The Wolf Of All Streets - Wall Street Is Hoarding Bitcoin! But Are They Missing The Best Crypto Play?

Episode Date: April 23, 2026

Strategy scooped up nearly 52,000 BTC in April alone, Morgan Stanley keeps buying, Kevin O'Leary is calling for $200K, and Blockchain Capital is raising $700 million in fresh crypto funds. But while everyone fights over the same two assets, Solana quietly did $198 billion in DEX volume last month, outpacing centralized exchanges with tighter spreads than Binance. Lets break down why the smart money might be looking at the wrong chart, plus we cover the SpaceX-Cursor $60 billion bombshell, FTX's $3 billion mistake, OpenAI poaching Coinbase execs, and whether the biggest opportunity in crypto is hiding in plain sight. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Local news is in decline across Canada, and this is bad news for all of us. With less local news, noise, rumors, and misinformation fill the void, and it gets harder to separate truth from fiction. That's why CBC News is putting more journalists in more places across Canada, reporting on the ground from where you live, telling the stories that matter to all of us, because local news is big news. Choose news, not noise.

CBC News. Wall Street institutions are hoarding Bitcoin, and nobody's hoarding more Bitcoin, of course, than strategy. But they may be missing the biggest opportunity in the market, which could actually be in other tokens other than Bitcoin. We're going to break all of that down right now. I've got Brian Rudic, the chief strategy officer from Upexie, live in the studio. Let's go. Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the show. Happy Thursday, something I never remember to do.

I'm supposed to tell you to subscribe and like. to Brian, not to the channel. I like Brian. Good morning, Brian. How are you? This is something we've rarely done, have people in the studio. Obviously, we had Allen in here before, but it seemed like the perfect opportunity to break down what's happening sort of on the institutional side because you have obviously endless

insight. I think we'll get to Solana and you pexy, but I want to start here, as you can see, Morgan Stanley. New 2 trillion Morgan Stanley buys 10.8 million Bitcoin yesterday, cumulative inflows of 190 million since launch. They now hold 1821 Bitcoin. It's kind of a rounding error, to be quite honest. To me, it's more the signal that Morgan Stanley decided to participate than the actual flows that they're getting. I think that's true. But what I would say is that this is actually a big opportunity for flows over the medium term. They have 16,000 financial advisors. They manage about

$7 trillion in assets. And so I think even if their clients put a small percentage of even just a fraction of their wealth into Bitcoin, this could add up to a really big number. To put it in perspective, Eric Boutunis, ETF analyst from Bloomberg, estimated one-year flows could be about $5 billion. Now, some of those flows will obviously come from other ETFs because this is the lowest cost product on the market. Some of those flows would be new flows that would have went into other ETS, but some of them will be brand new.

So I do think that this is a big signaling issue. It increases the ability for folks to get their hands-on Bitcoin. But I also do think it represents a new material source of demand over the medium to long term. I agree with everything. And I think the most interesting part, I don't want to talk about it too much because I've broken it down on the show, but that they did come in at 14 bips. It means that they didn't just expect it to be their 16,000 advisors selling this. They did want to kind of compete and capture flows if we get a bull market from new retail or, as you said, kind of steal the iBit thunder by being a cheaper product.

100%. And I also think that there's a big strategic. component for them too. I think they want to signal to their clients that they're very forward thinking. They're thinking about how financial markets will innovate in the future. And so this, in addition to actually potentially bringing in some additional revenues for them, I think, also speaks well for them in their client's eyes in terms of what they're doing on the digital front. Yes, we have this topic here. Wall Street is hoarding Bitcoin, right? The title, I think that if we're counting strategy as Wall Street, I think that's obviously the biggest story, right? So That brought up a different window.

See? We're live, you know, guys. I shared the wrong screen. But obviously, the window I'm about to bring up is going to show you that strategy is holding 20x for everybody else, right? Strategy has 20x more Bitcoin than the next largest treasury company, unstoppable. So, A, I think we can talk about whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, right? And whether you can even look at the whole treasury space or it's just strategy and then the treasury space and then STRS space. and then STRC.

Yeah. I think that they've been incredibly innovative. They've basically invented the digital asset treasury company. From my perspective, I think what they did was when they have that premium multiple, and I do think that they will likely get that premium multiple in another bull market. But obviously, it's very accretive to issue equity when you're trading at a premium to the value of your Bitcoin. By definition, is accretive to your crypto per share. I think when that premium multiple went away,

they had to look for other means. I think then they started to issue convertible notes where typically that conversion prices above the current spot price, so you're quasi issuing equity at a high premium, assuming that Bitcoin moves up, your stock does too, and that converts to equity. But then they kind of flooded the convert market. I think the demand wasn't fully there,

and it brings on additional credit risk for them. And so now the bet that they're making is essentially, like we issue these prefs and buy Bitcoin with the, proceeds from that. And if Bitcoin goes up more than the costs of those prefs, roughly 10, 11% per year, then that was a good bet to make. And so this is how they're continuing to accumulate Bitcoin, continuing to increase BTC per share. So they changed the business model a little bit. It doesn't mean they can't go back to what it was before. But they're in the cap currency to do this and really well positioned to continue to grow and buy more Bitcoin.

It's interesting. So I guess there's multiple ways to look at it. If you're a bear on strategy or you think that it's Ponzi scheme. So you have the Peter Schiff's and such. You'll just say that he's doing everything until he runs out of runway and then finding a new thing and finding a new thing and finding a new thing. But if you ask Sailor, he'll tell you that that was all a part of the process to get to SDRC, which he views as the perfect product for continuing to buy Bitcoin. Yeah.

Well, do you need Bitcoin to move up? They have, and the reason why I say they're in the Capford seat to continue to do this, is they have so much unencumbered Bitcoin that they could have. always sell that it gives the market confidence that they can pay their preferred dividends as long as they want to continue in addition to that $2 billion cash buffer that they have. And then they also have like best in class liquidity. So folks know that they can come in and buy it and then they can actually sell it. And so especially on the ATM side when you're issuing equity, you generally drip it out

to the market where you need you can only sell a small percentage of your average daily trading volume. And so obviously, MSTR is one of the most traded stocks in the U.S. And so they really are in this great position to continue to do this. And yeah, we obviously have a very strong positive view of Bitcoin. And so I like their chances. There's an irony when you think about it that it's one of the most traded stocks because of how much everybody hates it. But it's allowed him to actually, because of that high volume to continue on the path. It's almost like the bears are enabling the strategy. Yeah. I mean, half the Treasury model is this intelligent capital issuance, but half of it is being as visible as possible

and having everybody know about your company and the ability to invest in it. And nobody does it better than Saylor. Everybody, especially in crypto and those folks in traditional finance know who he is and know about micro strategy and know about the option to buy Bitcoin and the potential for them to add value on top of Bitcoin. But he's buying four, five, six, maybe by this month 10 times what's being mined, right? You have to wonder who's selling it to them, to be honest, at this point, like how that much floor demand doesn't raise the market more dramatically on Bitcoin. I mean, it's a huge asset, obviously. Yeah, it's unclear. Actually, I'm unsure about so far year-to-date, but I looked at MSTR Bitcoin purchases in 2025 versus 24. They were down something like 11%.

Same when I looked at the US-Bot-Bikoyne ETFs, the inflows in 2025 were down 37% versus 2024. So I actually think even though these are massive numbers, they're down from what they were. So the marginal demand is actually decreased. Now, my gut is telling me, if you looked at that year-to-date on MSTR, it actually would be up from their pace in the second half of last year. And I do think like this will all help support the price. But yeah, there's a supply component to this price. Okay, so then thoughts on STRC generally.

Like I said, he believes that he's kind of found the perfect product. I actually sat down with him at Money 2020 in Vegas, sort of right after SCRC launched and he broke it down. I think he's unlocked a new kind of capital, which he's very good at, right? Finding a new money that can't gain exposure and finding a product that kind of works for them, this 11.5%, but it's also nonsense to say that it's risk-free. I'm a believer and a fan, and I believe in Bitcoin, it makes a lot of sense, but it's not the same. People compare it to the risk-free rate of like a Treasury, it's not the same thing.

That's exactly correct. These things can trade below par. It will all be based on, well, one, interest rates, and then folks view of credit risk, which is basically their ability to pay that preferred dividend. Now, they do have that massive cash reserve, and then obviously they have so much unencumbered Bitcoin that as long as they want to, they can continue to pay as long as they want. I actually think that they will. They're heavily incentivized to because they want to maintain access to the capital markets.

So I think that these things continue to trade around PAR until they don't. And you're right, like there is that big risk. If we go into a severe, severe Bitcoin downturn and it stays that way for many years, at some point folks will start to question whether or not they'll continue to pay that preferred dividend. But I think for now, they're in this really great spot, and they've got so much leeway that I think we're quite far off from that. Yeah, I mean, if the bear case is a multiple-year abysmal bear market, we're going to have much bigger problems.

And people have probably exited because they need the cash anyway. So it probably just wind down quietly. I don't see the it explodes overnight situation, unless Bitcoin, like, dropped from 75 to 30 in a week. And people just completely lost faith entirely in the market. 100% and really hard to think about a risk that would cause Bitcoin to do that anytime in the next couple years yeah let's hope not so that brings us obviously to what you're doing at you pexy you guys for context effectively the first salana treasury company i think there was like a

14-hour battle between you and someone else who's long gone for the technical crown and i think you've kind of always been viewed as the adults in the room in the treasury space you were there even even before most the Bitcoin treasury companies were. So how do you view, I guess, the current market and how you approach it as a treasury company? Paradoxically, I think it is a really, really great time to consider an investment in any treasury company. I would say, you know, when all these things were trading it five times,

that obviously you can look at it and say it's quite frothy, do you think that treasury companies deserve to trade at a premium? There are these multiple value-acrual mechanisms like issuing equity above book, like buying LockSoul at a discount that you can't get via other vehicles like an ETF or by buying sole natively. But I do think now where most of these things are trading at or slightly below book, it represents a good risk reward on the multiple. And then secondly, like the big thing that's going to determine our success or any treasury

company's success is the performance of the underlying token. And my view here is that right now, all altcoins are kind of tied to Bitcoin and we'll trade with a beta to them. And so there was no world in which Bitcoin goes from 126 in October all the way down cuts in half. And all these large altcoins don't fall by even more. But I actually do think if you look at the underlying fundamentals in terms of number of users, number the amount of adoption, number of developers, number of big corporates coming in and experimenting, It's all up into the right. And over time, prices follow fundamentals.

I actually do think that Solana and others will start to diverge from Bitcoin and very positive on Bitcoin. But I think Solana can go up over the medium to long term, regardless of what happens to Bitcoin. And so generally, we'll trade with the beta to that. And I like our chances. And then lastly, like I mentioned, we can add additional value on top by increasing our sole per share with these additional value of cruel mechanisms that I mentioned.

Yeah, I mean, I think looking back on a year of terms, treasury companies basically, right? I mean, it's kind of, I just remember going to Bitcoin Vegas, which is next week or something, and being pitched seven treasury companies saying that Bitcoin treasury companies are a really bad idea. But then coming to the conclusion that all coin treasury companies, you can debate whether something is a worthy treasury asset or not, but if the goal is to beat a benchmark, that the fact that you can stake and get OTC discounts and stuff makes them actually a much more compelling business than a Bitcoin treasury company. because Bitcoin does not have a native yield.

You have to do some kind of financial wizardry like sailor to beat Bitcoin. Solana, you can just, you guys can literally stake it and buy it a discount and you're beating it, period. 100%. So we stake to turn the treasury into this productive asset. We make 6 to 7% on that treasury. If we do nothing else, 40% of our Solana is Locke Solana that we bought at a roughly 15% discount. If you think of that as like, oh, ID on a bond, and you put,

to a yield equivalent, we still get the 6 to 7% staking yield, but it effectively doubles that. So all in, we can increase our sole per share by 10% if we do nothing else. And then there is that accretive issuance, which we did a $200 million subsequent raise in July of last year. It was highly accretive. And so all in last year, we were able to increase sole per share for our investors by 35%. To put that into perspective, if you bought Salana yourself and staked it, and similarly proportions and similarly timed, you'd have about 3% more soul from the staking yield.

And so we were able to get our investors 30% more soul from Treasury Company operations. Why isn't the market pricing that correctly then? I think they're starting to. I think generally what we've seen from MSTR is that in bull markets, you can trade at a premium and bear markets you will trade at a discount. We're actually trading at 1-1 on our fully loaded basis. And so we actually could issue capital here in this accretive form. Now it wouldn't be super accretive. We'd rather issue capital at two times MNAV than at 1-1. But we could do it. And I do think that if we get into a more full-bow market, it's possible or even likely that we'll see multiple expansion as well.

I mean, if Solana doubles in price here, if Bitcoin goes to 100-something or even into the 90s, which I think could be really supportive for all coins, the Treasury conversation is going to change entirely because everybody's going to have room to maneuver again. 100%. And so the biggest determinant of our price is this exogenous asset that we don't control. What I would say is like we're working on things that are within our control. So the big one that we've put out publicly is to increase the yield on our treasury. And so I don't believe the argument.

There's some new treasury companies out there saying like we make 3% on their staking yield, slap a 20 times multiple onto that, add it to NAB, and we should trade at 1-6. I don't believe that. I don't think investors will pay for what they can get themselves in the form of the staking yield. But I think if you can generate alpha on top of that, you can do it in a way that you can show investors it's a recurring and be low risk. Then I do actually think that they will slap a multiple on that and then add that to

book value. And so we're Uber focused to doing this in an off-chain way. So it'll be really low risk in a way that investors understand in an way that can be recurring. And I think if we can be successful, it can actually support our multiple, push us permanently above one, and then allow us to engage that capital markets flywheel in perpetuity. Yeah, so it seems like there's been a focus institutionally on Bitcoin and Ethereum, distant second and I guess Salana, distant third. I was going to play the video, but it's not worth listening to him. Kevin O'Leary, but he says, he thinks the clarity act will pass.

I still have stream doubts about that personally. I don't think so. But that that can send Bitcoin to 200K, then he kind of goes on to say, there's Bitcoin and Ethereum and everything else. I think he called them Pooh-Poo Coins. But it seems like there's a lot of opportunity, actually, in Solana, and there's a lot happening kind of under the service here.

Maybe you can explain this better because it's a bit over my head. Solana's prop AMM hits 19.8 billion March volume outpaces, centralized exchanges. So it seems like maybe Wall Street's missing some of the higher upside opportunities right now by just focusing on Bitcoin and kind of slightly Ethereum. That is definitely our belief. So Bitcoin was my first love, Ethereum was my second love, and then Solana, I think, is my true love. But what I would say is, like, we did the first large-scale equity raise for any alt-coin treasury. We could have chosen Ethereum. The view within

crypto was that Ethereum is a bit constrained by its original design decisions. So it's actually had to push out execution to separate blockchains called L2s. And most folks... Which has been going great. Yeah. And so I think Vitalik is even coming back saying like they're all achieving decentralization much slower than he had thought. And so there's this view that L2s are parasitic to each value capture.

Whereas when you have one singular state machine and something like Solana, that is highly performant. That has been around a long time. So institutions can trust it. and it has this wonderful distribution with 5 million monthly active users, I actually do think that it has the best chance to be the endgame winning smart contract blockchain. And then the last thing that I'd say is Solana has a North Star called Internet Capital Markets, which I actually think is the key use case for crypto and blockchain.

And so essentially, our current financial infrastructure is built on rails that were created 50 plus years ago. These are things like ACH and the credit card issue or networks. And even FinTech is just a front-end wrapper. So if I sent you $10 via Venmo, make it easy for me to do that, but it'd use ACH in the background. And so I think that we can improve all of these things using blockchain and internet-based rails, and Solana is in the Capbird seat to do that via things like stable coins,

tokenizations, and even AI agents. Can you break down a bit the other headline I brought up there, but Solana's prop AMMs hit $198 billion in March trading volume, now accounting for over 60% of all Solana decks activity. I saw that the spreads are tighter than even some of the big centralized exchanges. And what does this mean? And is this a missed opportunity or is this just yet again some temporary crypto story where retail is degenning out in some far corner of the cryptovirs?

Yeah. So prop AMMs are largely unique to Solana, has to do with the underlying architecture of Solano's blockchain, but they're basically a new type of AMM where they don't use these public liquidity pools. They're more actively managed by professional market makers, and they can actually provide better spreads than going to a centralized exchange like finance. And so because of this better fill orders and user experience, you're seeing a lot of traders on Solana actually gravitate toward these prop AMMs.

These are things like SOFI and humidify and bison phi and obrhic and they're becoming more and more popular. Now, they work best on major pairs. They're not great for the long tail of assets. I'm sure that that will be figured out in time. I do think this is a great use case on Solana, which is one of very many as we move capital markets on chain. We were kind of talking about Heath and layer twos and it naturally takes my brain to defy and all the hacks that we've had. I don't have the article here, but a Jeffreys analyst basically said that for the first time he thinks all these hacks that have been happening, helped out, drift protocol, seeing arbitrarum freeze assets, seeing AVE freeze assets. And then in this case, the unique contagion that happened with it being toxic debt rather than just stealing assets and selling them, that Wall Street is going to quickly back off of their interest in tokenization and real world assets and defy and yield. How do you feel about that, especially because you're participating?

in it. I think there's some truth to that. The good news and the thing that is making me happy is that these were generally OPSEC issues rather than like smart contract issues or program issues. And so I do think that smart contracts are getting safer and safer to use. I think it's so nascent that we're in process of upgrading processes and protocols. And so there's a lot of talk like could circle of frozen USDC from the drift hack and things like that that I do think. There's a class action lawsuit, I think, against them for not having done it, but they said they needed a court order to do so. So governance, decision-making, centralization is in a huge question mark. Yeah, and I do think that these things will improve over time.

And then as far as tokenization goes, my understanding is that you have a transfer agent, which is the main transfer agent, which is the final record of truth. But then you have this code transfer agent as well as keeping track of everything that's happening. happening on chain. And I think the end ownership of the asset rests with that main transfer agent. And so I actually do think that if some of these tokens were involved in a hack in some way, you actually can get it back, is my understanding. So I think that all of this will likely put a bit of a maybe slow down very slightly traditional finance coming on chain. But I think the benefits are just so vast and we'll figure out some of these small bumps along the road that the horses left the barn and it's inevitable. I think it's just sort of, as usual, we just

see a story and we conflate everything together. So you got to get Jeffrey's guy who maybe doesn't deeply understand. He says, this is going to stall tokenization. But I don't think this stalls the tokenization side of moving things faster, cheaper, without a third party, which is the key part of tokenizing stocks, it's just a better way to clear and to settle. What it might hurt, though, is all the things being built to earn yield on those tokenized assets, right? That part is maybe a little scarier because you have to put it to work. So I don't think they're right about tokenization stopping, but maybe having the full suite of financial services and yield products and stuff may be more hesitant, or we get an extremely centralized version of defy for each company. Morgan

Stanley has their own, like, walled garb. and defy heavily protected and it doesn't it's not happening on ethereum yeah i think that the technology for tokenization exists now and the big thing holding it back number one was regulation obviously SEC is doing a lot there putting these rules in place as we speak and so the biggest hurdle is being solved in real time my sense is the next biggest one is you do need a bunch of different players to coordinate to come in and kind of all come in together but if you look at like what NASDAQ is doing, building tokenization infrastructure, NYSC, building a tokenized trading platform or DTCC saying they're going to make all 1.6 million securities that they

custody digitally eligible. And the thing that gives me a lot of solace is the kind of hinting that they're going to do this on public blockchains or give end users like the choice of where to move their assets in time. So I do think that it will not be like something that happens next year, but over three to seven years, we're seeing so much movement from so many key players that, and I actually think like this is very underpriced because I don't think a lot of traditional investors that we speak to actually know about this, that is this massive, massive opportunity. It is a huge opportunity. I just hate when we score own goals.

And I wonder, you know, I don't know how much of it is truth or myth, but with things like mythos coming out from Anthropic, the attack vectors against everything, non-unique to defy, are just increasing so massively that it's hard to even imagine what the next hack will be. I think that's why people were so shaken by this because Drift was literally just like AI social engineering, posing as a trading firm for months before getting permission to steal the money, right? There was no actual hack there. There was lies, but they took money that they were given the car keys. You know, they stole the car that they were given the keys to borrow. And then with Kelp, obviously, they didn't just steal the

assets. They went and took a massive loan against it, creating toxic debt on Ave. These are two things we hadn't seen before. Yeah. I'm hoping that, and I think what we're seeing is this is mirroring traditional finance where, you know, people make mistakes, but then you learn from the mistakes of others. And it's this continual process of improvement via upgrading your OPSEC, via upgrading your risk management procedures. And I think that we'll get there. And we'll take those lessons and we'll just get better. Yeah, I agree. So I have an honorable mention story that I just want to bring up because it's kind of mind-blowing the takes on it, which is that everybody seems to be talking about SBF again. So obviously, I guess I'll bring up the story that's sparking this first. I'm controlling my

screen with my mouse on an angle is really challenging. SpaceX strikes a 60. billion dollar deal for cursor. So that was an interesting story in and of itself, especially when you found out that FDX had bought 5% of it for $200,000. So it's basically a 15,000 X and makes them worth $3 billion their position that it would have been. So I even saw Tom Lee retweet that tweet that tweet that I just showed you and say like, great job SPF, you're awesome, like literally like not on accident. So I would just like to offer my opinion is that if I, I had everyone else's money to invest with that I had stolen, and I was given access to every VC investment. I would also put $200,000 into literally everything, complete spray and prey and look like a genius down the road.

Nobody's listing the hundreds of things that they invested in that did not go up. And this was not his money, and he had no risk. So that's why he's in jail. And by the way, the bankruptcy process is built to liquidate assets to give it back to creditors. so there's no world which people seem to think they should have held these assets as investors or something. Yeah, I completely agree with your take. I know that he doesn't think all this is his fault. And now he's probably fuming, thinking that, you know, if none of this would have happened,

then, you know, he'd be sitting on all these massive, massive gains. But actually, like, he has only himself to blame. And if he did nothing, he didn't just, like, steal customer funds. Like, he'd be sitting pretty. and so would all the investors in FDX? Maybe. Or he wouldn't have had the money to invest in these things. Yeah.

That's true too. Maybe or less. Yeah, I know that he's got to be fuming, but like I just see this. It just blows my mind that people are acting like you as like the greatest venture capitalist of all time. Yeah. Because these things went up and once again, there's nuance and there's zero context here. But it sucks. Listen, it's brutal, I think, to be an FTC creditor.

Yeah. I was a Voyager creditor, one of the biggest. and having found out what they did with the money afterwards after lying, it's horrible. And then, you know, Voyager and them, but not even as bad, but liquidated at the dead bottom of the market because of the timing of the bankruptcy. I can also say, hey, if they had just not paid us back for the last two or three years, imagine what we would have gotten back. Yeah.

And by the way, I've also seen FTCS customers saying this would have benefited us. If FTCS doesn't go under, these investments benefit FTCS, not a customer who had funds on FDX trading. There's no world where these investments were a benefit to FTX without a bankruptcy. Yes. Like to customers. Yes. Yeah, completely agree.

A lot of misleading or uninformed takes out there. So anything else you're watching before we wrap up, anything else, like really compelling that's on your mind? Nothing too much. I do like the risk reward here for crypto. I think most things will go the way of Bitcoin. I kind of think we had the perfect storm to bring Bitcoin down from 126 in October. you know, whether that was like four-year cycle fears, quantum fears, Bitcoin OG selling,

like precious metal stealing the show, the list goes on and on. But it's hard to think of more things that could really pull Bitcoin down from here. And I do think we have some positive catalysts like the war in Iran ending, like the Clarity Act potentially passing. If a central bank was revealed that they bought Bitcoin, I think that would obviously do it. Or even Bitcoin moving up 20%. For whatever reason would just cause a bunch of FOMO could push us back. to all time highs. That's my favorite one when you dumb people down to the, you know, mentality of like a goldfish, like the intelligence of a goldfish, you just say nothing's better marketing for an asset than higher prices of that asset. It's true. It should work in the opposite way,

but yeah, in crypto, generally how it works. The best mean, you know, like the line for Bitcoin at 126 and the line for Bitcoin at 60. It's so true. Yeah. All right, well, thank you. Brian. It's great to have you in the studio. Hopefully we can do this again in the not so distant future. Everybody, I'll be back, of course, at noon for the Daily Wolf on Yahoo. And that's how we got for you. Brian, thank you so much, man. Thank you very much. Thank you guys. Frozen lasagna, medium power, 15 minutes. Sounds like Ojo time. Let's play. Feel the fun with Play-Ojo. The online casino with all the latest slot and live casino games. What you win is yours to keep with no wagering requirements, instant payouts and no minimum withdraws. Hey, I just won.

Woohoo! Feel the fun. Play, oh, Joe. Honey, forget about the lasagna. Let's celebrate. 19 plus Ontario only. Please play responsibly. Concern about your gambling or that of someone close to you.

Call 16-531-2600 or visit connexonterio.ca.