four clinics just today, just doing all these different treatments for everything. And I'm going to go to another clinic for anyone that saw Brian Johnson's latest video. It's a pretty dangerous one with a kill switch. I don't even know what it is, but I trust people that tell me to do it. So I'm just do, I do all these stuff all the time. And I'm guessing when I go, they do, I do blood tests. Like I've got, I already had a needle in my right arm too. They did a quick blood test and I did some drips and I went to another place.

They did some scans. So all that data, they've, they've gotten it from me. But I don't, I don't know. I didn't even even i'm paying them for the service but they got my data and i didn't get anything in return so what you're saying is that all that data i could have actually monetized it through x and dow and then i could have and then when when i do monetize it goes on the blockchain that gives it access to anybody that buys your other token because you got dual tokens to have access, all these institutions to access that data with that token. How am I doing? Almost great.

The thing is that you are not putting the data into the blockchain. The data is in your private vault. This is also one of the craziest things that we have made, and we will introduce this in the next two weeks. But just consider that decentralized science is like a decentralized venture capital for research. Think about like this. And can you hear me, guys?

Yeah, I think so. Yeah, we can. Yeah, yeah. So just for example, if you have, for example, you are not sure if, for example, you might be having Alzheimer's or some kind of issue that changes your neurological capabilities. Like you go slower, you feel that something is wrong. Before you will make the full DNA tests or blood or gut tests, you can, for example, record your voice continuously for the next three, four weeks. We are working on a project like this.

And we will be analyzing every recording you will make. There is 20 different factors we observe. And we are checking if there is a slight change in those factors that can show some kind of downgrade of your capabilities in different vectors and before you will even go to the doctor or the hospital without making anything sophisticated, just recording your voice for it takes like two minutes, the procedure on a daily basis, once time per day, at most. We can tell you, for example, that there is something like maybe incoming

depression, or maybe we feel like you have some kind of issues with the rhythm of your voice. So what you do, so Mark, essentially what you do, Max, sorry, not Mark. So essentially what you do is when you take that data, you also so action also analyzes the data, you also – so Acton also analyzes the data. Yes. The user – okay. So first, that's fucking fascinating. But I've got two questions there.

First, privacy, and second is legal liability, like you're giving medical advice. Is there no liability there? It's the – Well, the – Go on, Chris. I just want to hop in here. We're working actually on a study to do uh microdosing data analysis on microdosing and so we're working with irb uh actually to do the ethics um to to make sure that we're doing all the things correctly but right now i mean all your data is being put into your health apps all

your monitors all those things i mean where is that data going and you can't revoke it so we're working with data lake and a bunch of others that, you know, it's basically like a plaid that can pull your data out or you know where it is. And so like, I think everyone has a taste for this right now.

A little bit of like trust and knowing where things are. And so like, there's a lot of opportunities for DeSci. And there's a lot of things to unpack here. The biggest thing for us is that when we launch... Yeah, finish. Just make sure.

We have to use decentralized science. Avoid DeSci. A lot of people think we're saying DeFi. Too early for DeSci. Too early. Let's take DeSci. Decentralized science. When you guys blow up, when the whole concept of DeSci starts blowing up, we can start using

DeSci. Too early. You didn't earn the acronym yet. We'll use the cool words. We'll use the cool words next. But the big thing about us is that we were so fortunate last late fall to be invited into the NVIDIA Inception Program. So we feel like with the AI, blockchain, DAOs, and there's a little bit more legal structure here based from the U.S. that we can operate this way. And we're really excited. We have a great team.

I mean, our main lawyer, Beau, he was from the SEC, worked at the SEC. So I think we know a lot of the realms here. But there's a challenge here. I mean, like you all were just talking, legal clarity. So we're trying to follow within the guidelines here. But there's a big opportunity here. And check out all the other DAOs, like all the ones y'all mentioned. I mean, there's so much here, but it's such an early spot.

So there's a lot, you know, a lot for all of us. Yeah, so just going back to the use case and then I'll discuss your token because I know we're running out of time. But you essentially do everything when it comes to the medical, anything to do with, you know, comes to the medical, anything to do with science and the medical records, because you decentralize the data, you democratize access to that data.

I want to dig into the funding one as well. But you also leverage AI to kind of offer medical advice. And then Mac, when I said, all right, what about the legal liability? I think you spoke a bit before your colleague jumped in. You said we're decentralized, so there's no liability. Is that what you're trying to say? No, no, absolutely not that. We are.

Okay. We are taking responsibility, and it must be solved before we will start collecting the data. You can do it only the one way, the right way. Okay. So essentially what you're saying is that you already, but okay, so you trust your AI to offer accurate medical advice. It's not that the AI is, you know, you can exchange it, doctors with AI, it gives you suggestions, opinions, but it's not telling you the disclaimer.

Yeah, always. Okay, okay. Now I understand. And then what about privacy? The obvious question. HIPAA compliance, GDPR compliant, soon to be ISO 27001.

No, the data privacy security is basically second thing after the legality of our operation in terms of the taxes. AxonDAO is LLC registered in states, which is kind of unique in DeSci world, in basically crypto world.

Unique, yeah, as an understatement. I was going through your, I think we've dug into most things. I'm just seeing your token now. You guys already listed, you're sitting in a market cap of 26 million FTV. You've been public since March this year. So you've been out there for a while. Obviously we're investors. So I appreciate you having us on your cap table. So my next question for you is you have two tokens. Dual token projects are

a bit tricky. How did you figure out the tokenomics? Can you go through to both tokens? We only got like four minutes left. So I want to ask about this and then I wanted to ask the last question about something to do with COVID. You guys did something during COVID. I saw all the questions. Correct me if I'm wrong.

So that's my second question. But let's do the first one, just kind of the dual token model. Yeah, I'd love to answer that. It's really not a dual token model in the sense we have an LLC, which is the ownership of the DAO LLC, which has to have some owner. And then you have the token. So by all means, we really just have one token.

The other one represents ownership in the DAO as a private Reg D investor. So we're finalizing the PPM so that we can take in private capital and operate that way. But there's some legal clarity we have to do. And what was your second question? So why are you based before my second question? Why do you decide the US as a jurisdiction? I'm sorry, if you answered that already, I missed it. No problem. Well, we just found that there's a DAO opportunity in Wyoming that operated this way. And we were suggested by our legal team that we could operate under the DAO LLC in Wyoming. And it's a pretty clear structure. It's a lot easier than the Delaware DAO, which is a stack of papers.

Lawyer, what do you think? Have you seen many web3 companies go through Wyoming? Yeah, certainly. I mean, they already have a lawyer, so I'd be careful. There's lots of options and all of them have their ups and downs. Okay, that's the safest answer you can come up with, Lawyered. Let me go to the next

question. It's COVID. I probably don't have too much time for more questions. But what did you guys do with COVID? Maybe give us some interesting use cases. Like what have you guys achieved as well since launching? Yeah, well, in 2018, we raised some funds to work for private funds just internally to work with the clinical data company to try to help speed up their process. And finding out that it's just so archaic how they're using fax machines and voicemails. And so during COVID, this same company needed a way to maintain their

clients. And we found out it was $1,500 a patient they would lose that weren't participating in the research. So during COVID, we were able to like quickly make a system so that they could connect with their research patients. So we learned intimately how that process works. So yeah, after COVID, we realized we couldn't be Zoom. And there's an opportunity here with blockchain and funding. Nice. And then maybe we can wrap it up with this. And anyone that wants to check out Axendale Solicitalkin, you can go to their website,

read about them, understand what they do. And yeah, but my last question there is any interesting use cases that you have come up you can go to their website read about them understand what they do um and uh and yeah but my last question there is um any interesting use cases that you have come up with in and kind of design in general like what maybe a broad question is we've invested in a few projects a few web3 science projects in you know years ago five years ago i think the first investment so we've invested in under 10 in total there's not that many out there but they just haven't gotten the same love as other use cases in crypto and i think they just haven't had their their their time in the limelight what do you think it's lacking well you have to you have

to curate long-term plan just consider that ultimate goal of things that we do in in kind of architectural part is that it's it's a network of AI agents talking in between each other analyzing your health data helping you understand what's happening with you. So what while now we are building two and three projects in the same time, somewhere around September, September, October, there will be like probably in total six different projects. Each one of them is separated, but they are also interconnected.

And you have to build a few legs to try to stabilize your long-term plans and become net positive. We are close to becoming kind of net positive, but it's a very early stage. Just consider it's our fourth month of existence yeah i agree i agree look guys it's you know pleasure to speak to you finally and you know i know we've we've been investors for for a while now or a while as in earlier this year uh but we've talked about you in the team a few times you've come up a few times and so it's a pleasure to be part of your journey. Appreciate having you on the show. It was a great discussion.

And something different to the typical AI, DeFi, gaming projects that we have on a daily basis. It was a more fascinating conversation for me. I was more inquisitive in this one. So I really appreciate it. Also hit me up privately. I was just speaking to a decentralized science project earlier today.

Usually I don't jump on a lot of these calls, but my team kind of squeezed me in because anytime a project mentions biohacking, the team gets excited and add me to the call thinking I'll be excited to join that call. But it was actually a pretty cool company. So I'd love to connect you to them and maybe have a discussion.

But otherwise, it's a pleasure to have you both. Anyone that wants to check out Axe and Dow, they're on stage, go to their Twitter, go to their website, read about them. Thank you. And if you're interested, you could look at their token, not investment advice, Mac and whoever's's behind the Axendow account.

Christopher, I really appreciate coming on. Such a pleasure to speak to you. And yeah, for everyone else, we'll see you tomorrow. Me, Scott, and half of Ryan, as always. Thanks a lot, everyone. Bye-bye. Thank you. Let's do it.

Bye.