The Wolf Of All Streets - Is A Bitcoin Supply Crisis Incoming? Michael Saylor Is Buying Everything!

Episode Date: April 15, 2026

Is Michael Saylor quietly triggering a Bitcoin supply crisis? While most of the market is focused on short-term price action, billions of dollars are flowing into Bitcoin behind the scenes through Strategy’s aggressive accumulation and ETF demand. In just days, massive buying has absorbed tens of thousands of BTC, signaling that strong hands are stepping in while weaker participants exit. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Is a Bitcoin supply crisis incoming? I would actually view that as a good thing, not so much a crisis, but I like it. Why? Because Michael Saylor is buying everything. It's absolutely insane what he is pulling off right now with his infinite money glitch. I'm gonna break all of that down for you and everything else going on in the news right now.

Let's go. What is up, everybody? Welcome to the show. My ear fell out. This one, I've got an ear. It looks really cool. This one, less cool. Now I can hear everything happening around me, which is great. And also, we have Peter Cheer scheduled to join today as the guest, who we've had here many times. Absolute Macro expert and legend, works with Generals, was planning to ask him all kinds of

questions about macro and Iran. And now I'm alone. So what you get is an impromptu solo show from yours truly, which is great because it's basically an excuse for me to practice or my dear. new show, The Daily Wolf on Yahoo Finance every single day at noon for 15 minutes. That's going to be our commercial for that. That starts on Monday 420, by the way, 420 Monday. That's going to be the first time. We've been running dress rehearsals.

It's going amazing. It's perfect. And I can't wait for you all to watch it because that's going to be me completely unhinged 15 minutes a day on mainstream media. Yes, we can start today by taking a quick look at the market. we have the Bitcoin trading at $74,000 Ethereum at 2300. We had this interesting scenario yesterday where Ethereum was actually outperforming Bitcoin to the upside. There was a point where Bitcoin was up 6 or 7% in 24 hours, and Ethereum was like 12 or 13%.

Even at the daily close, I think it was up 3% more than Bitcoin. Of course, now underperforming slightly after the rejection there on the upside. I mean, I don't have the Bitcoin chart pulled up. up, I can go ahead and do that since we're winging it today. But pretty clear to me right now when you take a look at the chart, what's going on. Let's hope this is the right one. And that is that we have a very strong level here. Of course, we can look at the one at 74,000 there. But if we're taking a real look, we can draw a new line, I think, on this chart, which is from that March high that we just recently had. We can pop it in right here, right? About 76,000. And that's the line.

And you can see that if you drill this in on the daily from the weekly here, that that's exactly where yesterday's move was rejected. I mean, almost to the penny we put in a high. That's a disgusting daily candle. I'm not saying that the top is in. I'm saying that it's hard to get really excited until we start clearing these important levels and seeing higher prices. But I did find yesterday particularly interesting because it was one of those rare

unicorn days where we did see something other than Bitcoin outperforming. So what does it mean when Ethereum actually outperforming? To me, it means that A, people are more willing to take risk. Within the circular crypto economy, we know that you can basically view Bitcoin as like a bond, right? It's the risk-free rate. It's the benchmark that you need to beat to do anything else. So when there's a flight to quality or flight to safety within the crypto community, people sell their alcoids and they buy Bitcoin. So we largely see Bitcoin outperform to the downside. And then we largely see people fomowing into Bitcoin on the upside. So on days where Ethereum's

outperforming, we saw 41% week-over-week increase in Ethereum transactions. I did all this research for my test run of the Daily Wolf yesterday in case you're wondering. So you're going to actually get data there and stuff. So I'm theoretically prepped. Forty-one percent, we had Ethereum ETF inflows actually outpacing Bitcoin ETF inflows, which was a very interesting scenario. And we have clearly a risk-gone environment with stocks back up to nearly all-time highs and people shrugging off any concerns about the war. So I don't know if there's much signal there or not, but we are having at least days here where we see the broader crypto market performing either in line with Bitcoin or even outperforming. So I thought that that was really interesting.

But the story of the week, and there is no other story. We're going to dance to skate to one song and one song only. Lady Humps by Michael Saylor. STRC breaks record again, raises $1.57 billion buys $14,834 Bitcoin in one day. Rout row. Those are crazy numbers. So we were reporting, obviously, on Monday. Now it's a rounding error when Michael Saylor buys Bitcoin and announced it on a Monday, right? He does the little orange dot thing on Sunday, and it's super cute.

And then we all do big, bold headlines. Michael Saylor buys Bitcoin again, which is super lame. And then the next day, we were either really impressed that he bought over a billion or really disappointed at how poor he is because he only bought four or 500 million. Like have some fun staying poor. He only bought 400 million in Bitcoin last week. Loser. But now he seems to have found the infinite money glitch.

I hate that term. It makes me feel like the top is in and that we are all exceptionally euphoric. But here we are with the infinite money glitch. So last week, he bought almost 14,000 Bitcoin, 13,800 and something. It was about a billion dollars. Worth. Then on Monday, we saw STRC volumes absolutely skyrocketing. I think they have $1.1 billion in volume on Monday, which at a 65 percent rate. So basically, they can tap the ATM at 65% of the money earned to buy Bitcoin. That was about 7,800 Bitcoin. Now, yesterday, he bought 14,834,

which is more than all of last week, which was a billion dollars last week, which is $1.57 billion just yesterday added to the 7,800 the day before. I mean, we're talking about right now a floor of one to 1.5 billion seemingly only increasing that we know will be bought every single day in real time and completely trackable, right? I mean, SDRC, ATM tracker and Bitcoin preferred equity digital credit dashboard. This just runs throughout the day right here. I was showing it actually when I was doing our test for the Daily Wolf yesterday, and it was absurd.

I think at noon, this was over 600 million in. volume. So two and a half hours of trading. It was over 600. You can see right here this week, 23,934 Bitcoin, with proceeds of 1.76 billion on 2.74 billion in volume. I mean, I just want you to breathe it in, you know, take a deep breath, enjoy the beautiful smell of Bitcoin in the morning, not an APOM. But it's incredible. Like, if Sailor can keep a lot of Bitcoin. You know, keep this up. If STRC is just starting to reach its potential, it's hard to even fathom how much Bitcoin will be bought and guaranteed to be bought and transparently bought. If you need a reason for us pumping up to $75,000, even outside of all the macro conditions and stuff, I mean,

this should be it. Right. Yes, buying a billion dollars worth of Bitcoin is a, it's a fraction of the volume of a total day of trading. But when you have an asset with supply decreasing and transparent demand increasing, the number should go up. And it's not just the 24,000 Bitcoin that he's bought over the past two days. It's the narrative that gets other people confident to buy Bitcoin because they see that Michael Saylor is transparently buying Bitcoin that is the narrative. Right. I mean, we've had massive ETF inflows this week. We had Morgan Stanley launched their Bitcoin ETF last week, was successful. Now we have STRC buying everything that's not nailed down. I mean, I'm going to be honest, man, this Bitcoin thing might catch on and you might want to buy some before Michael Saylor gets it all.

Have you ever seen the movie Spaceballs? I've seen it. You've seen it, right? Do you know at the end, they have this humongous spaceship called Mega Maid, and they go to take all the air from this planet and Mega Maid's just huge vacuum sucking it? That's Michael Saylor with the Bitcoin right now. And hopefully he, like Mega Maid, will not go from stuff to blow. if you remember that movie, Megamade. She's gone from suck to blow.

Okay, the next story we have here is very much in line with this one, and I'm glad I get to talk about it because I'm going to have to talk about it a lot because it's Goldman Sachs and its ETFs, and once again, we have another entity that's not necessarily, specifically an ETF issuer. Goldman Sachs files for Bitcoin ETF,

income ETF in crypto push. I'm really better at talking than I am at reading. Honestly, I need new. contacts or something. The bank is moving deeper into crypto with a Bitcoin ETF that generates income by selling options on Bitcoin-linked funds following BlackRock's push into similar yield-focused products. So in case you don't remember what actually happened last week, we had Morgan Stanley, who is not specifically a ETF issuer, issuing and launching a Bitcoin spot ETF that's exactly like the BlackRock

and Fidelity and Bitwise ones that we've seen before because they have 15 to 17,000 advisors out there and they'd rather be selling their own Bitcoin product than the product of their competitors like BlackRock and Fidelity. So they launched this Bitcoin Spot ETF. It was priced, I think, 10 Bips below the competition. Bips is a really fancy way to say much cheaper. So, you know, 10 bibs below basically no fees. They're not going to make much money on it, but they're undercutting the competition and guaranteeing that they have a product of their owned to sell. Well, BlackRock recently announced that they will be doing a similar Bitcoin income ETF and now Goldman Sachs, who until now, has not been really a part of the ETF race.

David Solomon, their CEO, has been way too busy DJing in Abiza to care about this. But he has said he owns a bit of Bitcoin that he's watching it. And now they're going to create this product. This is interesting because it's really a story about the financialization of Bitcoin, Right. We've seen the kind of same trajectory that we've seen with other assets with Bitcoin. First, it's completely dismissed. It's nonsense. Think about gold before there were ETF. So you had to literally trade physical gold. Complicated. Well, Bitcoin got an ETF. We saw that it was the most successful ETF of launch of all time. BlackRock itself was the most successful. And that was just one of nine or ten. When you looked at them all together, nothing has ever come close to touching this. And so the next step was, to start to offer options. And we saw it with limited contracts. Now they've basically opened the floodgates and you see that option trading action on IBIT

is absolutely astounding, mostly funds that are doing complicated hedging strategies and earning yield, things like this. And then the next step is utilizing those options to create new products that basically have this actively managed for you. So what you're getting here is Goldman Sachs files for Bitcoin Income, ETF, and Crypto Push, which is Goldman Sachs saying, we're going to create a product where you can earn a yield,

and your upside may be a bit more capped than the upside of Bitcoin, but you have guaranteed income that's coming from it. Think of a dividend stock or something like that. Right? And so the story here is that this is being fully financialized and they're creating all the products that your traditional investor would want to limit their downside and guarantee some sort of income. But what's even more interesting here is if you really think about this,

one of the biggest arguments against our beloved Bitcoin was that it was boring and it doesn't have a yield and there's no way to really utilize it in the financial system. And that criticism was coming from, I don't know, people like Goldman Sachs. Right. And now once again capitulating, bowing to the crypto gods and getting on their knees, Mega Made, and joining the crypto circus. So now we have the one and only Goldman Sachs jumping. into the pond with their own ETF and it's a different

new and novel kind of ETF. Of course, I was talking about this before but Bitcoin ETFs bought 5,530 Bitcoin losers. Do you see what Sailor did? Losers. Worth 471 million. BlackRock's Ibit bought 200870

Bitcoin extending its buying streak to five days. I mean, we're seeing massive inflows right now. Clearly there's bullishness in the market. I think we have a chicken and an egg problem generally with how we analyze this. Because I think a lot of people say we saw inflows, that's what drove the price up. And a lot of people say the price went up, that's why we saw inflows, because those investors are obviously following the price and getting excited when they see

it going up. But yeah, we also had Morgan Stanley. They're gathering some fees here and buying a little bit of Bitcoin, but it's much, much less than the others. But still, as I said, it's a huge signal that Morgan Stanley is now even in this market in my very, very humble opinion. So what do we got next on the docket today? We have the Bitcoin Risk Index just hit zero. Selling pressure is exhausted. Now weak hands exit, strong hands absorb before the next move begins. Okay.

I mean, these things are all true until they're not, in my very humble opinion. I'm not going to do the thing where we pretend that there's nobody left to sell. Because every time we talk about how there's nobody left to sell, somebody dumps massively, and they're like, insiders are selling whale wallets no longer want to be in crypto. Adam back is Satoshi, and he's unlocked the keys. Right. I mean, we know that this is only as good as the last five minutes. So I'm going to go ahead and skip that one.

But what we do have here is some big news from our good friends over at What's Cracken. Where is it? Come on, get on there. Repto exchange Cracken confirms it is confidentially filed for an IPO. Dude, this is not confidential. What are we doing here? Elon Musk, who's been planning to go public with SpaceX Confidentially files for SpaceX IP. Can we get rid of the word confidentially here when we're literally reporting it in the news right now?

But either way, Cracking co-CEO Argent said Tuesday that the crypto exchange is confidentially filed for U.S. initial public offering confirming CNBC's previous reporting. The crypto exchange's valuation has fallen to about $13.3 billion from $20 billion reported in November per reports. Less than a month ago, Cracken froze its IPO plans amid a crypto winter that pushed the price of Bitcoin down to 40%. So, I mean, listen, we had this kind of Goldilocks moment for companies in crypto to go public. And now I think they're kind of waiting for the next opportunity for that to happen, which is likely coming. But we've had a lot of news around Cracken, and I find it really compelling because, line with this same story, we have this one right here, which says, oh, you know, I can look at this.

I'm going to do this one. Oh, I'm not formatted for that. I'm going to fix it in real time. Is it fixing? That looks better. I like this view. Justin, German stock exchange operator Doucheborsse buys 200 million stake in crack in crypto exchange. I'm fluent in German, so don't at me. That's what it says. I see that. But this is not to some random company investing in Cracken, right? Deutsche is the exchange operator of the German stock exchange, much like ICE, not the Minnesota ice, the other ice, the good ice. Well, I guess depending on your political leanings, all ice is good.

But the intercontinental exchange that controls the New York Stock Exchange. We recently saw that OKX had an investment and gave a board seat to ICE. now we have 200 million going into Cracken. So this is the people actually operating the exchange. This isn't like a hedge fund or a VC that's doing this.

So it really is absolutely big news. And this is where the confusion about the valuation comes in. Because at the end of 2025, Citadel let around for Cracken. I think it was December 2025. They valued it with a $200 million investment at $20 billion.

This is $200 million, giving 1.5% to the duches at a $13.3 billion valuation. Right? So yes, it's a repricing, but Citadel, that round was just money. This is literally getting money from the people who built and run the exchange in Germany. So obviously there's a much bigger play here as a strategic partner. So I think it's a bit disingenuous to say that Cracken has taken a down round effectively to make this. happen. So I find this like all just so incredibly interesting and I'm hoping that we'll get the market hot again and crack and we'll be able to go public. So we had a lot of very successful IPOs

obviously in crypto. Bito's kind of first circle bullish, blah-l-l-l-l yada, yada, yada, yada, yada, yada, yada, yada, yada, right? But most of them, or at least specifically treasury companies, kind of did the old Birch-Khalifa chart pattern. Well, up one side, down the other. if maybe a Christmas treat, depending on your religious leanings. So I'm hoping that we can actually see some sustained bullishness from some of the future IPOs that are not in that FOMO hype market because we obviously saw the Bitcoin treasury companies went up, down, and then went below the floor that they started at. Right. And we definitely don't want that for the next round of IPOs and offerings that we have

in our space. I will say, though, I'm a bit concerned if these IPOs have to align with SpaceX and Open AI and everyone else, we're talking about multi-trillion dollar IPOs. I mean, how is there possibly enough liquidity in the market? Right? We've seen it for years in crypto. You guys have experienced this where we have a washing machine of capital, right? You have money going in one side, coming out the other, into Bitcoin, Alcoins, Bitcoin, all coins.

You can't tell me that there's going to be, you know, $1.5 trillion in new capital for the SpaceX ICO, and that money is not going to come out of other tech or somewhere else. It has to. right so if all of that money is flowing and going into these new IPOs where's the money going to be left for our beloved crypto companies I just don't see how there's going to be enough liquidity in this particular stock market for all of these to sustain but I would love to be proven wrong and maybe we'll be down the road now there's another story here that I find just mind blowing mind blowing right and that story is this The 7.84% stake FTX owned in Anthropic will be worth $62.72.2 billion. The total market cap of Coinbase today is $48.7 billion.

FTC's bankruptcy estate liquidated the entire stake for just $1.3 billion in 2024. This is on the news that Anthropic gets VC funding offers at $800 billion valuation, which is like half of SpaceX. I mean, not that impressive. What's $800 billion in a trillionaires world? Really? But, I mean, just think about that, right? So Sam Bankman-Fried is a gratuitous scammer. He's a fraud. He deserves everything that came to him, maybe more. I know he's trying to get a pardon, but that is not happening on anybody's watch around here. But to his or his company's credit, all that money that they were stealing from us and losing by leverage trading on the other side with Alameda research. Some of that money actually flowed into exceptional investments like Solana in the first rounds and early investment in Anthropic. So what this speaks to is that,

A, if they could have been patient, I know that that's not the way bankruptcy works, but if they could have been patient and thought about when to sell instead of liquidating the second that they had the access, FTCS creditors could have been made whole plus many multiples, right? This is much bigger valuation if they sold now than the hole that was being filled in total. What was it, $30, $35 billion? We all know that in the bankruptcy process, even if you are made quote unquote whole, it's based on the price when the bankruptcy was filed. So it was at the bottom of the market. For Voyager creditors like me, they were selling our Bitcoin at $18,000, they had just held on for another month or two. Everyone would have been made whole if they had

held on for six months to a year. They could have sold Bitcoin at double, triple, and nobody would have lost anything. But the bankruptcy lawyers just need to get their money. And depending on the timing, they just liquidate the assets the second that they get them. And I get that. It could have gone lower. But man, it's brutal when you see this in hindsight and know that all of the money lost in this industry between FTX and Voyager and BlockFi and Celsius likely could have completely, with a little bit of patience or just less unlucky timing, everybody could have gotten all their money back. Absolutely, absolutely brutal. So I was intending to, you know, dive in here with Peter about the macro and we've covered everything that I intended to. So what you guys get, oh, Peter,

where'd you come from? You know, having some travel issues today. I mean, Bentonville, Arkansas, and had some travel issues, but I finally made it on. That's not a real place. That's Arkansas. I got you. It's the other Kansas. Yes, exactly. So listen, I didn't even, I didn't even see you here. I'm glad that you are. We talked about almost all the crypto stuff, but this gives us an opportunity to talk about the non-crypto stuff, which I think we can all honestly say is driving the markets. I mean, I guess we can give an Iran war update. I think that everybody's getting minute-to-minute updates. There's some hope, I think, that there's going to be peace, which has probably been driving markets higher. Do you think that that hope is valid? How do you look at this now,

and the generals, more importantly, that you're talking to? How is this being viewed? Yeah, so I think when I talked to our generals and admirals and we've got some retired CIA people, I think they're all agreed that the best thing to do would be to prosecute this war to some sort of real conclusion, where we ensure that Iran does not have the capacity to nuclear weapons ever. You know, pretty much the consensus would be that if any country were ever to use a nuclear weapon, it would be Iran. They've been pretty vocal about it. They have done terrorism in the past. So I think that's what we'd like to see. And I think, though unfortunately, we're in this battle, is the U.S. public willing to, kind of deal with higher costs, affordability, pressure from the global economy to take that time.

And I don't think we will. So I think we're going to wind up with kind of some half-baked sort of solution. What does a half-baked solution look like? Because I think if we're just calling balls and strikes, before the war, I guess we had at least an open strait of Hormuz, right? So whether there's 40 chess going on and the whole intention was to close the straits, I've heard that theory and that make people come get their oil from us. I guess that's one theory, but we had an open straight. We certainly had a dangerous Iran, but as I'm looking at it now, we have the Itolla's son in power, so we haven't really canceled that out. The United States is notoriously bad at regime change anyways. Even when we do get the guys, we don't necessarily account for the power vacuum or what comes in the next 10 years.

So what have we gained here? Because what I read, and I could be completely wrong, I'm going literally just based on news reports and comments by Vance and such, is that now we're negotiating how long until they can enrich, enrich uranium. of not if they can. Yeah, that seems to be, we're almost back to the status quo. I think the Israelis talk about it's quite crude, but they talk about mowing the lawn. So when their enemies kind of, you know, rise up a little bit, they come in, they fight with them, they take back their abilities and go back.

And I fear that that's where we come up with something, where we're almost back to a Jukoa type situation, maybe it's strong than Jukhoa, but that same sort of idea. And Iran will kind of possibly be in charge of the strait. And I think you are going to see a real shift in how the Middle East looks at the U.S., all these things. So, again, I think if we had the conviction to prosecute this to the end, we really do have the possibility of a phenomenal outcome where you do kind of eventually eradicate the IRGC. You get someone in Iran in charge who's more comfortable. I don't think we have a willpower to do that. That's, I think, we didn't get there yet.

I mean, is that fair to say? Yeah, I think that's very fair to say. And again, I think, you know, we talk, there's two sides. So you've got the religious side, but the IRGC, to us, it's almost think about feudal lords. And these people have risen in power. They tend to have their families intermarry, so they're very connected, right? This is a very tight-knit group. They're also well aware that if they were to capitulate, the Iranian people would probably kill them.

So they are not popular at all, you know, one of our generals have been using the term, it's kind of crude. But again, I think makes sense. He's like, Iran is willing to, you know, massacre. their own people on an industrial scale. Like we have not seen anything like that. They're keeping their people down. So I feel like we get back to maybe slightly better than the status quo, but nothing's over.

And I feel that that's probably a weakness if we do that. What was the point? What was the point of all this? You know, I think at the side that we see, and I think how we maybe got into this was, we were already putting a lot of military equipment in place in the Middle East. And, you know, some of our CIA people, one of whom was the director, director, deputy of counterintelligence in the CIA.

He's like, we possibly saw a once-in-generation opportunity where they had 40-some odd, you know, very senior leaders in without many civilian casualties. So they're very low risk of civilian casualties. And we already had a lot of equipment in place to defend ourselves. We probably got a little bit overconfident with what had happened in Venezuela, how quickly and smoothly that went. that was like overnight, everything changed. And I think we're a little bit, maybe caught by surprise, that things did not change overnight. Our troops weren't quite in position.

We didn't have all the troops necessarily. We needed over there to fully enforce it. So, again, the ceasefire to me, it would be interesting to see whether this is Trump just delaying until we get the boxer and more troops into position to put one more round of pressure on Iran, or really he's just done and wants to move on to other things. Peter, listen, I see the comments,

I'm sure we're going to start being called TDS or something for not saying that like we've won World War 7 or wherever we at. Can you just please like reiterate to people who you are and what you do? We're not just kicking around ideas here that you're literally on a like running a business on a daily calls with generals and admirals for the last many decades. Yeah. So I'm with Academy Securities and we have about 40 retired generals, admirals, CIA, FBI. NSA operatives, a few from Europe as well. So we've got kind of a broad-based approach. We now talk to, obviously, a lot of investment managers,

but we also spend a lot of time with corporations, including more and more C-sweets. And we're kind of advising them on what we see on the geopolitical side. And what we can do, I think, very effectively, is our generals and admirals can assess situations, what they would do, what they would like to see done, what they think should be done, and then we see how that plays out in real time.

And I think, you know, again, militarily, we are dominating. and we're doing everything right. The question really becomes, do we have the will to kind of continue to dominate while we have affordability issues? And I think there are some concerns that in and around how we work with NATO and things, in a typical thing,

we would approach these countries in advance, right? I believe it's ABO, you know, we look for airspace basis, order of operations, and we prepare those in advance of attack. That clearly did not happen right now. Now, I think our NATO members are not doing maybe what they could to be supportive. They've got their own concerns.

Maybe they're also feeling a little bit myth that Trump did not approach them initially. But yeah, we've been excited. I think, again, the military is performing very well. The question is, is this something purely through military, especially airstrikes only? Can we achieve the changes that we want? The military conditions are really to be set up so the politicians can come in and get what they want. And it's unclear that we have that line right now. Okay.

So I guess to our audience, the market side is the most. compelling. Obviously, we unpack it daily, certainly on macro Mondays, but we've had oil all over the place. Like, every day, you know, I think we're now testing all-time highs practically. I haven't looked at the market open in the last minute, but, you know, we were just a few percent off the all-time high once again. Another market V-shape recovery, just like we saw last April with the tariffs. I think there's a general sentiment that nothing can ever go down and there's no such thing as bad news, right? And we have Bitcoin, of course, in the middle of all of that. And I unpack it. Pat kind of how sailors buying it. But I mean, just what your broad strokes? How are you viewing

markets right now and what's likely to come if those are the conclusions that we get? So I'm still a little bit cautious on the broad market. One, you know, I think this affordability issue is real. I think it's hurting spending domestically. I do think globally we've got some, you know, spending issues. Having said that, you know, my main theory for the last year continues to play out. And that's what we've been calling pro seck or production for security. And every country is going to have a little bit more almost vertically integrated nations. And I think everything that's going on in Iran right now forces the whole world to do that. You need to produce more of your own electricity.

You need to make your own rare earths and critical minerals, right? We've been using up these missiles that cost $5 million apiece. We will rebuild them slowly. The problem is a lot of them, you know, they require germanium. Most of that comes from China. So I think anything along those lines, Intel, for example, has still been my favorite stock. Last year and this year it's been my, you know, if I had to pick one stock, I'd pick Intel. I continue to like that.

Chip industry is going to be crucial. We need to have domestic chips. So I think this all just accelerates what we're seeing in this kind of reindustrialization of the U.S. We're seeing areas like the Great Lakes do well. So I think when you're looking at commercial real estate and we're getting this shift and we're reindustrializing areas that can produce electricity cheaply are important, areas that have access to fresh water, attractive. So that's the flip side of all of this. And again, so I would argue I do not have TDS. I think we've done a pretty good job of analyzing what he does right and wrong.

And this reindustrialization is crucial, and you're seeing that slowly occur. And I would say one thing that maybe it's a bit disappointing is I feel everything goes through Trump in this administration. I think is we can pretty clear, right? When he's on crypto, he's all over crypto, and then he moves to something else. I feel the Iran war has been such a time sink. He's not dedicating his time and focus to smelting and all the other things that are critical. So hopefully we get back to that a little bit.

I just don't understand how everything just goes up all the time. I also don't understand how everything that used to be the flight to safety like gold. I mean, I understand. Don't get me wrong. I just think it's insane that we see the volatility that we used to see in the furthest corners of the alt market now and the largest assets on the planet. You know, like silver having 40% down days is not something that was necessarily on my bingo card and is usually not a symbol of a healthy economy. No, and you can see almost like these interday momentum, right? Whatever direction it starts, all of a sudden you see the zero date expiration option.

pile into it and you see almost this force gamma squeeze every day, even in some of the biggest stocks, which again makes no sense. We live in this world of what we call full liquidity. I think it's fake, right? It looks like there's a lot of liquidity because the others are sitting there splitting out really tight markets. You can trade stocks to two, whatever, three decimal places. But the reality is it's all the same people kind of capture the same flows and direct

markets. And I just feel right now stop loss trading is kind of the biggest driver. So anyone who's in the wrong position, it's just awful. You know, we said the software sector breakdown to multi-year lows last Friday. It looked bleak. All of a sudden, boom, swoosh, right? It's straight back up as everyone gets cut short. So I think you have to be really small and nimble in this market or just tied away as you do.

I think you'll put your things into something and not look at them because I think the day-to-day is more and more noise than anything real. It's so much noise. I mean, you know, you have the Mike McGlone camp on one side saying just buy TLT, buy bonds. I can't get there as a Bitcoin or mentally. I just buy Bitcoin. I just wonder how your average person looks at this market and says, do I want to participate in SpaceX's $1.5 trillion IPO? Or do I want to buy Nvidia or one of these things at these massive valuations?

What are you safely confident dollar cost averaging into right now? And by the way, that same fear in thinking has pushed the market up 2X since people started thinking that way. So when I've been over allocating a little bit, I actually like solar again. I think Trump will ultimately have to accept solar as part of our energy growth. We're going to do coal. We're going to do natural gas, but we will do solar and batteries. I'm a little bit optimistic too on Europe, whether it's BP, Shell, Total.

I think Europe's going to finally get the joke that they actually need to invest in their own resources. We've also seen companies like Nokia and Erickson do a little bit better. Even when our, you know, AI stocks, I think you're going to see Europe say, we need to develop more of our own AI. We need to use more of our own chips. So everything that I just said that's going on in the U.S., I think we got a head start on those things, Europe's going to start doing it.

So look to invest in anything that's kind of electricity production, chips, and more domestic or in Europe. I would avoid, you know, the Chinese sector because I think this friction is ongoing and whatever else is going on. There's definitely every step that Trump is taking has some level of confrontation with China and whether that's on purpose or just we're now

the two big behemoths kind of fighting with each other, that's a reality. But again, I think you want a decent amount of cash. You want to be able to take and choose, you know, hey, this is feed up. Everyone hates it. I want to own it. Ooh, everyone loves this. It makes no sense to me.

I'm scratching my head. I want to sell a little bit. So you have to be nimble in this environment. Yeah, it is interesting because the market as a whole is trading your all-time highs, but there are a lot of sectors and specific things that maybe are way undervalued still, even in a market like that. But to your point, it's, you know, crypto guys, you look around and you go, there's maybe three or five of these millions of things that I would want to own, right?

And I think stock investors are starting to feel that way to some degree too. Like what 10 good ideas can I have and ignore the rest of the broader market that's, you know, all over the place? So in terms of stocks, I still like Intel. I think that's just going to continue to do well. Maybe I did sell a little bit this past week because it's, you know, hit above 60, but I will dollar cost average into that. And if I miss some of the highs, I might wind up filing back into that.

I think companies that are on the electricity generation side, some of the nuclear, I like those. Again, kind of the commodity stocks, but again, not so much the extraction, but those that have the ability to do processing and refining. So again, I want to revisit something like MP, which the U.S. government bought into, you know, my understanding is they're actually making some progress on in terms of their magnets. That's going to be a crucial thing. You know, go back and look at some of the companies the U.S. government bought into, which entails one of them. That's where I want to be. I think you are going to get support. The government's going to direct traffic.

One thing again, this is probably subtle, but U.S. defense contractors are now being rewarded in many cases with seven-year contracts instead of two-year contracts. And part of that is to encourage them to build out their missile and production facilities. So the government is taking steps behind the scene to really drive this manufacturing change. So I like that. Again, I think you kind of want to own some real estate. If you can find a good way through a meet more in the Great Lakes region and a little bit away from some of the regions that have done so well for the last five years. I think that all makes perfect sense. How do you feel about Bitcoin here?

I actually like it here. I think you're seeing, again, we kind of stabilized through this. For better or for worse, I think it got legitimized when Iran talked about, you know, wanting Bitcoin. I don't think there's any way they would hide their Bitcoin from the U.S. At some point, the NSA will figure these things out. So, yeah, I feel like for progress. You know, kind of back to what you were talking about earlier, I'd like to see the crack in IPOs. We're definitely involved in some of that.

And I think we want to see some of these other IPOs come to market and make it so it's a more broad investment scheme. And then, you know, you look at space. That's probably the biggest conversation we're having. We talked to our geopolitical intelligence group. We're talking assamander's like, how do we get involved in drones? How do we get involved in space?

And it's awful because there really is no public way to do it that isn't an incredible high valuations. That's space. You have to find private companies. It's going to be so overvalued. What do I know? Maybe. So one last thing I didn't.

So I think ship building is going to be a part of this. I think you can look at even at companies like a brunt with who make small boats. And again, air drones kind of, you know, drones. When we think of drones, you think you need little flying ones, right? But you're seeing in Iran, the surface drones are also very important. Taiwan, surface drones. They're very, very difficult to attack because they have almost no profile. So that's another area. I think trying to figure out what's, not just in the drone space with the flying ones that everyone was thinking about, but also who's going to do the shipbuilding. That's another area. This administration is very focused on.

the military needs these. And I can safely say, I think, again, the military has been looking at drones coming into this. One of our generals, General Teta, has gone on to be undersecretary of war before he went through the confirmation process. We spent a lot of time. He was all over drones at the time.

And sometimes DC and the military are very hard to move along. Times of war changed that very dramatically. So I think we will see an escalation and the adoption of new technologies and we almost have to barbell ourselves. We have all these exquisite weapons, which work incredibly well if we're doing a peer sort of competition. Clearly, the asymmetric warfare does not work well.

I would expect that the U.S. will rush out very sophisticated, very good, relatively cheap weapon systems in the very near future. So trying to play into that's good. And again, that's going to be some smaller companies. I think benefit. Probably too many are private, but that's where we're looking. I guess a final question. We have the Clarity Act back on the docket sort of this week.

I don't believe it has any chance personally. So I don't want to talk about it specifically, but I think obviously the main topic now, if they get past stable coin yield, is going to be the Trump family involvement in the crypto industry. Seems to be the bigger sticking point. How do you view that? I mean, we have new news today from World Liberty Financial. I unpacked it the other day. Now they're looking to unlock massive amounts of tokens, but primarily for the same insiders. So it's kind of an interesting story.

But a lot of backlash against them for their actions in the crypto space and not being traded. transparent about it. Do you think that this will play out in the elections? You think it's even meaningful when there's a war going on at this point? Is this just an inside crypto narrative? Do you have admirals calling you asking what's happening with the liquidity pools, World Liberty Financial? Probably not. No, I think this is definitely probably more of a crypto thing, though. Again, you know, the president could come out with these two social telling people not to, you know, bet on markets or use insider trading. So I think it's attracted enough attention across, you know, whether it's

Poly markets, Kalshi, you know, Wall Street, for example, the SECs now come out that, you know, Wall Street people are not supposed to have accounts on polymarket or Kalshi, right? So you're seeing a bit of a crackdown, so maybe the president will follow that. Again, it's probably going to be a bit depending. He really feels that this is moving the needle with the, you know, for broad public. And I think it is, not maybe so much the crypto insider trading, whatever you want to call it, or, you know, how they're behaving on the crypto side. But some of that behavior seems to have played out in regular markets.

So I think there is a pushback. So maybe this is the time he steps back and plays nice to let this goes through because they will benefit. The family is going to do incredibly well, even if they're just playing with the rules that Congress is trying to set. They've already done exceptionally well. I think they're good. I think they've, even at the most cynical view, I think they've extracted so much out

of it. But if they never had to do crypto again, I think the numbers were like it was three times what he made in previous ventures in crypto alone. the last year and a half. Right. And like you say, too, I think crypto seems to be to really be narrowing down to just, you know, the stable coins and then three or four large coins. Bitcoin, like I don't get any enthusiasm whatsoever when we're talking to people about

all the other coins. It's kind of people are trying to figure out who's got use. What are the useful cases? You know, ETH comes up, Bitcoin, Salon. It's a relatively narrow thing. I don't think there's going to be this broad base, you know, into all the alt coins. regardless of what they try and do. You'll get some people flipping that,

but I don't see that being the way of the future. I tend to view. Peter, I'm glad you joined. Thank you for making it from Arkansas. That's how you say it. I'm never giving up on Arkansas. Anyways, it's been a pleasure. I will be back, obviously, tomorrow.

I think we got Eric Baltunis tomorrow. We were supposed to be here last Thursday. It's supposed to be here. I hope your travels are good, and everybody we will see you tomorrow. Thanks, ma'am. Thanks for having. Have a good one.

Bye, everyone. Thank you.