The Wolf Of All Streets - Why Bitcoin Will ROCKET To $126K — Arthur Hayes

Episode Date: May 14, 2026

Arthur Hayes joins the show with a bold call: Bitcoin is headed to new all-time highs, and the catalysts are stacking up fast. With BTC holding strong at $82K, JPMorgan going all in on tokenization via its new JLTXX Ethereum fund, Schwab rolling out spot crypto to 35 million retail clients, and Morgan Stanley triggering a fee war on E*Trade — Wall Street's crypto invasion is no longer a thesis, it's the trade. Add DTCC tapping Chainlink for a $4.7 quadrillion tokenized collateral platform, the Senate Banking Committee marking up the 309-page CLARITY Act this Thursday, and Saylor unveiling a $2.2B tax-loss playbook while still pledging to buy 10 to 20 BTC for every one sold — and the setup is loaded. Hayes lays out why he believes Bitcoin's next leg up will catch everyone off guard, and how to position for the move before the breakout hits. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Bitcoin's ready to rocket to $126,000 and there's nothing you can do about it. It is a foregone conclusion, not my words, but those of today's amazing guest, one Mr. Arthur Hayes. We're going to dive into that and all the ridiculousness in crypto right now. Let's go. What is up, everybody? Happy Wednesday. Good morning to all of you. I hope that you're having as amazing of a Wednesday morning as I am.

I haven't done anything today. I literally have done nothing. in the snow. I wanted to make Arthur feel comfortable. Arthur likes to ski, but I guess I'm off-season now because you were in Miami last week. Yeah. You know, you can do so much in the snow and then you got to change it up.

Yeah, I mean, dude, I don't think anybody's having more fun than you. I'm going to be honest. Makes me, honestly, it makes me a little bit uncomfortable. Like, do you ever do anything you don't want to do ever? Fuck that shit, no. I love it. Well, listen, so I guess we can

start with your most recent writing. my favorite the butterfly touch i mean first of all this image like i don't even know what it means but it's provocative honey is sweet life is beautiful and pepe is max as fuck and then your first line the reductive sensation of expectation permeates my body as the incipient bull market generally caresses my soul so uh you think the bull market's coming i guess huh it's here it's starting we're we're building we're getting there and you know i feel i feel like it's time okay so listen I said, you always love to throw out a big number. I'm going to be honest.

I said this to you before. Now we're saying 126K and people are like, can't believe we would possibly be talking about an all-time high. We used to like throw out a million. We used to be like a casual 500K. Now 126K makes waves. Isn't that just a signal of how beat down and depressed people are for no good reason? Yeah.

I mean, at the end of the day, when it gets the 126, and I'm sure you and other people ask me, what's your new price target? And I'll throw some ridiculous number because that's what you do. Why not? Like, it doesn't cost you anything. It gets above $1.26.9. It could go straight to $1.27.

That's what my chart says. It could go straight down to dollar. You never know. You never know. Seriously. So like in your mind, what's the case for for bullishness at this particular moment? We're kind of sitting in this area where, you know, we're well off the lows, right? I think the bottom.

I thought the bottom was in from the minute bat bottom was in personally. You obviously agree. I mean, what's the case for us to keep heading up here? As usual, always. comes down to money printing credit creation. And I think that I wrote about this in my most recent essay, the U.S.-Iran war has been a catalytic effect to push these themes. On one hand, you have sort of the AI build-up and this race between the United States and China to host the most amount of machine intelligence within their squiggly line borders. And that requires a fuck ton of

CAPEX. You know, what's the 2026 number, something like 700 billion is the expected spend by the hyperscalers? And the economics and the economic game theory that goes along with this means that they're going to continue to spend more and more money until there's an outside exogenous event from the market that forces them to stop. But even if they spend down all of their cash flows, both in the U.S. and both in China, the word from on high is we need to be number one in tech. and then when in tech means AI, and that means the banks and the central banks and the central bank to provide the credit. If Google runs out of free cash flow to build a trillion dollars of CAPEX and we're still in this sort of AI meta, then JP Morgan needs to step up to the plate and lend them the money.

And they will because at the end of the day, you have sort of the government saying AI is the most important thing to us. It's a national security effort. It's an economic effort. It's this competition between the two largest economic and military superpowers on AI, and both leaders, Trump and she, have bought into this. Whether you believe it's a misallocation of capital or not, it doesn't matter. From on high, AI is the thing. So banks will fall in the line to do the lending.

And we're starting to see this. If you look at construction and industrial loans in the banking sector, it's up into the right, starting in, you know, middle of last year. And the Fed is obviously increasing its balance sheet, using the reserve management purchases, situation, the people's makeup of China. And they're also increasing their balance sheet and the Chinese 10-year bond is yielding something like 1.5%. So they've got a lot of room to borrow money to build the stuff that's going to power AI. So we have that sort of credit creation

on the technology side. And then when you talk about the war, every other country in the world is now recognizing that the United States and their explicit and implicit promises of free navigation of, you know, going to fight wars to make sure that the good guys get their stuff on time. That's out of the window. The straits still pretty much close for most traffic. And, you know, certain nations are suffering. And they're sitting there like, okay, why did I own all these treasury bonds and all this big tech U.S. equity? I should have built another pipeline from the U.A.E. Why am I? This is not like a not unknown issue that there's this Persian Gulf place and there's this choke point. Like we've been talking about this ship for

longer than I'd been alive. And yet it's all of a sudden it's a surprise of the UAE now, now cannot ship any of their shit out of the Persian Gulf because these motherfuckers didn't want to build a pipeline. It's also barely a surprise that Europe can get gas and closes. Like Europe, Europe's like, what, what? Like, come on, guys. It's like, you're an entire continent.

You didn't think about this. Yeah. But yeah, let's just buy some more fucking treasury bonds, right? So I think that's ended. So whatever happens in this, in this conflict and however it results at the end of the day, everybody who has been caught off sides is going to realize that winning all these dollar paper assets does not protect you in the time of war. And so you need to move from just in time to just in case. That's highly inflationary. And it puts a dampener on U.S. financial markets,

which Besson and Warsh are going to have to fill that plug, plug that hole with pretty money. And we're already starting to see that with sort of swap lines and discussions about who should get swap lines if they do what the U.S. says or, you know, Bessent railing against the Japanese Ministry of Finance and basically telling them what to do to make sure that they're not dumping treasuries in the market. Hey, why don't you use a swap line or other means to raise the dollars to buy the commodities to, you know, rebuild your infrastructure that you should have been building for the last 50 years. That's what's going to happen. And so I think these two things are very inflationary. It's dollar credit creation, yuan credit creation.

and that's what's going to power crypto. Yeah, I find it really interesting. Jordi Visser said something similar to me a couple months ago, but he was like, they're printing money. It's just not the government right now. And he said the same thing about AI CapEx. I mean, these companies need to raise so much capital that money has to come from somewhere, and I don't think people have just realized the shift that you just laid out so eloquently.

It said like the money, whether it comes in Fed policy or rate cuts or bond buybacks or whatever, like the money's coming for AI. and that's all going to find its way through the system eventually. Exactly. And I think obviously we've been trained to look at central bank balance sheets from the start of USQE in 2008, obviously in Japan QE until the present, and de-ethesize the role of the commercial banking sector in the creation of credit because credit can be created either the central bank level or the commercial bank level.

And usually when you create credit at the commercial bank level, the money multiplier is much higher because they're lending to real businesses or building stuff. And then that person who gets a salary is going to get credit. And there's a whole money multiplier effect, which is why if you want to juice an economy, bank lending does way more than central bank lending. I mean, we're at that. You know, we have the Linna Alden. Nothing stops this train. Fiscal dominance theory.

But we are getting this guy. I made a meme for him. That's Kevin Warsh. She's a soft puppet. I put that on Yachton finance. Yeah, you know. But I think we all know that no matter what Warsh says. that he's going to do what Trump says, right?

I don't buy the, like, past hawkishness. Eventually, we're going to get rate cuts, but do you think that even matters? I mean, right now, I think prediction markets have rate hikes at 40% or something. Who cares? I mean, I think this, and then you can argue with me in this. I've been very clear.

I believe that the quantity of money is more important than the price. And, you know, the most important episode that recently that we can exhibit this phenomenon is during, you know, 2020, 2020, when, you know, we bottomed in that last cycle, if you want to call it that. And you had Fed funds at five and a half. And the engineering of reducing the reverse repo program from $2.5 trillion down to zero,

essentially powered stonks, powered crypto, power real estate, right? And Fed funds is at five and a half, super restrictive, supposedly, right? Why would you think that, you know, financial markets can rally when you have Fed funds at one of the highest levels that it's been in, you know, 20, 30 years? So again, it's the quantity of money, not the price. As long as people can get that cash, it's flowing through the system, then assets like Bitcoin are doing to perform very, very well. So I don't care if the Fed fund's rate goes up or down,

and I sort of think that's a red herring. Obviously, the market focused on Kevin Warren saying, I want to reduce the Fed balance sheet. Fine. Okay. And there's very valid reasons why he wants to do that. You know, Buffalo Bill Besson has written some very eloquent opeds in the Wall Street Journal, the gain of function of the Fed, you know, all this, you know, the Fed is the engine of inequality, absolutely true. But, you know, they're talking on two sides of their mouth. Because on the one hand,

while the Fed is talking about, yes, I want to reduce my balance sheet, Governor Stephen Moran just wrote a very important piece of you, I think I want to read it. It's a user's guide to how reduced the Fed's balance sheet. And he put out like something like 10 or 12 different policy measures that the Fed and the Treasury could adopt that would reduce the demand for reserves. which would reduce the assets out of the balance sheet as well. And the takeaway is that all of these measures are essentially regulatory changes that nudge banks to buy more treasuries that the Fed is then selling. And so it's a net wash.

It's not as if the Fed is going out and saying, hey, I've got $4 trillion of treasury bonds. I want to reduce my balance sheet by $2 trillion. I'm going to go open the open market and sell these bonds. That is not anyone, no one is saying Fed go sell some bonds in the open market. No, let's do some regulatory Fugazi with the banks. And so the Fed reduces their treasury holdings and the banks increase it in the same amount. The net effect is zero. So all this hawkish is nonsense.

Yes, technically speaking, he will reduce the balance sheet. It'll have no effect on dollar credit. Yeah, you came with Buffalo Bill Besson. I'm workshopping Daddy Warbucks. Worshbuck. What do you think? Just an idea. 20 Montana.

A lot of the idea I'm working for. The new president would be amazing, man. We just make things happen on the fly now. You know, it's perfect. But I 100% agree with everything you said. I actually thought when we saw the UAE leaving OPEC news and then you looked under the hood and it was all about swap lines and basically protecting the dollar, you could see all this. It's just you can see exactly what Buffalo Bill Bessett, as you said, is trying to do here.

I wonder how much stable coins will play into that. I don't know. I mean, maybe you could tell me, I don't know how much. let's call it from this inauguration of Trump till today, how much is total stable coin in the circulation gone up? I don't think it's that much. I don't think it's that. I approximately like 30%, 25, 30%. I mean, people talk about trillions, you know. I mean, I talked about it. It's a 10 trillion. I will. I mean, I think it will, but like, I just wonder if that's going to be like, you know, some smathering of private coins all over every single bank for their own stable coin and their own cross-border usage and whether it goes around. But Tether is, you know, a top 10, I think, now holder of U.S. treasuries.

I think writ large, stable coins are like seven or eight. You know, if you gather them all together and compare them to a country. That's got to be a part of at least Besson's thinking or, you know, or the United States thinking for hyper-deterization. I mean, you see like this news. Like Brazil is like blocking stable coins for cross-border transactions now because nobody's using their currency anymore. You can just use dollars, right?

I mean, it's going to be a problem. Absolutely. And I said this in my piece about Sablecoins. If you are an emerging economy, this is a direct assault on your financial sovereignty. And so the only thing you can do is do what China did. Ban all of U.S. tech. Like you cannot have your people having a Facebook, a WhatsApp, an X, and all these different accounts. Or you severely restrict their ability to integrate any of the sending functions of currency on these platforms.

Because it absolutely is a way to completely disemediate your ability to control your money supply. and force, well, the user convenience factor having a dollar for your plebs to go and use dollars instead of reales or rupee or whatever currency, right? So absolutely, if that's your end goal, that's what you should be doing. Yeah. Is there anything unique to the crypto market, clarity act, institutional adoption, any of these things that you think play into the thesis of higher prices right now, or is it really all about macro in your mind? I think it's always, always been about macro. I want to on stage and consensus in Miami, and I said, we don't need no regulations, right? Who cares?

Clarity Act, I hope Trump vetoes it if it ever gets to his decks. Don't need any of these regulations. If Bitcoin and crypto needed regulations who survived, we wouldn't be worth a dime. Because what's the point? If you're just going to have another Fugazi derivative that sits on some member of the financial systems balance sheet, we got that. We don't need that. What's the point. And I think people miss this distinction. The reason why banks want to offer this product to their clients is because the product does something for its client. It's a non-correlated asset that's done very, very well in inflationary environments and environments when lots of fiat has been created. Obviously, their clients want to have some of that. And the bank is in the business

of making fees and providing the product of their clients want. So sure, they want to onboard crypto. And they should be allowed to do that. But other than that, like, why are we bending over backwards to like try to institutionalize bitcoin. Essentially just saying what you've actually built for the last 15 years is a zero. And we just want to have another piece of shit financial product that's going to go to zero when some small shitty bank goes under. Yeah, I'm kind of feeling that way. And I've been saying for a while ever since I,

Coinbase killed the Clarity Act. Like, you know, I was like, how the fuck does Brian Armstrong have anything to do with killing the Clarity Act? Like I really saying the quiet parts out loud about the lobbies and the money now. because last I checked, like, he's not a senator, you know? And then I started like digging more deeply into it. I had a conversation with Chris John Carlo, who used to be ahead of CFDC. And he actually said to me flat out, he was like, the Genius Act, he's like, it's not great.

You know, and everybody was cheering the Genius Act. He's like, now you have circle. And he's like, you have private companies and the government can see your transactions. It's like the worse than the CBDC. And he's like, and the Clarity Act is so that the banks can do what they want in the industry, not so that crypto has rules. It's like banks can't do all the things that Coinbase can right now and they want to. That's what the Clarity Act is really about.

It's just really interesting. And it echoes your point. I mean, Coinbase has what, 120, 130 million funded accounts, stable coins are $300 billion. Crypto doesn't need. The Clarity Act is more likely to just allow banks to co-opt it. Unfortunately, I mean, the news yesterday, there was 100 amendments yesterday added to the Clarity Act for Markup yesterday. A hundred. Like, tell me this thing.

any chance of passing. I mean, I hope it doesn't pass. But again, and I, hats off to Brian Armstrong. He is a CEO of a publicly listed centralized crypto company. And he's doing everything in his power to make his shareholder's money. And he should be doing that. And that does not mean that he has the best interest of the broader crypto ecosystem at

heart. You have to understand what his role is and what he's trying to do. Reduciary duty. Yeah. That's his job, right? So why do you think that he would ever have the interest of the average Bitcoin or the average open source developer in his mind. If they converge, great. But if they don't, then sure, he's going to go his own way.

I'm curious your opinion on STRC. So obviously, I have this theory, kind of working theory that, you know, we see these little pops. We're going to see these little pops in Bitcoin, not huge moves. But every time you see that STRC is about to trade above par and go above 100, like you can literally front run Michael Saylor transparently buying a couple billion dollars in two or three days. And why wouldn't you want that trade? You know, like you literally just go out of a hundred bucks. I have the little tracker, you know, like I watch the tracker now. It's fun right here this week.

Yeah, see, he bought to about, should have bought about 2,000 Bitcoin just yesterday when it came above par. I want to front run that. I haven't really delved deeper to the corporate finance mechanics of STRC. I'm sure that, you know, Michael Saylor is a genius at corporate finance, right? And so that's why he's been able to do what he's done. I think he's in a unique position in terms of micro strategy's ability to pull off these products, these derivatives. No one else is going to be able to do that.

No one else has the balance sheet. No one else has a connectivity to sort of the sell side. Like this is only him and his company can do that. And they'll succeed or fail depending on that. So, I mean, I don't think micro strategy is going out of business any time soon. Obviously, from what I understand, he doesn't have to play dividend in STRCs. You're sort of trusting that he's going to. That's me, bro.

You know what happens when you trust in crypto. It doesn't end up very well. Not the sale is doing anything bad. He's going to do it to the best of his fucking shareholders. Again, right? People need to understand what these people are there to do, right? He's the CEO of a court member or whatever or micro strategy. That's his baby, right?

He's there to protect micro strategy. He's not there to protect your Bitcoin bags. I mean, that's the line sometimes. I mean, I talked to him Wednesday morning just by total coincidence. Like I had the first interview lined up with him right after he said he'd sell some Bitcoin. I was like, oh, there's going to be fire. And, you know, like, he didn't say it explicitly, but yeah, his shareholders and anyone who's buying STRC and the SEC need to hear that Bitcoin is not an impaired asset when it comes to

protecting dividends and STRC shareholders. Like, he has to say, I would sell some of this if retail starts to get wrecked or else like straight to jail, have fun, right? I mean, so. So, I mean, I respect it. He's just kind of evolving. But to your point, all these guys, I mean, you can't just say shit when you're the CEO of a publicly traded company. Like you have to actually like, you know, Brian Armstrong can't just go out there and say wild stuff.

He has to actually protect his shareholders. Like, as you said, what about all coins, man? This story is broiling my mind. I asked you about before. I know you don't care about this particularly quite. But DTCC builds out blockchain-based collateral system with chain link integration. First of all, like, I don't know what that means. I don't be honest.

But like, and then I just look at the chain link chart and it's like not even up. I'm like, how can you have the DTCC, which settles $4.7 quadrillion dollars a year in volume? Like make an announcement about your all coin and it doesn't move at all. I mean, how bad is it out there? Because that would, four years ago, if you saw anything like that, you'd be up like 700X in five minutes. Yeah, because again, I've been in this game since 2013. I remember when we used to look in sploogging our past because somebody had a PayPal announcement or, you know, Oh my God.

Did you see that like that shit coin got a Bloomberg article written by them? Fah! Like that fucking 500% right? Like we were so hungry for any sort of like non-crypto validation. And over time we've seen that none of these deals mean anything, right? If you don't provide any value for your retail people who use this product or service, then we've seen time in, time again that none of these partnerships allow them to anything most of the time. Right.

And so yeah, maybe that is the, you know, some like deep value. is there on chain link because they're actually going to do something with DTCC, but history tells me that there's some press release, maybe it's like a proof of concept, maybe it's like some small team within DTCC is going to do a pilot with chain link, and the actual on-chain fees or on-tign activity from this is going to be de minimis. But, okay, maybe in 10 years it will be really, really big. But again, we've seen this arc so many times,

and time after time, it's boiled down to pretty much nothing. Yeah, and I think the other thing is you get the huge announcement and the company or the protocol or whatever, they're doing something, but none of that value necessarily accrues to the token anyways. So even if it is the biggest deal in the world, like, how does that, like, move the token? And I think that's been the biggest problem in crypto for ages. Maybe the more interesting question is what tokens exist where you can actually handicap what the value accrual of a big announcement or of fees will be and should we be holding those? What are you interested in? Hyperliquid. I mean, very consistent.

The hyperliquid tokenomics do exactly what they should do. And now, obviously, the perp exchange business is not the first people to do this. DYDX, GM, and there's so many people who have done on-chain perps. But the tokenomics were Fugazi in most respects. Lots of VC bags, interesting admission schedules, whatever, right? But we know with hyperliquid and we see it on chain, 97% of it. their revenue, buy back hype and burn it. And that is why, I'm a bagholder of hype. And I think that other backholders are very happy because we see a direct correlation to hyperliquid does lots

of trading volume. They earn fees. The fees come to me as the token holder. And even today, and obviously I advise a lot of projects. And I say it's very, very simple, guys. And I don't want to hear excuses about why you can't do it. No one gives a fuck about your excuses of why you make money and none of that money comes to me as a token holder. I don't care about what your lawyer said or what your advisor said or what your big ass VC said. If you make all this money and I don't see any of it, fuck your token. Go to zero.

And finally, we've gotten to that stance over after doing this since like 2017 in terms of big ICOs and people aren't feeling it anymore. If they're not seeing any money in their pocket from success of the protocol, then fuck it. I don't need to own this token. And I think that's a maturation of the space. Yeah, not even picking on anybody, but it always, it's like the same debate that you can always have about like owning ripple shares versus XRP as a token.

And these companies that have, you know, you can basically get the value out of the stock or you can buy the token that's being used to fund the value of the stock. Circle just, you know, they had their announcement on Arc. They raised $222 million in a token presale from BlackRock, Apollo, and literally everybody else. And I'm like, damn, our new KOLs are BlackRock and Apollo like doing pre-sale token launches. Like, what's their vesting? You know, like, it's really wild. But I still don't, like, why would you own ARC token necessarily versus owning Circle stock?

Right. You can trade Circle stock right now. You can't trade ARC. I'm pretty sure that, you know, Black Rock's probably stuck in some, you know, two-year lockup, whatever deal that they saw. Yeah. They're going to figure out exactly what it means. Larry Fierke's out his best-to-stitch schedule.

He's like, you know, hitting the OTC's term sheet deal. in the fucking telegram chat. That you can do a labor pick? I don't think so. You know, it's interesting, though, is like you, obviously, I know that you're a hyper-liquid bull, and honestly, I don't own it, and I feel stupid because it's just screaming that I should.

Hey, man, you can do it right now. You don't know. I might, actually. But like 21 shares launches T-T-Hype. I'm called it T-hype. It might be FIP. T-C-C-C-I don't know how I'll pronounce the second one. TXXXX-H on NASDAQ,

the first U.S. E-TF. tracking hyperliquid. First of all, I think that Matt Hogan said it, but I think this is like the end of the single asset ETF era ends right here at hyperliquid. I don't know. I just think like, you know, now we're going to get indexes and stuff. Like, I think that the market has an appetite for this one. It did, you know, it did, I think, modest inflows in the first day. But like how many more of these can we get? But I think it actually matters that you have some sort of like level of institutional stamp of approval in the form of an

ETF even if it's a smaller one. And this just might be another case for hyper liquid. It's at $1.8 million in day one volume. Yes, for a lot of people, obviously hype is special because it's a extinction level event for centralized exchanges. A well-run decks with a lot of mind chair and a growing market share and permissionless trading

and doing everything well and properly is an extinction level event for the centralized exchange. Because centralized exchanges make all their money from very good traders taking money from dumb retail traders. That's literally all it is. And that's the same in, you know, traditional markets. And so if you're saying, hey, retail trader,

not only can you own this token and earn a percentage of profits, right, of the thing that you're funding, but you can trade the newest shit coin. You can trade 20x leverage oil on the weekend. And all you got to do is connect your wall. You have to deal with some dumb exchange customer service representative. And it's a much better training experience. That is why, you know,

a lot of exchanges don't let you trade hype spot or it's very difficult. Right. And so for a lot of people like, oh, I get the hyperliquid thing. We're like, how do I buy it? Like I don't understand how I get the hyperliquid token. It's not on the largest sex that I'm familiar with. And so I'm sort of out of the game. So I think some of the ETS will bring a different type of person who understands a hype story,

but for whatever reason, it was too hard for them to buy the token. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. So, I mean, I'm just thinking about this. You literally invented the perpetual swap. I mean, is that fair to say? I don't know if you can hear me. Is it fair to say that you invented the perp swap? Because they seem to be coming everywhere.

Yeah, can you hear me? I said, I said, it's interesting. We're talking about hyperliquid, but you basically, this is where we get, where we have those. Can you hear me? I'm a lost the ears. Not the first time it's happening. Can you hear me now?

Did your AirPods die? Can't hear me. What was that commercial? you hear me now? Sprint. Verizon. Can you hear me? Scott, you there?

Yeah, I'm here, but you can hear me, can you? Am I muted? You guys can hear me, right? Can you guys hear me out there in the world? I have to tell Arthur to sign off and sign on one second. I'm going to do the prime. Yeah, I'm here. You can't see me.

It's so weird. Go to the chat. Do you guys just hang on where you get back? Scott, hello? Yeah, I'm putting you in the thing. Hey, guys, this is real TV right now. I'm going to tell them to sign off and sign on and see what happens. We did it.

I'm going to go skiing while we wait for Arthur to try to come back. It looks nice out there. And I was really, that was my moment. I was going to be like, you invented the perpetual swap, like literally. And now we're talking about having prediction markets for perpetual swap. And see, oh, yeah, see, we did it. We did technology. Okay, so I was having a big moment there where I was going to give you all the credit in the world.

You created the perpetual swap and here we are talking about hyperliquid. Like you literally invented it. What is it like to see that now we're having conversation about perpetual swats coming to the stock market? Like literally to everything. And then you have like prediction markets that are now adding perpetual swaps to the prediction markets. You invented this thing. I fucking love it. It's awesome.

It's very validating for what myself and the team created. back in 2016 and that this financial product has become this ubiquitous and at least you know obviously you know i've made a lot of money and you know being the father of purpose and all that but like on an ego level like i hope that hyperliquid or wherever comes after them you know destroys the cme the nisi the urex like all these exchanges and just says like we have a better product we have better product market fit we are able to allow seven billion people to trade whatever the fuck they want to trade go fuck yourself. And I hope that, you know, the hyperliquid or someone like them continues on this journey.

And I'm super proud of what Jeff and this team have built. I mean, how do you then loop in prediction markets, right? So you, like, I would say perp swaps were like, that was the like, just the tip of degeneracy. Now you've got, you got like, you know, people with inside knowledge of shit that's going to happen tomorrow, So potentially being able to bet on leverage on that event and nobody can stop them. I think it's great. As I've gone on record saying, I think insider trading should be legalized. There should be nothing you should not be allowed to trade.

Information should be free. And yeah, if you have inside information, I want to know about it. Why is it kept in the shadows? Why, you know, certain people can insider trade and certain people can't. So you get all this, you know, volatility in the price. It makes for a much better trading experience of all information at all times is presented in the market. And then we as traders can make a decision on a trade. People who use these signals can inform their decision making your running events.

I think insider trading is great. So, and I guess that if you believe that, then prediction markets does it on steroids because you can basically probably, I mean, I guess if you're smart enough or you have an edge, you can see those insider trades in the market basically based on the odds. the spreads versus other platforms and basically get on sides with the insider trader. And is that the idea? Yeah. And I'm sure there's some sort of like signal to noise, you know, factor analysis that quants can do.

And I'm sure they're doing it, right? Like Friday night is Trump going to bomb around or not, right? And people are looking at the market, the different market, seeing if there's a trend that's developing somebody placing some order on some esoteric markets to sort of like make a bunch of buddy because they already know what he's going to decide to do, right? But these are sort of things that we want all this information in the market. Nancy Pelosi loves to hear that. Well, Nancy Pelosi wouldn't be such a good trader if everybody could inside or trade.

Let's put it that way. Well, I guess that's the point is it. Nobody has an edge if everybody has the edge. That makes a lot of sense. I mean, is hype literally the only thing that you're looking at in the market outside of, you know, Bitcoin? I mean, do you touch Ethereum, Salana? Are there other all coins in the market? I have an Ethereum bag.

bag, it's been there for a while. Ethereum will do what it does. I'm very bullish on DeCash, the privacy narrative. I think that as the understanding of what AI can do with data sets from Big Tech and big government in terms of de-

anonymizing transactions and tracking fund flows, people are going to demand some privacy over the internet with money. And that is, in my opinion, Zcash, which is why I think that it belongs in every crypto person's portfolio. Obviously, maybe you don't believe in Zcash. Maybe it's

Manaro or something else, but pick one, right? And so I particularly believe that Zcash is the one. And I have to say, looking at Milstrom's portfolio, it's probably our second largest crypto asset outside of Bitcoin. Zcash caught fire like, you know, six months ago, whatever, maybe a year. Everybody started talk about at the same time. And now that privacy narrative is everywhere. I mean, this is, you know, BitWiCIO Matt Hogan says privacy can become crypto's next killer app. And I'm not sure how that aligns with Art Canton and Tempo. I mean, Arkansas, that's not privacy at all.

I mean, it's privacy for, like, it's privacy for Citadel to, like, not have their overflow be public, but it's not privacy for, like, you and me to send each other cash at the table at 11 that we didn't want people to know about because everybody is tough. I was there. I was at the party. How was it? Was it fun? It was fun.

Of course it was fun. It was fun. I mean, you know, it was fun. worst DJ I've ever heard in my entire life. Yeah, I'd rather go across the street to space. Yeah, space is better, you know, historically, and it's been there, it's the OG. I mean, I can remember some winter music conferences, you know, being on the, like, outside deck at space at noon. And I literally don't know if it's Wednesday or Monday.

So, yeah. Good time. I can't do that anymore, you know, in the same way. But privacy really seemingly has emerged here. And what you're talking about is privacy, into. transactions between individuals, not privacy for institutions here. Correct. Yeah.

And why not Monaro? You know, why Zcash? Why not Monaro? Or is it just choose your own? I mean, I've read some things about the cryptography behind Monero. So Monaro is obviously riging signatures and you're able, and I'm not a cryptographer, so I'm sure I'm butchering us a bit. It's a different way of essentially achieving privacy.

And some governments have been able to de-enonymize it. It's very difficult to do, but they have been able to do it. You can probably Google there's a Japanese criminal case about the government there was able to de-anonymize some Monaro transactions by a particular subject of investigation. Now, Zcash, with some of the upgrades, there's no more trusted setup. I remember being super bullish about Zcash in 2016 when it was the hottest shit coin around. Like privacy back then was such a thing, right? Massive launch. Obviously, the price price is looking at $3,000 a coin and like $2,000.

drop 9 to 9% and all sorts of fun of games in that market. But one of the big problems was that you had to trust that Zucco and the gang, when they did this whole elaborate sort of security setup, weren't fucking you. But they removed that in one of the subsequent upgrades. And so I believe from a cryptographic, cryptography perspective, Zcash is the most private of the offerings out there, which is why that's the one that I'm backing. And it seems like enough people like it, that it also gets the narrative momentum them that, you know, like, you're going to choose one, you might as well choose the one that a lot of people are talking about on Twitter.

Yeah. But again, people have been talking about Manero as well. So I think it's a race between pretty much Monaro or ZECash. I mean, anything else that's on your radar right now you're thinking about before I let you go? And then near intents. I think, you know, if you use the Zodal app, I'm an investor in that particular wallet, you can basically take your shielded Zcash and move it into any other coin. send somebody, I can send you Bitcoin using Shield of Zcash going through New Year Intense, and there's no traceability back to me. And I think that's amazing utilization of Zcash, because obviously you want to spend it on other stuff, but now you can spend anonymously that goes through New Year Intense. And I think if that becomes a thing, then you're going to see a lot more transactions

through that particular L1. Obviously, the blockchain earns a percentage of the fees on those transactions, and that can help flip the near protocol from inflation. to deflationary and power, I think, a very big move because it's down big from its all-time high of a few years. Yeah. Yeah. Everything is. Everything not names E-Cash and Hype.

So you've chosen the right horses, right? I mean, I just struggle to, you know, like what, why would my 2017 bag pump at this point, you know? But maybe it's disbelief, you know? Like, it just feels like, it feels like hype is the move. It's new enough. it actually has value. I'm going to buy some hype today. There we go. That's right.

You heard it here first. That shit's down 50% tomorrow. You'll know. Because Arthur sold me his hype bag. Yeah. You got them. All right, man. I appreciate you. Sorry about those technical issues before.

No, it was. It's a pleasure to catch up. And hopefully we'll do it in person at the next conference. I think last time we did it in person was in Dubai. That didn't happen this year. Yeah, yeah, now. Maybe in Singapore or Korea. We'll see.

See next time. All right, Arthur. Everybody give them a follow. Thanks, everyone. You know later. Peace, man.