The Wolf Of All Streets - It's A Bull Market | Crypto Town Hall With Raoul Pal, Noelle Acheson, Michael Green, Michael Terpin, Peter Tchir, Dave Weisberger, Joshua Frank & Others

Episode Date: July 4, 2023

Crypto Town Hall is a new daily Twitter Spaces hosted by Scott Melker, Ran Neuner & Mario Nawfal. Every day we discuss the latest news in the crypto and bring the biggest names in the crypto space to share their opinions. ►►OKX Sign up for an OKX Trading Account then deposit & trade to unlock mystery box rewards of up to $60,000!  👉 https://www.okx.com/join/SCOTTMELKER  ►►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   ►►COINROUTES TRADE SPOT & DERIVATIVES ACROSS CEFI AND DEFI USING YOUR OWN ACCOUNTS WITH THIS ADVANCED ALGORITHMIC PLATFORM. SAVE TONS OF MONEY ON TRADING FEES LIKE THE PROS! 👉 http://bit.ly/3ZXeYKd  ►► JOIN THE FREE WOLF DEN NEWSLETTER, DELIVERED EVERY WEEK DAY! 👉https://thewolfden.substack.com/   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.

Mario! Rand! How are you sir? Good man, how's your show? Fantastic. I was just telling Fred how much I hate your life especially after seeing your tweet today. Which one is that?

The tweet today, the one I retweeted. The um... Ah, yeah, look it's not... About you being... Your intention was to show yourself as a hero, as like a hustler working hard. But I'm like, man, this guy has a depressing life. No, it actually wasn't to make it a hero. I'm just like, you know,

when we decided to join up on Twitter Space, it was a massive decision for you because what it means, for those of you who didn't read the tweet, what it means is that I, I mean, I have a one-hour content call every morning, and that's the whole company on the call. And then I prepare for the spaces in the show. It takes me about two to two and a half hours. Then I do a show, which is an hour, and then I do spaces.

So I'm broadcasting for six and a half hours a day. And that means six and a half hours a day, that's before I start actually running the business. For me, every day I start off at negative six and a half hours, and then I start building a business. You're pretty much the same because, Laura, you're on the spaces like, I don't know, six hours a day, seven hours a day. So it's very hard to run a business and be a host at the same time and make content at the same time. But I chose it because I thought

this platform would be amazing. And I think, you know, yesterday, when we get spaces like the one we did yesterday, then it just reinforces why I did it because I think we've built, between you, Scott, and I, we built the biggest daily crypto platform in the world today,

which is, I think, it's a huge feat. You enjoyed the feedback you got after yesterday's space? I got a lot of credit, man. You got a lot of credit. A lot of feedback. I got a lot of journalists calling me, and I got a lot of friends calling me. A lot of them said it was one of the best spaces I've ever heard. And I really enjoyed it, actually.

Actually, you probably probably know you probably felt that I was I was really enjoying that space yeah no it's very rare for you to pay attention for that long

I'll be honest and I'm sure you agree with me you know what I'm talking about because you just lose you lose interest really really quickly but there's something about those spaces

where it's like a personal discussion like I enjoyed the one I got similar feedback to the one with Imran Khan and the reason I got it is that it just became like a personal discussion. Like I enjoyed the one, I got similar feedback to the one with Imran Khan. And the reason I got it is that it just became like a personal chat. Like you're literally sitting on like a coffee table at night

and just having a very sincere discussion. I've had a few of them obviously because I've done so many spaces, but that's the cool thing about spaces. There is no camera, there's no setup. And then people open up a lot more because they feel like, I always use Robert Wolf as an example.bert always says um calls the space a call that guys can i jump on the call

or when's your call or it's a really good call and calls are more personal it's like you're speaking to someone face to face so that's the beauty of of um of um of audio rooms it feels like a one-on-one call and uh and you kind of saw the beauty of it in that space. You know, also, to be honest, like I really like the story. I liked yesterday's story. The reason why I liked yesterday's story is because, yeah, you're dealing with,

in my opinion, an entrepreneur who tried really hard to make money and succeeded. I mean, you know, you take any guy that's taken $20 million and turned it into $5 billion, regardless of whether you like him or don't like him, and regardless of whether he at the end of it succeeded or didn't, at some point, the guy took $20 million and turned it into $5 billion. And that is a huge success. And then listening to how it all collapsed. Now, I know what it's like to lose much less than that. And the fall from grace is hard. It's difficult.

I can't imagine what he went through. Also, to be honest, it was kind of nice to, I respected him for facing such a large audience, which he didn't have to do. And he faced the large audience, which was really good. I agree with all the other credit. This one's pretty lame. Like he's doing it like a year after the incident,

year, year and a half. It's not that hard. He's doing it to shill his new project. So that one I wouldn't take. But I agree with the other two. Correct. When the time was to face the music, was then he was sitting in Bali on the beach.

And again, I'm not saying this to be critical. I'm just kind of being realistic. Would I do the same? Would I face the music? Or would I just let it quiet down? He probably made the right decision letting it quiet down um but i wouldn't give him credit for jumping on now when he has a new exchange yeah i mean yeah i just i like the story a lot you know as you know i'm an investor in the exchange i wish them the best of luck i don't i mean i'm not saying that it's going to work i'm not saying that anyone should invest it's like yeah i wish them the best of luck i really want i'd love to hear the story of how they bounced up again and you

know they've got like good they've got things where they say they're going to make good for the for the old creditors um with no real obligation i i prefer i prefer to have that sentiment like again i i'm i'm i'm tend to be more objective and and a bit less critical but i'm being critical just kind of not only to balance it out but i would say like i'd be more objective and a bit less critical, but I'm being critical just kind of, not only to balance it out, but I would say like, I'd be more empathetic with projects that we're building back in the bear market and they're talking about crunched

and VCs don't give a shit about them because they didn't like, they're the entrepreneurs I tend to admire. These guys are still sitting on a lot of money and they made a lot of money in a very short period of time. I think there's a lot of, what I like the most about the space is how you broke down their entire journey

and more importantly like kind of linked it to the audience on what they can learn because these guys made a fuck ton of money in a short period of time like what are the learning lessons that we can apply ourselves and then what are the lessons to prevent the implosion you guys went through and that's what i like the way you structured it from the beginning of the journey to the implosion, up and down. So that's another point. The lesson is if you fly too close to the sun too fast, you will explode no matter who you are, no matter at what level. I mean, I thought Rand did an absolutely incredible job. I think that, you know, listen, obviously we were all getting endless feedback in the background.

Raoul, hold on. Let me ask Raoul, our special guest today. Let me just jump into it directly. Raoul, what are your thoughts? Did you hear yesterday's space or not? If not, that would kind of be a bummer. Sorry, it's a bummer. I wasn't.

It was one of Rand's better spaces because he really enjoyed it. And it was just a discussion between him and Kyle from Three Hours Capital. But it was probably the deepest conversation, at least that I know of, since the implosion. And it got a bit personal as well. But yeah, it's a shame you didn't joke. Yeah, all stories are complicated. There's one side's narrative, the protagonist's narrative, and then somewhere in the middle is the truth.

And that always makes these, A, very interesting, but also very difficult to know where you lie on the emotional line when you hear stories like that. Do you remember, Raoul, do you remember the witch hunt that we saw back when Three Arrows fell and Luna fell and FTX fell? People were calling for the death of these people and obviously they were receiving death threats. But it was insane times. The amount of animosity and hate towards those people, I'm not saying it's warranted or not warranted, was just mental.

It was such an emotional time, especially when ftx was collapsing yeah but also it didn't as you kind of alluded to they didn't help themselves by kind of fleeing the scene you know there was invest somebody that just didn't stand up and say listen this is what's happened and so i think i agree you know that's what creates anger because look everybody can fail failure is a normal part of life but it's how you fail that's the important part yeah rather i must say i agree with you i mean look then no one's perfect i'm not standing up for them i think cd's got a great approach that he's you know always been very transparent even before the case he becomes transparent so i think what they adopted the other side of it which was

complete silence one thing I did actually quiz Colin I said look you know he said when the whole thing

went down he went and sat on a beach in Bali and I was like I can't imagine just having lost so much money

and then just going to lie on a beach I think if anything I'd lie in a mental institute and if not in a mental institute I'd find yeah I just can't imagine I think the sitting on the beach i think if anything i'd line a mental institute that if one of the mental institute i'd find yeah i just can't imagine i think they're sitting on the beach i think i think i

had my mental the beach is my mental institution exactly it's up time i go to little cayman my house over there walk the beach there's nobody there and some sort of calm comes over you it's a meditative place so yeah i get it i agree with that but if you recall at the time suzu was also tweeting about like lessons learned in zen philosophy of surfing and you see here's my problem i agree with everything that everyone said where my point is that there's still zero remorse for the retail side of it and i get that they're institutional facing and all of that but the fact that they're not cognizant of where that came from and whose money i think at least there has to at some point

i'm gonna yeah i feel bad about i'm gonna push back i'm gonna push back because i think you're emotionally invested because you you had money in origin you're like i'm not i'm not no no i'm not i'm not emotionally invested in our degree event but please do push back okay so i'm gonna i'm gonna push back i'm gonna say look they going to push back. I'm going to say, look, they didn't take money from retail investors. They took money from lenders. Lenders have agreements with retail investors, which are not really their problem. And

the lenders, in my opinion, the lenders here were super negligent and super greedy. And that's got nothing to do with Sue and Kyle. No, I don't agree, Scott. No, no, you don't, Scott. No, no, no. I agree that they are responsible for the losses directly of those people because they simply took money.

What I don't agree with is that they shouldn't at least feel remorseful or feel some connection or something. Even the facilitation, Scott. If you jump... So if someone else is hosting a show and promoting scam projects, you know those are scam projects, you can join as a speaker and bring attention to it and say, hey, I'm just a speaker. And I'm there to talk about a specific point that if I'm bringing attention to a scammer, that's not my problem. And obviously, that's not a direct comparison, but I'm saying that they played a role in the mess.

And he frankly, yeah. I mean, he literally was like, yeah, we were lending to Celsius Voyager these hedge these hedge funds. Right? That's what he said. You know those are not hedge funds. And also, to be honest, the reason why I'm sticking up specifically on this point is I'm saying what we got out of it yesterday and until we hear anything different is they didn't do anything fraudulent or scammy. They just proved true. That one I agree with as well. Yeah. But that's it. Go ahead, Raoul. Yeah, but I'll also miss it.

I want to get Raoul's final thoughts on it before we get into the discussion. We saw very similar early in my career back in 1997-8 was the collapse of long-term capital. And I've drawn this parallel many times is long-term capital were the biggest client of everybody on Wall Street. And when somebody is so big, you need to ask the questions is what the hell are they doing? And the leverage that they use to employ their strategies like three hours capital was obscene and when something went wrong the whole thing unraveled and it unraveled the entire financial system and the federal reserve had to come in and cut rates what was interesting is on real vision we had victor hergani who's a lovely guy who was one of the founders of long-term capital zero remorse um and also um you know john merriweather who set up long-term capital, zero remorse.

And also, you know, John Merriweather, who set up long-term capital, then set up another fund afterwards with kind of zero remorse, even though it did hurt a lot of people. It's also kind of a function of financial markets, where you have winning trades and losing trades. It's weird. Again, I don't think it's right, but it's not. I don't think it's weird i don't again i don't think it's right but it's not i don't think it's their fault um yes their fault is they should never have used the leverage that they did and it really is the fault of the uh of the c5 platforms for using leverage in the way that they

did it's the fault it's the fault of the c5 plan and the system as a whole what's the fault of the regulators for not having regulation in place to not allow these people to be that liberal. That always annoys me, not with you, Rand, with crypto in general, is like when regulators come in during a bull market, like, hey, leave us alone. Let us do our thing. We know what we're doing. Don't ruin it for us.

And then when the market crashes, like, hey, where are you? You're the reason the market crashed. I'm not referring to you, Rand. I'm just referring to the general narrative that's happened in 2017, 2019. But let's... I was wondering what would be a pivot to the actual topic. Yeah, we're about to now. Let's talk about today's topic.

And I think a good place to start with today's topic is I just finished my show. And I did the show very simply saying, you know, we're in a raging bull market. You can choose to look for reasons why we're not. And you can choose to talk about this recession that may or may not come in Q4. Or you can just accept the fact that we're in a raging bull market and position your portfolio accordingly. And I did my show today about talking about just accepting the fact that we're in the bull market and just position yourself accordingly. And this bull market is going to be very different from

the previous bull markets. And I believe that Raoul shares the same sentiment, I think. Raoul, am I right? Raoul Pennery Very much. And I shared that same sentiment over what I think was the bottling period, the end of crypto winter, which started in June after the three hours capital and Luna, and then was kind of confirmed in November with FTX and ETH not making a new low. A bunch of the indicators that I look at, which is forward-looking liquidity indicators, starting to turn higher crypto i find tends to be a leading asset as opposed to a lagging asset so it along with technology stocks tend to

lead uh the cyclical bull market coming out of these kind of negative cycle episodes i'd noticed that it that it kind of kissed the long-term uptrends. Things were kind of two standard deviations oversold. This is the monthly kind of log channel. So everything was in place. Now, the narrative has remained negative most of the way through, but that's pretty normal, right? It's the wall of fear.

That's the first part of a bull market, which we might call crypto spring, is when there's the denial phase. The PTSD. The poor way. That's the PTSD phase. Yeah. The PTSD phase is people can't accept the fact that we're in a bull market

because we're so badly beaten in the bear market. That's right. And, you know, if you look at many of these tokens of the major stuff that I focus on, they're up over 100% from the lows. Okay. 100% in crypto is kind of 20% in equity terms. That kind of, you you know because the difference in volatility that's pretty much in line with what's happening in the nasdaq which is also a massively

hated market that goes up every single day because people don't want to believe it because they're trying to trade macro data on the today when actually it was all pricing in the past and i've tried to spend a lot of time explaining to people who don't see it, is there's relationships between assets and business cycles. And we found that most things, like the NASDAQ, priced in a full recession last year by November,

a full and deep recession. So therefore, if it's already priced it in, then the marginal rate of change has to be more positive. And rate of change drives markets and it's driven positive. So I'm just, you know, I'm just in the basic buy and hold mode. And, you know, if I get liquidity and stuff and other than that, I don't do anything. So I must say, you know, you've been on my show a few times and I've honored your stuff.

I've actually just recently, I'm a subscriber to your Real Vision platform. By the way, just for anyone who's listening, we will post a link to Raoul's channels, but it's probably the best subscription that you can make is to subscribe to Real Vision and to Raoul's other platforms. I've been following the platforms. Raoul's 100% right that he did actually call the recession. And I think that that's the main point here. The main point here is that I think the market is seeing right through this potential recession. So yes, we may have a recession in Q4, maybe, maybe not, maybe it's going to be mild, but the market's already seeing right through that because the market doesn't work two quarters forward. The market actually works a couple of

years forward. Now, one of the things that I spoke about in my show, and I'd love to hear what you think about it. What you think about it. I listened to everything that you said. I think the one thing that the market is really starting to price in, you can see it in the NASDAQ, is the market is starting to price in AI. And what I

likened it to on my show was I said AI is one of the biggest revolutions that we've seen in our generation. It's probably as big as no electricity and then electricity and stuff like that. I think the effects of AI, I think the market is looking at this and going, we've scratched the surface of AI, and we're realizing how much more efficient and how much more productive it makes the economy.

And I think what's going on, if you look at the NASDAQ up 50% this year, I think what the market is telling you is that we're in the middle of a technological revolution. And whether or not there's a recession in Q3 or Q4 actually doesn't even matter. Again, all of these assets were down like crypto. gross end of tech was down 80 percent last year it was priced in last year so all we're seeing now is the rebound off the low the big companies yeah they're making all-time highs and that should get people to pay attention i think ai is the meme of this particular bull market but it really is the ongoing outperformance of technology versus other equity assets. And that's been an observed trend for a significant period of time now.

And that makes sense because in a world of limited growth, you want to own things that grow because they're scarcer. And technology is growing because it's endless reinvention of itself every technology bull market has a different narrative to it and the narrative of this one is ai but i think it will also be ev i think it will also be probably robotics um there's a whole bunch of mega narratives that i call the exponential age that are all coming into play at the same time. So, you know, there is a possibility, probability that this ends up being a kind of spectacular bubble style market because the narrative is so powerful. Hold on. That is some reflexivity is important.

Raoul and Rand, before kind of touching on AI or moving on, you're both very bullish. And I agree, like I've agreed with most of what you said, especially the fact that markets are forward-looking. It's crazy how people keep forgetting that. It's insane. But then my question is that the markets are forward-looking based on what we know and what we expect. What are some things that are not expected that could change your entire outlook

well i think the unexpected i mean mara i think the unexpected is you get another black swan event you could have another code not to that extreme yeah so i think these are extreme these are extremes or these are issues like what is something that so so let's say you don't expect interest rates to rise any further you expect inflation to fall what are some of these expectations that are a bit shaky and that could change you know could there be more dominoes to fall could there be more cracks in the banking system look i'm gonna i'm gonna i'm gonna pass this to robert i want to pass it to you in the form of a question so i think for me the rate hiking cycle is pretty much down there maybe Maybe one rate hike and maybe, maybe, maybe, maybe, maybe two.

But as far as rate hikes for inflation to fight the inflation, I think both inflation are a thing of the past. Rate hikes and inflation are now both a thing of the past. There is one cloud in the sky that I am watching. I'm very keen to hear what else take here. And that is the Treasury General Account, which was depleted before before before before you move right now before before you move to that just i want to i want to you said rate hikes and inflation are a thing of the past and before going to the second point i know you had a question for a while i want to get

different perspectives of that particular point because i don't want to move away from it as if it's a fact like peter michael dave do you guys agree um that rate hikes and inflation are a thing of the past? That's a pretty big statement. It's a ballsy statement. It's kind of a depends, right? So it's the type of thing that if they keep the economy crushed down by not lowering rate and not putting a risk on environment, then inflation will be a thing of the relative past for a short period of time.

And as soon as it goes down, inflation is going to go back up. But I think they have to kind of keep the hammer on because they can't afford to be issuing new T-bills when nobody other than the government itself is buying them. China is not buying them or otherwise we'll just be just in like a 300% GDP worse than Japan situation. Dave, I think you were jumping in on this point as well. Yeah, I mean, I think that you have to understand the definition of inflation got muddled and we got into this thing because people keep ignoring

the fact that impulsiveness is monetary, but there are two types of inflation. And this is an oversimplification, but obviously it's an easy way to think about it. There's asset inflation. And by the way, Dave, your... We shall... Asset inflation and consumer inflation.

As you explain both of them, and then I want to give the mic back to Rand, but your audio, I know you're probably out, but I'm not sure if you can improve your audio, because it's a bit hard to understand what he's saying. Sorry. Okay. I'm trying again.

Is that better? Yeah, it's a bit better. Yeah, go Sorry. Okay. I'm trying again. Is that better? Yeah, it's a bit better. Yeah, go ahead. So asset inflation and consumer inflation. Asset inflation, which we've had for 30 plus years until they decided to helicopter money to people during the pandemic. At the same time, supply chains got constrained. Both of those things are gone now. And so if you look at

what's going on, it is entirely reasonable to assume that if you continue to not do the things that cause consumer inflation, and you see it, which will feed through to consumer inflation, the idea that consumer inflation will come back is based upon inflationary expectations and wages being demanded. As long as that is kept moderate, the Federal Reserve is totally focused on that. Powell has said it many times. It's entirely possible that it doesn't come back

and we end up with a resumption of asset inflation as they start to reflect the money supply and do the bully to do on the back end because exactly the reason that someone was just talking about, which is the Fed government has immense borrowing needs and needs to make that cheap. And Michael, do you want to add anything to this before I go back to Ran? I actually agree with the observation that the confusion around the definition of inflation and failing to separate it into scarcity components versus monetary components has played kind

of a critical role in this. I think the challenge is that we have chosen to address the inflation by trying to crush demand. What that's really leading to is a contraction of supply addition. So everything I'm seeing actually suggests that what we've done is reintroduce inflation and interest rate volatility. It may go away, but if we reaccelerate, it'll likely rematerialize in an unfortunate way because we chose a bad path in terms of how to tackle it. And right now, I'll go back to you and just for the audience, before I forget,

if you are an investor with portfolio companies or if you're a project, just check the pinned tweets above. And it talks about coming on as a partner to work with Incubator, but more importantly, to come on our Shark Tank show for pitching or as a sponsor of the show.

So you can hit us up as an email in the pinned tweets or just DM us, DM me, because the guys don't check twitter or ran but spot doesn't so just dm me or ran or the email in the pinned tweet which is preferable and ran i took the mic away from you so go ahead i think you were moving on to another point yeah just uh one of the things that i want to gauge as well one of the things that I'm not very clear about is this treasury general account which was, it's effectively the treasury's bank account

which was depleted before they raised the debt ceiling and one of the concerns in the market was that in order to refill the account in other words to get more money into the treasury account that they would sell more debt and take liquidity out of the market.

So I'm just wondering, for real, what do you think in terms of replenishing that account? Is that something you need to worry about? Is it a headwind? Or is it well priced in? I think generally, when Twitter is talking about something as, oh my God, they're going to refill the treasury general account, they didn't know even what it meant three weeks ago. I was about to explain to you if they asked you to define it well it's basically the the account for the treasury their general account their bank account and what they have they'd like to have liquidity as all of us that was in the bank account so it gives them flexibility to do certain things for spending programs etc so it had been depleted because as you went into the debt ceiling talks um they weren't allowed

to increase the treasury general account so the idea was oh my god they're gonna add a trillion dollars and that's gonna take liquidity from the market and everyone's gonna blow up it's the end of the world that was the general narrative what actually happened was there's another part of the equation called the reverse repo which is where banks and money market funds park money at advantageous rates with the federal reserve and what happened was they drained that and that's got like two odd trillion dollars in it and so the money just went from that straight into the t-bills that the government was offering so there was no net increase in liquidity there'll be some but it's pretty marginal and

that they raised i don't know 400 and something billion in about a week or two so you know if they continue at this pace and they can drain the the reverse repo then what they've got is a zero liquidity effect on the market. The government sorted out and this reverse repo, which was trapping a lot of money into it, means that there'll eventually, eventually probably be more liquidity in the bond market, which has been a problem. So it's kind of a win-win for everybody. Nobody takes the egg on the face of everything collapsing because the government's trying to refill its coffers. So overall, I think it's been a relatively non-event. Well, the markets have shown you that it is a non-event, but it's again, it's one of these kind of narratives that

Twitter gets gripped on because there's so much fear around. And we've gone through these TGA refills before and periodically people get gripped on this, Oh my God. And then generally nothing ever happens. So Raul, you say you're sitting back now and you position yourself quite well pre the bull market. Now you're sitting back and you're just enjoying the ride. But didn't, hold on. Didn't Raul, before you ask that question,

just to understand with that, Raul, mate, didn't you, and Noel, I see your hand up, but didn't you talk about, and correctly if I'm wrong, because I used to watch your videos all the time, and shout out to Real Vision as well, similar to Ryan, I've been a subscriber for a long time. But didn't you talk about a super cycle back then, and I think you kind of corrected it afterwards. Did you, were you prepared for the bear market we're experiencing now, and how did it impact you?

And then we'll go to Ryanand's question which is how your position moving forward yeah i mean i didn't do anything my thesis has been people get so confused with time horizon my my thesis has essentially been into the end of this decade so i have no reason to do anything except add when the market sells off and having been in this space since what 2012 2013 i've gone through several of these large drawdown phases and i've learned that if you add into these large drawdown phases you compound returns over time if you just need to zoom out and it's a matter of you know can you accept volatility you know how much you need the money? That kind of stuff. So that's a personal decision.

And time horizon is the other decision. So I've done nothing. I've literally done nothing off the mat. But wouldn't you, like when you see, remember the meta hype, where everything that had metaverse, we're seeing the same thing with AI now. But when things just look way too frothy,

when every single project launching is doing 10, 20x, it's very obvious for all of us that we're at or near the peak. It's impossible to time, and that's why we still participate. But at times like these, why don't you pull out for a sec, say, hey, I'll come back in, let's say, in six months.

So I've learned this, right? So the 2013 to 16 cycle, I did nothing. And I bought Bitcoin at 200. And then we got into the 17 cycle. I thought this is getting wildly out of control. There was all these negative narratives about forking of chains. I'm like, I don't really understand this. And so I was like, I'm up 10x, so I'm going to take profits.

It went up another 10x after that. So I took profits as like 2,000, 2,500. It then went up to 20,000. It then collapsed again. And I actually went back and looked at what would have been the best outcome for me. The best outcome would have been kept my original bet and double it every time it gets to and it wasn't a very big bet at the time double it every time it gets to these big cycle lows I'd have outperformed me buying and selling because I got back in at like six and a half thousand to the sell-off so it was it's been it's been a lesson for me that if you've got the long-term time horizon use the time horizon to your advantage people aren't you think you can catch the top you can't you think you can catch the bottom you can't so i think it's just to be more cautious around that stuff

noelle and peter around i'll give you the mic back but noelle and peter uh you know on on that particular point of trying to time the market, like investing 101, I remember as a kid, I'd read all the bait, intelligent investor and listen to Warren Buffett it's like timing is something you should not even try but in crypto, at least in crypto, it's just sometimes it's just, I know in high

it's not in high tech, like things look obvious, you know when there's blood in the waters, like we are now or at least we've been in the last six months but you also know when things are just too mental too crazy um should even people even consider timing the market whatsoever mario before mario before before you answer that just right now are things too crazy or i think it's not too crazy just because you see there's somewhere there's? There's somewhere in the middle. But it's like if you ask me that question during the FTX collapse,

I'll tell you and I said it in those spaces. And Noel, I'm just going to unmute you and just unmute again when you speak just because you got a bit of feedback. So just unmute right after I'm done. But during FTX, I said there's blood in the waters. Now, it doesn't mean it cannot get worse and it got worse. It just means, or at least it got back to those levels, but it just means that we're either at or near.

And if you ask me, or if I ask you, or if you ask anyone with a brain in the bull market, whatever, two years ago, hey, are we at or near the peak? The answer will be yes. We just don't know if we're at the peak yet, and that's why it's still worth it. It could be a bit more upside left, but there's no way 10 and 20Xs every day is a normal market.

I guess I have to say that it's always crazy in crypto markets. I don't remember a time when it's not stable, which is relatively scarce. In terms of can things get worse, they can always get worse. As you said, Mario, which is relatively scarce. In terms of can things get worse, they can always get worse, as you said, Mario, that's totally right. But even now, I don't agree that we are in a raging bull market yet, precisely because of that. There are some very important shoes that have still to drop in the crypto markets. And we know that the market does look four months ahead, four and good in years. It doesn't look four months ahead for bad news in terms of equity.

Sharply on that. Especially given the liquidity, the thin liquidity. That's a good point. By the way, Noel, I interrupted you because your mic is really bad, but you did make a really good point. I want to kind of repeat it.

I'm not sure if we can fix your mic in the meantime, but you just say that the... Actually, can you... I don't know if I would agree with you. The markets are forward looking when it comes to good news but they're not as forward looking when it comes to bad news that what you said or i misunderstood yeah that's exactly but hold on why are we just making the point earlier that the market was forward looking for a recession that was the point that ran was

making it's like the market's already priced in and i think iran or um raul made the point that the markets are very priced in a severe recession do you disagree with that i do disagree with that it priced in what it thought would be a recession not even particularly bad one a few months ago it then decided that we weren't going to have that the soft landing data was coming in thick and fast is still coming in thick and fast i mean we saw this last week was just the GDP revision and then the PC figures. The economic data is surprisingly resilient. We are not yet, we have not yet seen the pricing in of unemployment at 7%. We have not yet seen the pricing in of more bank failures. We saw how fast the market reacted to the bank failures that we had back in March. But that's more of a black swan event versus a recession,

which is like being talked about nonstop. Well, I don't think that swans, I mean, they were relatively predictable. We didn't know when they were going to come, but the fact that they were coming was not that out there. Black swans are totally out there. And of course, there are indeed some of those possibly in the waiting, but there's a lot of bad news ahead. And that's not even taken into account with the geopolitical tensions that we could see

in the second half of the year. That's not taking into account the impact on energy prices that any of those would have. And that's not taking into account the impact of a really hot summer or a really cold winter on energy stocks. But then when you say when someone, right before you jump in and then right after you, right now I want to go back to Peter. I want to say that when someone says the market is not factoring in, blah, blah, blah, when I hear that, doesn't that actually mean the opposite? Because we're talking about it, that means the market is already factored in because we're thinking about it, unless you're saying things that no one else is talking about. So that would be, and then maybe, Ryan, a good time for you to jump in.

And Noel, I'm not sure if you could fix your mic. And for the audience, while Ryan is speaking, give us your thoughts. Do you think we're being too optimistic? Or at least Ryan and Raoul and I tend to agree with them. Or are you more on Scott's side and more pessimistic? Scott is always pessimistic. But are you a bit more pessimistic? And do you think the markets are as forward-looking?

Or at least if they are forward-looking, or at least if they are forward-looking, are they efficient? Because being forward-looking but inefficient means the fact that they're forward-looking is just not that interesting. Rad? Yeah, I must say, I agree with Noel that the banking

collapse wasn't the black swan. I think it was very much expected. And also, I think that the banking collapse wasn't the black swan i think it was very much expected um and also i think that the way that they fixed the banking collapse was also very much expected you're gonna have a banking collapse you know if there's you know the one thing that the fed and the the governments do really well is they know how to deal with the same things twice and if you look at you know they they they know that when there is a banking collapse, the Fed needs to just step in and just guarantee your loans

and everything is fine. And that's exactly what they did. As soon as there was some signs of cracks, they came in and they just, they said, oh, well, we're making all deposit as whole,

in which case there's no more, there's no more bank runs and then there's no more banking collapse. So I think, I think you know let's let's differentiate black swans versus non-black swans and and and i think that we have to say that a black swan is an event that you really can't anticipate or you know it's so unlikely that you wouldn't anticipate so you know black swan would have been uh covert covert was a true true blacks one how many of us would have thought that a virus that was manufactured in lab that was like that was a real the banking

corruption and all that that's pretty much anticipated and all those things are potentially priced in and i don't see any of those surprises and i think i'm in the camp i'm in ralph camp here where i say we're in an age of technological progression that is unlike any single... I don't know. And I want to go to Raoul right after Peter because I want to get Raoul's thoughts on the whole metaverse discussion because I think the AI discussion we're having now is, I want to say it's similar to the metaverse.

It's just a lot more impactful and the adoption is a lot faster. But I've got a question on the metaverse topic, Raoul, because I was and still am a big proponent of the metaverse. While I was listening to your show, I was traveling the world. I would take bits and pieces of things you say and kind of use them in my speeches. So it's funny how no one's talking about the metaverse now, but everyone was talking about it before. But Peter, I want to go back to the point that Ran and Noel were discussing and regarding the efficiency of the markets and whether timing is even a thing any of us should try in crypto. Yeah. And I think there's kind of three quick

things I want to hit on here is one, talking about your AI point. I think the one thing that I keep hearing, AI, AI, AI, I agree it's going to be transformational, but so far the benefit has largely accrued to the companies that supply the AI, right? So either AI is's going to be transformational. But so far, the benefit has largely accrued to the companies that supply the AI. So either AI is really going to work. And I think it's actually going to be very supportive for the broad markets. You could see PE ratios or however you want to define it really rise. If AI truly works, the efficiencies aren't going to accrue to big tech. They're going to accrue to all these smaller companies and midsize companies and traditional manufacturers.

So I think the next leg of the AI rally is going to be far less about big tech and far more about actually deciding to price into the economy, to markets, to these companies that they will actually benefit from AI. So I think that's kind of where we're at this fulcrum is if AI truly works, the rest of the market should actually be benefiting probably more so than the big AI companies because so much is already priced in. So that's an inflection I'm waiting to see how it's adopted. I think we'll get a lot about earnings in that respect. When I look at crypto right now, and I was wrong when we went through 20, I thought we'd get to 10 before we got to 30. So here we are at 30. So I have to reevaluate. I talked to a lot of my customers, large asset managers in particular, and I think the excitement just isn't there like it was the first time we kind of broke through 30. And people are still questioning, you know, what's the validity of here? They're looking at these thin markets. They're looking at these large moves. And yes, we're getting the data coming in. We're getting, you know, responses in terms of Fidelity working on making it more accessible. But I think there's a lot of skepticism of whether

this time everyone frant ran this again and we do a pullback or people are going to have to adopt more and more. And I would say right now, I'm kind of very neutral. I'm not getting the sense that we're going to see this next wave of people piling in. I'm looking for that. I'm trying to see if conversations will change. If so, then I think you want to be buying this because we have a lot more upside if everyone starts really allocating that 1% or 2%. If it kind of fades, I think we go back to 20-some-odd thousand just because so many people have front-lined the good news and priced in the good news, expecting people to get sucked in. And I just don't feel the sucking sound. And then the last kind of wildcard I'll throw out is, I think the one thing that we're not

talking enough at all about, and there's lots of signs of this, and this is a real risk, I think, to the US economy and the markets, is that we see a shift from made in China to made by China. And this has been one of our big themes, is that China is going to start trying to sell their brands globally to compete with us. All the nations that they have trade deficits, where they're securing natural resources at a better pace than we get natural resources, they're going to turn around and try and sell their made by China company goods into those countries. And I think that could be very disruptive for the dollar. It could be very disruptive for companies. And you look at Huawei as the example. The product was probably 80% as good as what you could buy

using Western Europe or American technology, but the cost was 40%. It attracted a lot. So to me, that's my wild card on the horizon that I don't think anyone's talking about, yet there's plenty of signs that it could be a risk to markets and the economy in the next year or two. Raoul, I wanted to shift back to the metaverse. I don't know if this is something that Raoul wants to talk about as well, but I really wanted to have that discussion with you. We're both proponents of the concept of the metaverse. Meta started that bull run back then. It was like the next thing after the whole play to earn hype.

So everyone praised Meta for their decision, for their rebranding from Facebook. And then a few months later, it's the opposite. Everyone's making fun of the whole metaverse hype and Meta's decision to rebrand to Meta. Your thoughts on the metaverse? Is it now old news, AI is the new thing, and we'll never see a metaverse hype phase again?

Or, you know, it's just getting warmed up and that could play a big key, a big role in the next bull market? Listen, the largest observable trend, I think, on earth is the digitization of everything. The Marc Andreessen quote of software resisting the world is one of the most profound things. And if you think about the digitization of everything, that is an ongoing super trend. So everything around us gets digitized

faster and faster. You know, we're all involved in the digitization of money, financial markets, contracts, ownership, all sorts of stuff, which is the crypto market. So the metaverse itself is the broadest digital rendition of that life that we live that is digitized. I argue that Zoom is an early basis for the metaverse because I now spend my entire day where I would have been in meetings, meetings in a digital format with a digital person somewhere else in the world. And so that super trend is not going away. Apple massively moved the game forwards with spatial awareness, with spatial compute, which is basically augmented reality. There are many, many people working in VR. I think people have an anchoring bias.

They have an anchoring bias on ready player one or or snow crash and so they think well it needs to be this world that we kind of fully live it i don't see it as that i see it as the interconnected digital activity of humanity and the more and more we become digitized the more and more the spaces around us integrate with this digital world. And I think AR is a big breakthrough. So no, I don't think it's gone away. But what about an open metaverse?

So in other words, a metaverse with the concept of digital ownership. So where NFTs kick in. So there's two ways of looking at the metaverse. And the way I would describe it is like a Web2 metaverse and a Web3 metaverse. The Web2 metaverse is what you're talking about. It's like the entire looking at the metaverse. And the way I would describe it is like a web two metaverse or a web three metaverse. The web two metaverse is what you're talking about. It's like the entire experience, VR, AR,

and we're heading in that direction, whatever term you want to use. But then the other metaverse, the open metaverse or the web three metaverse, essentially the ability to be able to own digital assets and that allows for entire economies,

decentralized economies or like a real replica of the physical world we live in without without predetermined physics to exist is that something that interests you especially when it comes to gaming and are we way too early to even pay attention to it or is that could be a good a good narrative for the next bull market so when things get digitized, they essentially go to zero in value because the marginal cost of creating a new one is zero. So we see this massive crushing sound that comes out of this digitization megatrend. So that's a real problem if we're living most of our lives in a digital world, is therefore no assets hold any value.

So what blockchain did was solve that one thing to me. That's a very, very big thing. Now, there's tons of other applications, but it's a very big thing in this metaverse concept. Now, will Apple or will Facebook use NFTs as a way of anchoring value in their metaverses? My guess is that if they want to maintain value outside of just the

experience as well or the connectivity then they will um because it doesn't make much sense otherwise because you can't move around in that world and own things in the digital world and we're seeing large movements by fashion houses and others into this particular space with the understanding that digital scarcity is the same as physical scarcity um because humans are humans and they will attach their full value to it so i i think all of this happens together it's the battle for the internet it's the same and it's how far across the central line do we get the decentralized version of the metaverse where it becomes interoperable interoperable there will be walled gardens too so there's places where we won't be able to take our digital assets so i just think it's a a broad mix of everything within that and you know that

that's the way the world works i mean punk 6529's crusade if i call it that is to keep the metaverse open because the control within a place where we live our entire digital lives is even more powerful than when Facebook were five years ago and Google are today, et cetera. And his argument is we can't let corporations control our lives in a way when the metaverse becomes more important to us. And that having things on blockchain helps us retain some elements of freedom and ownership. And I think that's absolutely dead right. That's a think that's absolutely dead right. That's a fight that's got to come.

And that's a fight that will play out over a decade. I think we'd reach unprecedented levels of centralization as we digitize, unless the open metaverse gains traction. And that's the same problem with the AI as well, right? Yes, exactly. And I want to get onto it. All power. Yeah. All power to give some of these giant tech companies that's the same problem with the ai yes exactly and i want to i want to get onto all power yeah the all power of to give some of these giant tech companies not only a metaverse to live in

but basically the system of intelligence for the metaverse you're pretty fucked as humanity at that point so it's really important that we have open ais it's really important that there have open AIs. It's really important that there are, it's not a walled garden that we get forced in by regulators saying Microsoft good, anybody else bad, because we trust Microsoft. Because that assimilation of power in three or four places is not good. Mike, I think we're still waiting for the Uncle Miltie in the metaverse, right? So the first hype phase came in a bull market that NFTs were still relatively new. The term Web3 was still relatively new. And there's a lot of, when it goes up, it went up exponentially with Ward Apes and everything else. And then it went crashing because nobody had really built anything.

And what we need in this next wave, I'm sure there'll be a fun thing around to do it, and maybe it's the other side, maybe it's something we don't even know about. There certainly are a lot of celebrities that put their name into various efforts, but if one actually launches either round, probably multiple celebrities that people actually tune into

and actually engage with. I think this next time you're going to have hype based on a reality of having hundreds of thousands of users and that, you know, the 75 people at a time that you have on the central end.

Maybe while you did touch on NFTs and you and Michael both still have your ape, you know, I moved away from my punk about a week or two ago, but I still have it. So I just moved it off just because I do a lot of political spaces. I can't do that with a punk.

I get mocked a lot. But the question is, what's the NFT market looking like today? We've seen a lot of projects capitulate. Ryan, you've talked about this in your show, the capitulation of a bunch of projects, honing NFT marketplace tokens. Yeah, I mean, so to me... Go on, you go, Ren.

Yeah, for me, I mean, I spoke about it on the show today and I said, look, for me, the thesis is that all technologies go through a V1 and the V1 is not really successful. Most of the time, the V1 is just an experiment. Except for Bitcoin is like an one hell

of an exception yeah well bitcoin is well actually not not really because there were there were attempts before that to make uh digital money that just didn't stick um but in this case you know i think nfts i think the technology is here to stay i think the collections i wouldn't be i don't bet on the collections just because I think that, you know, the thesis that we had that all these punks and all these apes

were going to give you culture and you were going to be part of these clubs. I'm not sure that that's exactly the use case, but I do know that NFTs as a technology is going to change the world.

And for me, when I see those kinds of things and, you know, what I want to be holding is I want to be holding the exchanges. Do you actually own, do you actually own any NFTs, any punks, any apes? I'm curious. I've never asked you.

I own NFTs. I don't own punks and apes because I just couldn't get my head around it. I do own NFTs. I'm going to be completely blunt and honest. I don't think I've ever made money on an NFT ever. I think I'm the one person in the world that has never ever... No, I'm the same bro so you're not alone and probably scott so all three of us have i've never made money i don't

think i've ever sold an nft at a profit uh but i've always like i've probably put less than half a percent of my portfolio into entities always because i just did i never believed in the thesis of buying jpings to be part of a club and spending millions of dollars doing it um but i do believe in the technology so for me one of the big bits that i'm actually making now is i'm looking at who's going to be the nft chain and and who are going to be the nft exchanges and right now when when it feels like things and nfts are capitulating that's probably going to be a good time to say all right let's pick up the exchanges and let's pick up the chains that I think are going to support the...

What about the blue chips, though? I don't believe in the collection. I just don't believe in any of the collections. I don't believe in apes. I don't believe in punks. I don't believe in dogs. I don't believe in that shit. I just think, you know,

I think a lot of people who paid a lot of money for these punks are now sitting deep underwater. That applies, but that's unfair. That applies to everything in crypto. Not really. What do you mean? What's not sitting?

What's not in the red? Anything that's new? Anything that didn't explain anything? Anything. I just said anything that's new. You can't talk. Yeah, but anything that's new. NFTs are new.

You can't compare that to Bitcoin and ETH. But look, Raoul, maybe you could disagree with Ryan because I think his position is... It's a smart position, by the way. I like having NFT marketplace talk. It makes a lot of sense. It's a great way to hedge your risk for any new asset class. But just the argument

that he doesn't believe in blue chips, especially after what they've been through, like for them to survive the bear market we're seeing and to have people like yourself and Maipo and others, I'll even count myself. Well, they have to have,

sorry, they have to have use cases and the use cases are probably less recognizable on the bear market. But first of all, I mean, two of the best known was the punks and the apes are now owned by Udall Labs effectively. and so a lot of the future values can be dependent and then really fulfilling the promise of their metaverse right so the two are related here and

i think they've made very few uh bad steps in their entire history right so i think that if they're able to go in and you know be able to go i mean there were so many uh you know people like cramming in and like begging to get tickets to see when eminem played at ape fest and those types of things we're just kind of laying low right now but you take that to the next exponential level of where i think they need to go and remember they they got as an equity play a five billion dollar valuation from uh um you know from a16z so i think that there's only a handful from this last wave they'll remain blue chips but i would not write off the entire category and i think the next you the next group of blue chips are going to be around web3 gaming as they're

going to be a deal let me let me right hold on i wanted to say that full disclosure Mario the one token that I am holding in the NFT space is I'm holding the 8 token and every day I wake up in the morning thinking to myself it's time to sell this thing, it's time to sell this thing, it's time to sell this thing and I hold on to it because it's really the one NFT pair that I've got

other than exchanges so it's like I'm holding it listen to this listen to this um and and i'm not actually i'm not gonna do it i'm actually gonna ask raul to do it raul can you can you maybe touch on obviously response everything's been said but talk about gaming nfts which to me has been during the bull market and continues to be the most exciting asset class in the entire crypto space and to me still more more exciting than decentralized AI or decentralizing aspects of AI.

So Raoul, maybe you could talk about or touch on gaming NFTs. Yeah. Well, first I'm going to talk about NFTs more broadly. So the kind of NFTs that we talked about, whether it's high-end art or the more expensive PFP projects like Punks, what they are is assets within the ETH economy. It's pretty straightforward. And people buy assets when they have excess savings or excess returns.

So i.e. when the economy is thriving, the ETH economy is thriving, people have gains, they tend to buy assets for status this is a human trait which is very interesting because when you look at the chart of rolex watches and patek philippe basically the same chart as the um as bought at the old club or punks and it's exactly the same mechanism so when you're feeling a bit flush you made some good trades your bank account is looking okay you're feeling confident about the future you reward yourself with a trophy asset that's what humans do it's a very typical trades why we buy you know a bmw versus a toyota all of those kind of things it's the memetic vision that we have but the stories we tell

ourselves about our status and how successful we are. So the same is true of high-end art prices. The same is true of high-end real estate. So when we get the ETH economy growing again, new capital coming into the space, which is foreign direct investment, new activity, what we'll find is people will go to what they think are the assets that give them status some of the assets that people thought gave them status this time around won't do and others will what what what those are i don't really know but punks is probably a great example because there's no utility to it so it's just a punk is a punk punk and it's an identifier a status identifier i think probably remains so well i think you may be wrong yeah and

i think i'll tell you why i think the way i see punks and apes i see them like fashion and when i look at punks and apes you remember true religion jeans do you remember the phase that everybody went through wearing true religion jeans when i look at punks and apes i see true religion jeans it was a fad it was great it was cool at the time and i think that in the next i fully agree with your thesis i fully fully fully agree with your thesis that um uh people will spoil themselves earning assets but i think that the nature of the asset is going to change i think that all these, including with respect also your Ape, I think that all others will be one of the asset.

The question is, Ram, is which fashion brand are you buying, right? So I don't think Punks is so much of a fashion brand. It's more like a Rolex watch. But let's say Apes is more of a fashion brand. I don't think so. I think a Rolex watch I think a Rolex watch the reason why

it is a Rolex watch is because it was very very very high quality and it stood the test of time versus most watches I mean the technology in a Rolex

is no better than anything else it's just a watch right it tells the time I can do it on my phone I don't actually need it it's just a trinket it stood the test of time

it stood the test of time but I don't think that Punks is going to stand the taste of time. Well, it has. The last year is like decades. Yeah, that's like 30, 40 years in traditional world. And you might be right, Ran. I have no idea. There's no crystal ball here. It's a bet that I'm taking. I've probably got of my east portfolio in a bunch of nfts i'm not a dj and i don't trade them a lot i like entities for utilities passes and stuff like that stuff we've been experimenting with with the royal vision collective the yuga thing is can they build a larger brand and can we accumulate benefits from the larger brand or does it end up being true religion as opposed to being Hermes?

You just don't know. Go ahead, Joe. Go ahead, Dan and Joe. Yeah, I would say the one place where the true religion genes comparison breaks down is that true religion genes are not limited supply. There will only ever be 10,000, 8,000, there will only ever be ten thousand eight just like there will only ever be 21 million Bitcoin and as web 3 growth grows cycle by cycle even as people just like look what happened with the the theory of rock came out of nowhere and like went up in value because it was one of the oldest when there's a billion people in web 3 people are gonna want to limited supply yeah

but most of this stuff will go to zero right most of the limited supply yeah which is exactly why it only matters which is why the limited supply guys there is demand yes but there is demand there is demand hey limited by no but the limited supply and unlimited supply both only matter there is demand but i think demand. Limited by ease. I don't know. No, but limited supply and unlimited supply, both only matter if there is demand. But I think the point that Michael's making is that limited supply,

you made a comparison to an asset, the Gs, that is not limited supply. So you're just saying that limited supply is better than unlimited supply, but both need demand. So maybe... But Joe, I'll let you jump in and then I want to kind of move to gaming NFTs

for selfish reasons because I'm so passionate about it. And if, ryan if you're bearish on gaming nfts and we will not be talking for a while but joe go ahead yeah i was just going to jump in a couple minutes ago mario because you were asking the question which i think is central here right about you know timing the market versus time in the market and what you see in the vast majority of the space all of these 10 000 plus tokens is that the darlings of the previous cycle never recover their all-time highs. You get a handful of them that ever make a new high in USC terms.

The vast majority never make new all-time highs in Bitcoin terms. And that's the point. Has anyone actually done, and that's for you, Joe, because I interrupted you, but has anyone actually done, I'm sure there is research on how many of the projects that launched during the last bull market, the 2017, 2018, actually went back and reached new all-time highs? In dollars or Bitcoin? In Bitcoin terms. No, percentage. I want to say Bitcoin terms. I'm saying what percentage of projects that launched in that bull market actually came back in the next bull market versus died?

It's great. It's a great one. In Bitcoin terms, it's two. You had two that made a new all-time high against Bitcoin. Dogecoin, which we obviously know had Elon behind it, promoting it on SNL and so forth. And you had BNB, the unregistered security launched by Binance. So you've got those two, that's it out of all the tokens. That's crazy. And then if you take USD terms, I think the number expands to nine or 10. So the vast majority of these things, you enter into what you said. You have to time it.

If you're going to play in the altcoin space and sophisticated people in the altcoin space know this, you catch the darling of the cycle and you sell your for profit. You don't hold these things. I mean, the comment made earlier, I think by Raoul about how you just average down on these. Okay. How did that work out for stellar lumens? If you average down during the entire 2018-2019 bull cycle, you never made it to an all-time high. Even projects that were the top 10 on CoinMarketCap 2018-2019, they never made new highs. So the notion that like, oh, you can just average down on these things,

which were popular yesterday and they'll recover is just flawed, I think. So how many of the... Yeah, but that's not what I studied on Earth. I'm talking about the one or two of the larger largest assets in this bitcoin and ethereum underneath i'm not talking about yeah i mean the rest i don't really care about yeah i've got position in solana but i don't really care about that stuff for me it's the representation of the growth in the space over time it's not i'm not a trader i don't choose a lot of tokens yes i've got few bits of shrapnel here and there of stuff just to keep my eye on it but other than that yeah that makes sense but i think when people

hear that you hear you can just average down they're they're thinking that's going to be true of their favorite altcoin which is going to zero most likely yeah well you know we can't help everybody in in every single interpretation of everything it's not about interpretation we're speaking in a room with 6 000 people so people here you just average down when the market so so the so so just on the route like i kind of link that to the question like so first did you do a lot of vc investments in the last bull market ral and then maybe you can you can kind of answer that while pivoting to gaming nfts if that's okay um sorry i just got somebody at the front door but um no i don't do bc i have no edge i don't know everything that sounds amazing to me is usually a zero and everything sounds zero to me is usually amazing and i've got no edge in gaming i've never been a

gamer so i don't i understand there's a lot of people passionate about it but i'm not one of the people who really closely follow i'll let you i'll really closely follow the game. I'll let you check the front door, Ran. Do you want to go before Dave? Okay. Yeah, I mean, look, Amar, I must be honest. I'm really, really, really bullish. Play to earn game. I'm really bullish.

Let's call it NFT gaming. But again, my thesis here remains the same. I will not invest in individual games. I'll invest in... You're not invested in any individual... I am. Okay. I am.

No, no, no. I am invested. I'm not going to make any further... I mean, what I invested in the last book, I invested in narratives. I invested in waves. What I'm not doing is I'm not investing in specific games now because

i know that the chance of success of an nft game is one in one in a thousand right so i think like if you think about video games in general the chance of a video game succeeding one in a thousand one in ten thousand one in a million um that's how many games actually make money it's the same for the film industry like you know you see the couple of films that actually end up making money but the majority of films actually lose money and to say it's going to be the same thing with games and so to me if i'm looking to invest in in these in these um narratives short of a real bull run where i'm where i'm surfing the wave then all i want to do is invest in the best studio with the most talented people and let that happen. I think I just want to make one point here, which a lot of people don't get about crypto

investing. But when you understand this about crypto investing, you realize just how risky crypto investing actually is. And it's a very, very, very important point. I'm going to try and go through it as slowly as possible because I think that it's quite a difficult concept to grasp and understand. But I want to start off by saying, when you invest in a company, when you invest in a stock, you're investing in a bunch of people

and you're investing in a bunch of people that pivot and make decisions based on the competitive landscape and the conditions of the market. So if you take a startup and you invest in a startup and the market conditions change or the narrative changes or the thesis changes, then what you're doing is you're investing in those people

and their ability to be able to pivot and keep your money safe and keep the investment safe. And very often when you invest in a startup, the business that you invest in on day one and the business that you land up holding three, four, five years later is a completely different business. Completely, completely, completely different business. Now in crypto, the rules of that game change. And I'll explain to you why. If you invested in, I'm going to use the word Solana or Ethereum, you invested in a layer one blockchain that was designed in proof of stake, for example,

right? And that is what you invested in. And if the winds change or the narrative changes or the market changes, the people can't pivot the business 180 degrees and do something completely different because it's a protocol. It's not a business. it becomes reliant on a DAO and it becomes reliance on a boat. But that makes investing in crypto much, much, much, much, much more dangerous than investing in companies. That's a really interesting point. But most projects you invest in, if you're doing early investments, they start out centralized, which gives them the flexibility to pivot, and then

they slowly decentralize and get to a position where they cannot pivot. They do. But you know what? If you look at the real project, they start off centralized because they have to, but the real project, the good projects decentralize really quickly.

I'm not talking about centralized projects that sell tokens as a substitute for selling equity and effectively are selling unlicensed illegal securities. I'm talking about real protocol. Let me give an example. If you invested in something like an arbitrage, so you know you're investing in a layer two on Ethereum that works on optimistic road apps. I know that sounds technical, but just work with me. Now, if the market changes or the thesis changes and layer twos are no longer required on Ethereum or something like that, your money's gone. Whereas if you had invested in a centralized company and the thesis changed and layer twos weren't required anymore on Ethereum,

you would have backed a management team and that management team, you would have backed them to pivot into something else. Now in crypto, in the true sense of crypto, that doesn't exist because you're investing in a protocol and you're not investing in a team that can pivot and do things quickly. And that's what most people don't understand about crypto investing. It is a hundred times more risky than investing in stocks, in equities, because you're not backing a team and you don't have the flexibility and the ability to change the structure and to change the narrative and to change the focus. So I want to ask a question to Raul if he's back about AI now. But before doing so, I just want to remind the audience first, if you all look at the stage right now, you'll see on our stage, we have a beautiful,

it's not beautiful, a pretty ugly looking circle. That's the new account we'll be using to start hosting the the channel so make sure you follow that account so you get notified moving forward because we're going to move off my account and finally um so make sure you follow that ugly red circle that's putting out love hearts right now in the meantime if you are a project or a business or anybody really that wants to sponsor the show or work with our incubator, just hit us up in the pinned tweet or just DM me or Ran, and then we could come back to you. Preferably, just email us in the pinned tweet.

But are you back, Raoul? Yep, I'm here. AI. I'll keep the first question very, very general. Your thoughts, especially when it comes to the intersect between AI and blockchain? My thoughts on AI is it is one of the most fundamentally groundbreaking technologies that humanity has ever come up with.

And people will look at it now and say, well, it's not that now. No, it's not that now. But where will it go over time? So I think it's massively important. AI opens up a enormous number of issues and enormous number of opportunities i think it can have the potential to change the productivity once you start applying it to robotics to cars to all sorts of things as we see this aging population around the world so i think it's a fundamental game-changing

opportunity that forms part of this exponential age thesis where it all comes together. The blockchain part of this, how does this connect? I know people are desperate to connect narratives and, you know, can blockchain benefit from the AI boom? You know, really, at the core of it is the scarcity in a digitized world is my id should be scarce because if not people can make a representation of of me endlessly for infinity and that becomes a huge problem so some form of digital id and content id that is blockchain really helps and i think we have to move towards that we're going into the u.s election we're already seeing the impact of AI on some of this. The content that we will see,

we will not know what we can trust whatsoever, even from our most trusted sources. So I think that nexus is the most important nexus of the use of blockchain and AI. Also, I do think that tokenization of the compute itself is an interesting opportunity for the open networks. Obviously, AWS and Microsoft Azure, everybody else will just charge normally, but there's a way of distributing this because I think I'm very nervous of the fact that some large businesses can

accumulate all the profits in what is a fundamental technology, because what you're doing is you've now gone from scarcity of intelligence to abundance of intelligence. And that's something humanity has never gone through before. And again, it's still early stage. So I do think that if humanity can participate in these networks as they grow, which is why also I'm very attracted to blockchain technology overall, is people can participate in these networks as they grow, which is why also I'm very attracted to blockchain technology overall is people can participate in a new financial system in a way they couldn't do before. So I do think there's things together, but everybody just shills render token or whatever it is. It's like, I don't think that's the big story here. I think it's the integration of these

technologies at fundamental levels that is more important than trying to find one token that's going to go up okay so so you mentioned something really interesting kind of relates to a tweet i did today so when i ran we were talking about uh the space yesterday and i was using uh giving examples of spaces i really enjoyed one of my favorite spaces was when we did at truth gpt versus chat gpt space a few months ago now, we had Sam Altman and Elon listening into the space in the audience. And we're just kind of comparing the two and the pros and the cons of each. And then one big point we were discussing

is that how will AI determine, who or how will truth be determined? And I was doing a tweet today about how the whole Gary Gansler rumor that we were making fun of it yesterday ran it was actually generated by a website it's only been a week old that used ai to generate it and then the person that spotted that this is fake news used ai to be able to to deconstruct the the fake news and that and found out that ai was used to create fake news it was like AI was used to determine

a piece of information that another AI shared was untrue. And everyone knows the whole Gary Gensler rumor a few days ago because you're probably all celebrating when you first saw it. And Ryan almost did a video on it. So my question to you, Ryan, is how will blockchain help

in ensuring the the How will blockchain help in ensuring the, I don't know what term to use, but the information or the core base of the infrastructure is, first, it's not centralized among certain entities. And then the fundamental truth is embedded in a way that cannot be manipulated um could blockchain be a solution to that problem uh ral you're muted or did the space crash are you there perfect no i'm there but sorry you were cutting in and out of me oh good so i'll kind of make me a too long yeah sure yeah of course applications of blockchains so kind of

digging into the applications of blockchains when it comes to ai because there's one way of looking at it as two hype terms being put together just for some projects to launch launch a token and pump versus actual applications that make sense at at least in the short term? Yeah, I don't see any applications yet that are truly groundbreaking. I know people are tinkering at the edges. People have some ideas. It's really super early stage because AI is moving faster

than the crypto space right now. So I don't think the space has caught up. So I'm super wary of everything, but observing anything. Just to try and see okay what traction what things i mean it's all well and good but i'm like 50 projects say we've sold digital id amazing how do you get that out to eight billion people unless you've got a distribution plan and scale it's not going to work so i think just be very very careful of of what you invest in based

around this theme or just accept it as a meme and try and choose things that will go up. That's not my modus operandi. Other people like to degen around smaller tokens and that's the way that they do it. They trade the meme. For me, I don't see anything fundamental yet.

I know it will come. So I just keep my eyes and ears open and just monistice face and look for things that get traction. And I'll kind of wrap it up with one last question, Raoul, and anyone could add on to this question afterwards, because it kind of summarizes what we've been talking about for the last few weeks. And that's the SEC action against Coinbase and Binance.

And of course, what they consider to be securities and the whole bunch of tokens that were considered securities that the market didn't respond too well to. So I'd love to get your thoughts on that, Raoul, and Gary Gensler's approach to crypto, and then kind of link it all the way to the ETF filings that we saw for the last few days and weeks.

And we'd love to get your state of the market based on the news we saw in the last few weeks. So twofold. Firstly, three of us on the call don't care that the US are calling them securities because we're not US citizens. And so that's one thing to realize. This is a global technology and it will move around. And because's financed and has a lot of money involved it'll move around to large financial centers and i've talked about this a lot you know london is stepping up to the plate singapore hong kong uh even europe has done a decent set of regulations so gary gentler himself is like it seems to be that some protection of the u.s system

uh we saw this in the past with the FX markets, with the Eurodollar markets. A bunch of times we've seen this, the US become very protectionist. And Gary seems to be fighting that fight. And his idea so far is claim everything's to security. And we've all talked about this ad infinitum. And now we have to go through the courts to prove otherwise. But it seems that political pressure has been rising and i think this is the crucial point the political pressure is rising to say you know you can't stop all innovation so the easiest way to do it is he's already set up bitcoin to say listen i don't think bitcoin's a security therefore i will allow the etf and that i think he's hoping reduces the heat on him um and therefore he can continue with his

crusade against everything else and i think that's you know i think black rock and everybody else got the nod is like listen we we will accept this because politically we want to accept it because we've got an election next year and we don't want to use every lose every single young voter who's been involved in crypto over the last three years so i do think it goes through um i do think that it attracts new capital into the space that spreads throughout the whole space it's not bitcoin only story you're just bringing it into the new digital economy and then it and it spreads out most of the institutions who invest in the space are really driven by price. So as price rises, their propensity to get in goes up. So, you know, it's a function of that as well. But overall, it's politics right now, but the big fight is still to come. You know, Brad Garlinghouse, Brian Armstrong, and a few others have a big fight to still have.

And that fight is incredibly important for people in the united states and for innovation in the united states within this particular technology my guess is the ai space will have the same fight at some point as well uh we have to see how all these play out um but somehow you know congress needs to set a set of guidelines and that's what everyone's trying to force here now is we need a proper set of guidelines driven by congress as opposed to the sec and one man's idea of it so look it's fascinating time i think it's actually noise for the longer term space we've seen china ban we've seen india ban we've seen all sorts of changes over time and in the end doesn't stop anything because the technology is like water

it flows everywhere people find use cases for it find opportunities and over time it gets adoption so my general thesis is it's all noise some way there will be because it's politically unacceptable to shut out a large part of the young population they will acquiesce to certain terms and conditions it also helps that the UK which has been the largest competitor of the US in financial market terms and in fact has generally been the leader when the US has stumbled is hot on the heels saying well if you don't want them we'll take them and with a country that's proven regulatory arbitrage over time and how they can bring trillions of dollars to the UK, they will pursue that relentlessly. And I think the US will pay attention to that as well, because I don't think going through an election, people want to see a whole technology leaving. Dave, I saw you give a clap as Raoul was speaking, and Joe, I saw you put a thumbs down.

So maybe Dave and Joe, I'll let you respond to what Raul said before I wrap the show. Dave, you want to go first? Yeah. Yeah, I'm not going to comment on the ETF thing, and Joe and I have disagreed with that, and we've fought about that on other spaces. Let's just leave that one lie.

But I think that there are a bunch of things. What's the outcome of the fight? Dave, what's the outcome of the fight between you and Joe in one sentence? The SEC, that Gadsdor is going to try to take a win by claiming that he's gotten the security, the surveillance sharing that he wants. And I think Rule is essentially going to end up being correct

that it's going to be driven by politics, not by anything else. But I think that a couple of things that Raoul said, which are very profound, that you guys are going, you're kind of dancing around it. When you look at, and I just go back to the beginning of the space when he was talking about stuff, the fact is there's a difference between confidence and how that affects the crypto markets is really important. So like NASDAQ recovered the all-time highs, crypto didn't, because NASDAQ didn't have Luna and all those failures and FTX. We are now seeing the people who put their heads in a coin routes. We service institutional traders and help them trade better,

right? So we were kind of at ground zero for this. We saw a huge number of people who were major players pull back and say, I'm not going to touch this. And every one of them that didn't go bankrupt now is retooling and getting ready to restart crypto trading and crypto investing. Those green shoots of confidence have oomphed to a crypto rally where it could catch up to where NASDAQ is. That's generally my bull case on top of where we'll sit. And when you talk about, you guys are talking about coins and tokens, and by the way, I'm with Ran on the infrastructure play, trying to pick winners and losers. The fact is, is the other big point here is people over, someone was talking about how you could pivot. And Ran,

the one place I disagree with you is companies don't pivot very frequently. And most of the time when they pivot, they die. But an open source movement can be very resilient. And so if you build a true open source platform, which is what we need in AI, then that will be something. The problem is there isn't one there. And that's why the market structure in crypto and the ability to make and fund open source and bootstrap to compete with big tech is such a big deal. But anyway, those are big mud of conversations, which we can explore on other ones, but I just want to kind of get those ideas teasers out there. Joe? Let me respond to this one. So first off, I agree largely with Raoul about this. I don't think this is the end. Or, you know, it's going to be, you're not going to see any more of these tokens get launched and issued and other assets, digital assets issued.

That's not really my forecast at all. However, regarding the ETF, I don't think the logic really holds up that you've primed the pump for an approval. And there's a couple of reasons why. Number one, we got a piece of information just last week in a rather unprecedented way. The SEC, through leaked sources apparently to the Wall Street Journal, basically said that the current applications are not sufficiently detailed enough.

That is bizarre that they would take the lengths to signal to the market at that length that they don't believe. Why would they do that? The only reason is to tamper down expectations for the ETF. There's no other explanation for that. So if they were going to take a political win and green light this, you would not have them go through unorthodox channels to push this into the

market. They would have just let it continue to fester and quietly while they position themselves for what will be a rather significant policy shift. The other issue is, I think you've got to remember, the SEC is in active litigation as we speak, still waiting on a decision in the Grayscale case. Grayscale is trying to convert to an ETF, the WTC is trying to convert to an ETF, and for them to come out and approve competitive actors in the space and be seen as showing favoritism toward BlackRock and other entities, while you have a major piece of litigation that is pending an appellate court ruling, I don't know how that makes any sense from a litigation

perspective. I don't know why enforcement of the SEC or any other approval division would allow that to happen. It seems like a completely contradictory policy. If your plan was, as Raoul suggested, to green light the ETF and use that for political purposes as a win to pacify segments of the population interested in Bitcoin or crypto at large, then why wouldn't you file a civil pleading saying, we're reversing our policy position on this and backing down in the appellate court, rather than take a big loss, which could theoretically still come in the grayscale

versus SEC suit. So that doesn't make a whole lot of sense logistically. And finally, the thing I think is most problematic is you've got active litigation in the SEC versus Coinbase suit, where the SEC has taken the position that Coinbase is not a broker dealer, they're not a registered clearinghouse, they're not a registered exchange. Now, if you point to the BlackRock filing as somehow being acceptable to the SEC, and that will eventually go through, why would they take a position that the very custodian of surveillance sharing agreement and exchange is not licensed to operate in the United States? That will somehow pacify their concerns about a surveillance sharing agreement of sufficient market size.

So there's too many things that don't add up with the train of logic that this is Gensler's way of priming the market or somehow pacifying the market by letting something go through. I think it doesn't make sense. We'll go to kind of wrap up with, we've got two Bitcoin, I'm going to use the word maxis for lack of a better term, HODL and TXMC. Good to have you guys. I know your first time on the Crypto Town Hall. Final quick words, your thoughts on what was discussed so far before I thank our guests and special guest Raoul and wrap up the space. TXMC, do you guys were talking about earlier recession risk and markets being forward looking and pricing those things in and the events of last year and how I think it was someone on the stage here, Rand or Mario, someone expressed a view that that was the market pricing in the risk of recession and looking ahead and building all that into the price. And I didn't

hear anyone present the view that I have, which is that that is ridiculous. And I think what happened last year was not the market pricing in a recession. We did have a couple of negative quarters of real GDP at the beginning of the year, which makes some people question if it's a recession, but I think we can all agree it wasn't one. But it came at the same time as the end of zero policy in an inflationary environment. And so what did we get? We got the light speed repricing of all assets globally at record pace, right? Stocks and bonds, everything correlation one, and it went down. That was not the market pricing in a recession. That was the market pricing in the end of zero rates and higher

inflation and what that means for valuations, as well as the shock from the Ukraine war and whatever else was going on with energy crisis. But that's not my point. My point really is that if we're going to talk about a market being forward looking and a market pricing in recessions, and, you know, a lot of the talk in these spaces, particularly around crypto, is around market cyclicality and the patterns of history. And I don't think there's enough people doing the research for what that looks like in the economy, which has its own cycles and its own patterns of history. And when you look at what's going on, when you look at the measures of the U.S. economy,

the cyclical aspects are dragging lower. Those are the pieces that generally lead us into a recession, right? Things like industrial production, real manufacturing sales, real retail sales. Those things are all, they've peaked, they've gone flat, and other aspects of last year to research this phenomenon of recessions, what they look like. There's a lot of consistency to them. And I think that one of the biggest takeaways when you actually look at the data and you look at the charts is that there is no example in history of the market pricing in a recession before it got here. It just doesn't happen. The market is

forward-looking based on the information it has today and what it can glean about what the future looks like. So it prices things in based on that. But it is not capable of pricing in significant economic downturns. And what I find hard to stomach is the idea, and it's not an attack on anyone on this stage because I think this is a pretty common belief, but people don't maybe take the time to really look into the validity of it. going to be and price that into everything, the asset values go down. And then we all just move forward and people just begin buying those same assets again when we haven't actually had the recession that they priced in. I just think that's kind of a ridiculous idea. And so if you look back all the way back... So essentially what you're saying, and that's interesting, because I do want to wrap up and maybe get Honolulu's thoughts, but that's a good point.

Oh, actually, at least an interesting point is that the market is forward looking but what you're saying txmc is that people are just fundamentally not able to tell the future so even though the markets are forward looking the market is made up of many people but people um you know we're not designed to be able to tell the future is that what you're kind of implying we're not designed to tell the future but but also people are just not looking in the right places. And we're on a path that all prior recessions have followed. And in fact, the window of time for it to happen is still considerably further out in the future. We have another year of time where history is replete with examples of downturns that have occurred in this window of

time. And this window is valid for at least another year where we have solid examples. I think everyone's really eager to move on from the events of last year to declare this a bull market, which is the title of your space. But if you look at markets in recessions, first of all, the S&P is not a harbinger of the economy there's no price on the s&p that will tell you we won't have a recession and in the all-time high right my last point and i'll wrap this up my i'll land the plane here the only time in every recession since great depression the bottom of the market came during the recession not before There's only one time that that was. Since when? Since when is that the case?

Since when? So my research goes back to 1929. And in literally every single recession, with one example that I'm about to tell you, the bottom was during the recession. It was not before because markets do not price them in. The only time that that was not true was 1945. And the reason we had a recession is because the federal government canceled war spending because we won the war. And we had a massive public side deficit.

But the private sector continued to grow and we didn't have unemployment. And the market goes the whole time. But hey, Mario, just another example. Yeah, hold on. Yeah. So, Joe, go ahead. Real, real quick. Just one. one distinct. If the

market's forward looking, why in May of 2008, were we 8% from an all time high after Bear Stearns had already collapsed after you were on the verge of systemic risk in the banking system or 8% after a massive rally? Okay, so explain to me how the market was forward looking in May of 2008. Tell me how it was anticipating another bull cycle. Right. So you brought me up here as a Bitcoin maxi, but really, I wanted to talk about the economy. I appreciate it. I don't think enough people have done it.

I appreciate it. And there's actually a lot more we can say about Bitcoin. Yeah, jump in. We do this daily, so jump in tomorrow, man. I would love to get your thoughts. And we do a finance space before this one, I think about 8 a.m. ET, so jump into that one, EST. Haro, I'm um gonna wrap it up with your thoughts on bitcoin before and then i see michael jumping in as quickly we wrap up the

space huddle good to have you yeah hey mario mario i'll be i'll be great um i know you try to wrap the space so you know i i wanted to say that strangely enough i agree with ral about the trends that are happening uh in both identity and crypto going offshore. And the thing I want to put out to your space, since I know you guys are mainly crypto maxis and we're Bitcoin maxis, is the thing I'm worried about is the social credit score coming to Ethereum. I think Ethereum, because it's not state resistant, is sort of racing towards state capture. And I'm worried deeply about the design principles that are going to be in these Ethereum identity systems. So I agree that this is a trend. The European Union wants it. The American government wants it. The World Economic Forum

wants it. Everybody wants a driver's license for the internet. And Ethereum is going to do it. They're going to do it, in my opinion, decentralized in name only. And it'll basically be a backdoor system for social control of the West. So I really want you guys to think about that as investors. What a bum to draw a puddle as we end this space. I'll try to make sure it doesn't kick off a debate, but probably something we want to bring up in a future space. And the same invite I sent to TXMC. You're welcome to jump in our space anytime, man. It's a pleasure to have you. And I will wrap this space. Michael, do you have anything to add, mainly

about the economy, before I end the space? Yeah, I just was going to echo what was just said by, apparently, I think it was TXMC, that the markets don't actually discount forward expectations of a recession. They discount states. We see this in everything ranging from interest rate policy, where the headline is that the market is pricing an X number of cuts. That's not actually what's priced at all. The market is priced for 16 cuts with low probability and zero cuts with high

probability. Michael, does the market, as Noel said, does the market price in a bull market or at least in a growth phases and the prices in good news? Or because Noel was talking about the market pricing in good news, but struggling to price in negative news or recessions. It doesn't do either. What it responds to is flows. So if I give money to somebody who is inherently bullish and wants to allocate to technology, they're going to buy stocks and invest in technology. If I give it to somebody who is going to be bearish and invest in bonds and hold cash, then that money is not going to make it to the stock market. If I withdraw because I'm facing a loss of job, et cetera, that's going to show up in the prices.

And if, as we have right now, you have a situation in which those who are facing mark-to-market losses, for example, commercial real estate or SPAC investors or anyone else, are desperately trying to avoid realizing any loss. And the markets will price that in very, very slowly. No. Cool. Well, Michael, I appreciate you wrapping up the show.

Everyone, we'll see you again tomorrow. I just want to thank our special guest, Raoul Pal, for jumping in again. Raoul, it's been a pleasure. And always got an open invitation to the show. Thanks for dropping by. And for the rest of the panel, appreciate you all joining. We'll see you again tomorrow and for the audience, just too late to check the pinned tweet, so

just DM me or Ran if you want to jump on the show, work with our incubator in response to the show. Just hit us up via DMs. Otherwise, we'll see you again tomorrow, same time. Thanks a lot everyone. Bye everyone.