Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to another episode of the Mark Ma Show,
Speaker 1: where we're talking about the decentralized revolution, the way the
Speaker 1: world's changing through our eyes, and of course we're trying
Speaker 1: to navigate this, and we're trying to navigate it um
Speaker 1: not to survive this, but to profit from it. And
Speaker 1: so I like to look at it, you know, from
Speaker 1: a news perspective, to change the way we look some
Speaker 1: of the headlines, we can see what's changing, and of
Speaker 1: course bring to you some exciting guests, and that's what
Speaker 1: we have today. I have on with me a returning guest,
Speaker 1: Dylan Leclair. He is a macro strategist. He is a
Speaker 1: senior analyst at the bitcoin magazine Pro and he is uh,
Speaker 1: he's young, but he's years ahead of his age. This
Speaker 1: kid is so smart. I love talking to him, and
Speaker 1: we cover a lot of ground. We're talking the big
Speaker 1: macro picture, what's happening in the global macro, what's happening
Speaker 1: with the Fed, FED policy, liquid in the financial system.
Speaker 1: We talk about the potential risks of Japan them moving
Speaker 1: up their yell curve control, which shows are potentially flinching.
Speaker 1: Then we dive down into risk assets. We take a
Speaker 1: look at bitcoin, we look at big potential risk with
Speaker 1: gray scale bitcoin trust, the tether situation, so and so
Speaker 1: much more. Let's go ahead and just jump right in
Speaker 1: with Dylan. All right, Dylan, here we go. Long overdue.
Speaker 1: I've had you once on the show. I'm excited to
Speaker 1: have you back against so much stuff to discuss. Uh. So,
Speaker 1: first of all, thanks for taking the time. Yeah, thanks
Speaker 1: for having me on Mark, it's going to connect again.
Speaker 1: I saw each other in Los Angeles a couple of
Speaker 1: months back, and uh, certainly a lot of a lot
Speaker 1: of transpired since then, so we got some stuff to
Speaker 1: catch up on. It makes our jobs easier when there's
Speaker 1: actually stuff to talk about, right. Um, I started making
Speaker 1: content for bitcoin and twenty sixteen then I made crypto content.
Speaker 1: I I'm not really ashamed to admit I did for
Speaker 1: a while twenty nineteen I kind of just got off
Speaker 1: that and just went back to bitcoin only. But I remember, um,
Speaker 1: like nineteen like there was just nothing to talk about,
Speaker 1: Like there was nothing going on, like in the depths
Speaker 1: of the bear market. Uh, this bear market has been fireworks.
Speaker 1: There's plenty to talk about. Um, I want to talk
Speaker 1: about Let's let's start like macro macro and then let's
Speaker 1: kind of like dive down into that. So let's start
Speaker 1: with the big macro picture, which it seems like regardless
Speaker 1: of what any on chain data or technical analysis or
Speaker 1: even fundamental analysis tells us, it seems like the macro
Speaker 1: pictures in charge. And when I say the macro, like
Speaker 1: the dollar, the FED. So let's let's start there. Um,
Speaker 1: let's talk about the Fed. You know, obviously they started
Speaker 1: they said they were going to raise rates. Well, first
Speaker 1: they said they weren't even thinking about thinking about Then
Speaker 1: they said they weren't gonna raise rates for four years.
Speaker 1: Then they said, okay, we're gonna start raising rates in November,
Speaker 1: and risk assets have just continued to sell off. They've
Speaker 1: raised rates at the fastest and most aggressive rate in history. Um.
Speaker 1: It seems like they're about to break something, which Powell
Speaker 1: said he's happy to break something because they can rebuild it. Um,
Speaker 1: which kind of shows what they're doing. UM. I tend
Speaker 1: to kind of take them at their word. They're not
Speaker 1: really trying to surprise the markets, are trying to really
Speaker 1: kind of project what they're doing. What's your view on
Speaker 1: this whole macro picture of what's going on? And kind
Speaker 1: of where rat in the cycle have they? Have they
Speaker 1: given us ultimate pain? Are we still got more pain
Speaker 1: to go? Yeah? I mean that's the that's a trillion
Speaker 1: dollar question. Uh. I I kind of ultimately believe that
Speaker 1: there is more pain to go in this macrocycle into three.
Speaker 1: I mean I don't know the specifics obviously, Um. You know,
Speaker 1: equity bear markets, bear markets and financial assets in general
Speaker 1: are characterized by you know, face ripping reversal rallies. But
Speaker 1: I really think that higher for longer is the reality.
Speaker 1: H and and everybody trying to front run you know,
Speaker 1: this pivot, especially equity investors. Right, the more that financial
Speaker 1: conditions loosen across the board, uh, the more rooms paradoxically,
Speaker 1: you know, the more that people buy the dip and
Speaker 1: the more that people chase uh chase stocks here, that
Speaker 1: the more room it actually gives the FED to tighten
Speaker 1: the belt more. Um. And so we kind of see
Speaker 1: this play out, uh and kind of this uh this
Speaker 1: uh like jigsaw pattern throughout two where you know, think
Speaker 1: it too bearish and then and then it reverses, Volatility
Speaker 1: comes back in and Pala goes Nope, guys like just
Speaker 1: pack it up, go home. Um. So I don't necessarily
Speaker 1: think that, like you know, UM, three thousand on the
Speaker 1: SNP is going to happen tomorrow. But I do think
Speaker 1: that most of the of the kind of the repricing
Speaker 1: and global assets and in global financial markets was due
Speaker 1: to the discount rate rising rapidly obviously UM, and that
Speaker 1: was because of FED tightening, but also bond investors realizing, Okay,
Speaker 1: if inflation, if we're out of this disinflationary regime and
Speaker 1: potentially entering a new one, what's what's this new cost
Speaker 1: of capital? How should I be you know, pricing the
Speaker 1: discount rate ten years out, thirty years out. And so
Speaker 1: I think, you know, the SNP at four thousand, there's
Speaker 1: you know, the equity risk premium if you look at say,
Speaker 1: and that's a big word, but if you look at
Speaker 1: just say you know, because investing is relative, right, so
Speaker 1: if you look at bonds compared to equities, it's actually
Speaker 1: kind of paradoxically it's equities are more expensive here than
Speaker 1: they were at the beginning of two relative to bond markets.
Speaker 1: So I think that that's something that investors should keep
Speaker 1: in mind, UM, just so they're not surprised if we
Speaker 1: do see some more downside, because I I still think
Speaker 1: that until said otherwise, Right, the FED pivot is kind
Speaker 1: of this more and more so buzzword than anything, and
Speaker 1: a pivot is actually going to require some real pain
Speaker 1: to be felt an employment, housing, and more seven financial
Speaker 1: and financial markets. So that last piece that you said there,
Speaker 1: so it's going to require more pain in the economy,
Speaker 1: the housing markets, etcetera. So, but you started out by
Speaker 1: saying that the stocks going up give the FED room
Speaker 1: more room to tighten, and so it seems to me
Speaker 1: that the FED doesn't really care about your stocks. They
Speaker 1: don't care about your house, they don't care about your retirement.
Speaker 1: They actually want to bring those downs, are trying to
Speaker 1: crush demand. What they do probably care about is obviously
Speaker 1: liquidity in the banking system. Uh, they care about the
Speaker 1: maybe the economy unemployment, that's one of their dual mandates. Right, So, Um,
Speaker 1: do you think stocks being high actually gives them room
Speaker 1: to tighten or do they not care about that and
Speaker 1: really they're looking at again the employment and like bank
Speaker 1: liquidity or do you see it more holistically? Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think that just you know, a lot of investors, um
Speaker 1: kind of haven't maybe not haven't realized but there was
Speaker 1: somewhat of a regime change in May two, right where
Speaker 1: for the past few decades investors were were rewarded with
Speaker 1: buying the dip, and the FED and global central banks
Speaker 1: could really inject an unlimited amount of liquidity and and uh,
Speaker 1: it wouldn't show up in consumer price inflation. Obviously. We
Speaker 1: we you know, saw cp I at forty year highs,
Speaker 1: and the FED came out and said, all right, well,
Speaker 1: we really got to get this lower. Um. You know,
Speaker 1: inflation low inflation is one of our core mandates. And
Speaker 1: we see that not just in the FED, but the
Speaker 1: euro Zone, the Bank of Japan, etcetera. Right, So, um,
Speaker 1: what that means? And they literally are telling you this,
Speaker 1: They say, we want employment unemployment higher. Right. So, so
Speaker 1: even though it's part of their dual mandate, Um, they're
Speaker 1: they're honestly really like embarking on a on a mission
Speaker 1: to reverse engineer the wealth effect, lower assets, uh and
Speaker 1: also higher unemployment to crush that demand. Like you said.
Speaker 1: And so I don't think that job is finished. I
Speaker 1: think inflation, uh is is stickier than a lot of
Speaker 1: people expect, despite uh, you know, kind of the reversal
Speaker 1: in the year over year prince, we've seen over the
Speaker 1: last five or six months, it's still a lot higher
Speaker 1: than the two percent mandate, which is arbitrary. Yes, but
Speaker 1: some of these things, like core CPI is a lot
Speaker 1: stickier than I think a lot of investors expect um.
Speaker 1: So for that reason, I think that you know, we're
Speaker 1: still in a tightening cycle. Until I said otherwise, And
Speaker 1: if you look at the history of of of FED pivots,
Speaker 1: they don't pivot until things get bad, and actually things
Speaker 1: often get worse after the pivot. So so we'll we'll
Speaker 1: see here. But I think, uh, you know, for for
Speaker 1: the bulls that are chasing here, uh, they might be
Speaker 1: a little bit blindsided by you know, macro conditionings, liquidity
Speaker 1: and real like economic data, not financial assets getting worse
Speaker 1: in so we'll see how that stands. Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: obviously of us have a crystal ball and and and
Speaker 1: I constantly referenced the insanity that we all have to
Speaker 1: sit around and try to read some guy's mind to
Speaker 1: understand what's gonna happen with our money. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: just the stupidest thing in the world, but it's the
Speaker 1: it's the world that we have write the game. What
Speaker 1: will what what's our fate? Let's all listen to Jerome Pal.
Speaker 1: I I often liken it to, uh the insanity I'm
Speaker 1: in southern California, but the insanity of the uh punk
Speaker 1: satani Phil or whatever. Right the groundhog, like if he
Speaker 1: comes out and sees his own shadow, like spring goes
Speaker 1: longer or whatever, and like everyone watches the groundhog and
Speaker 1: it's like that's kind of like we're all watching like
Speaker 1: Jerome Pal. Uh, but it is what it is, right,
Speaker 1: and so we so we kind of have to navigate that.
Speaker 1: But um, it seems like Jerome pal tries to be
Speaker 1: very clear, like, hey, there's more pain ahead, pain pain, pain. Uh.
Speaker 1: He finishes to me, He's like, hey, guys, you're not
Speaker 1: listening to me, like the stock markets rallying, but like
Speaker 1: I'm telling you there's more pain, right, And it almost
Speaker 1: seems like, um, the markets are calling his bluff, like
Speaker 1: we get it. We get it, you're serious, and we
Speaker 1: get it. You're committed to sticking with it, and we
Speaker 1: get it. There's pain, and we get it. You're gonna
Speaker 1: We understand it, and we believe you, and we believe
Speaker 1: that you believe it. But we also see the constraint
Speaker 1: that you're going to run up against, and so we're
Speaker 1: betting that we can hold on longer than you can
Speaker 1: hang on. Maybe the markets are saying something like that.
Speaker 1: Do you think maybe there's like this little chicken and
Speaker 1: egg or not a chick game of chicken going on
Speaker 1: where the markets are like, Okay, we get it, we
Speaker 1: get it, but we bet you the banking system the
Speaker 1: quity is going to dry up before um that happens.
Speaker 1: Or do you think it's just the people are stupid
Speaker 1: and they're just trying to buy the dip? Uh? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean I think, um, you know, a big driver,
Speaker 1: a big driver, and equity markets is often just price
Speaker 1: agnostic passive flows. Right. It's not actually like astute active
Speaker 1: investors making you know, uh, really advanced financial decisions. It's
Speaker 1: just pensions for owen Case, plowing money uh into broad
Speaker 1: based equity and bond in disease. Right. And then and
Speaker 1: they don't even know what they're buying at what price.
Speaker 1: They don't care right there, investing for the long term,
Speaker 1: and often that's why you see like the severe dislocations um,
Speaker 1: whether over the short term or or the long term. Right.
Speaker 1: And then you know, active managers on the margin, whether
Speaker 1: it's long, short, etcetera. Right, kind of have to clean
Speaker 1: up this mess. But sometimes the tail lacks a dog.
Speaker 1: So I do think there's excess liquidity still in the
Speaker 1: banking system. Right, there's still two trillion dollars in the
Speaker 1: reverse repo just parked. They're getting four four and a
Speaker 1: half percent yield, right, So until that draws down meaningfully,
Speaker 1: you know there is excess liquidity in the banking system
Speaker 1: at the very least um. But yeah, I think that.
Speaker 1: You know, Powell, he's literally said right like, there was
Speaker 1: this one I think it was a month or two
Speaker 1: back when when uh someone incorrectly during the fom CN
Speaker 1: beting said hey, bond and equity markets are rallying, and
Speaker 1: that was a lie, right, and Powell like almost like
Speaker 1: shook his head like cheese and came out like super
Speaker 1: aggressively hawkish and was like guys, listen up, like and
Speaker 1: and that was like, oh wow, he's just like he's serious.
Speaker 1: So I think over the long term, right, everybody knows, Mark,
Speaker 1: you talked about it a lot. I talked about it
Speaker 1: a lot. These debt dynamics, right, federal debt to GDP,
Speaker 1: global debt to GDP at you know three, these things
Speaker 1: are unsustainable and the only way out is financial oppression.
Speaker 1: Monetary debasement, right, a sustained period of inflation higher than
Speaker 1: interest rates. Um so so titaning can't be the game forever.
Speaker 1: But I think to get there right, the pendulum almost
Speaker 1: has a swing to the far extreme of Oh wow,
Speaker 1: you know, the easing is a must. And I don't
Speaker 1: think we're there yet. So is it a game of
Speaker 1: of of tea leaves and reading this magic ball? Yes? Right,
Speaker 1: but unfortunately or fortunately that's the game. You know, we're
Speaker 1: all we're all playing, Yeah, and and and again. I
Speaker 1: take him at his word. I believe the FED tries
Speaker 1: to project out what they're doing. So he said in
Speaker 1: November twenty one that they're gonna start raising rates. He
Speaker 1: didn't start raising rates until what March of so like
Speaker 1: they give you this long wide time frame. Now again
Speaker 1: he said we wouldn't raise rates for four years. He
Speaker 1: did in two years. Now they're saying they're gonna keep
Speaker 1: rates really high. But things change. But I think when
Speaker 1: he said that would rather break things because we can
Speaker 1: rebuild them. I think you have to take that part
Speaker 1: pretty seriously. And so to your point, there's a lot
Speaker 1: of liquidity in the system. He's prepared to see a break.
Speaker 1: I think, and again this is just my whatever, my
Speaker 1: opinion for what it's worth nothing, but I think that
Speaker 1: probably this year we see it get worse faster than
Speaker 1: he expects, and things do break, and then they need
Speaker 1: jerk reaction and blow it back sky high again. UM,
Speaker 1: but we'll see, um if we go, If we go,
Speaker 1: I guess even a little bit further. Although the FED
Speaker 1: is kind of driving that, I know, UM big news.
Speaker 1: It seems like also I mean talking about like liquidity
Speaker 1: in the system, Japan being one of the largest holders
Speaker 1: of treasuries, UM has been selling treasuries right there, they're
Speaker 1: they're Japan is basically just like f t X right
Speaker 1: if you if you, if you look at it, like
Speaker 1: a small microcosm like ft X, created a token and
Speaker 1: a thin air their ft T token. UM. Nobody really
Speaker 1: wanted to buy the f t T token, but they
Speaker 1: manipulated the market so it made it look like there
Speaker 1: was values, so people bought it. When nobody wanted to
Speaker 1: hold the token anymore, they started dumping the f t
Speaker 1: T token, and so then Japan then f t X
Speaker 1: was forced to try to prop it up by it,
Speaker 1: So they're selling whatever asse is they could to prop
Speaker 1: up the token, but it didn't matter. Nobody wanted to NFL.
Speaker 1: And if you look at that and then look at Japan,
Speaker 1: Japan is the same thing, right, Japan is a as
Speaker 1: a yend token. Uh, nobody wants the end token. They
Speaker 1: manipulate the market to think it has value. Now they're
Speaker 1: stuck selling treasuries to try to prop up the end token. UM.
Speaker 1: But like it's just the only a matter of time, right,
Speaker 1: And I think the big thing that I want to
Speaker 1: I want to ask you about was the yield curve control.
Speaker 1: So what seems to kind of catch me about this
Speaker 1: story is so for people that don't really understand, is
Speaker 1: that Japan basically manipulates their bond market to kind of
Speaker 1: artificially peg the rates. And the thing that catches my
Speaker 1: eyes that they had to change the rate they're pegging at.
Speaker 1: And it seems like I've always said that pegs are
Speaker 1: meant to be broken. Traders are always going to go
Speaker 1: after the peg. George Soros got famously rich in today
Speaker 1: from breaking the you know, the peg and the Bank
Speaker 1: of England UM and once they've given once, the traders
Speaker 1: are kind of like, Okay, now we know you're gonna
Speaker 1: give in. Does that kind of open up the floodgates?
Speaker 1: Do you think was that like you flinched first, now
Speaker 1: you're probably gonna lose kind of sign Yeah, I think
Speaker 1: certainly adjusting that policy rate, Uh, you know, kind of
Speaker 1: a roads the credibility um and you know, people argue
Speaker 1: back and forth whether central banks have any credibility left.
Speaker 1: I think they, you know, somewhat they do, right and
Speaker 1: given that right that the Bank of Japan has a
Speaker 1: trillion dollars at their disposal. Yeah, so somewhat of an
Speaker 1: FDx type situation, but they have all quite a big
Speaker 1: war chest to keep this game going right now. Um
Speaker 1: So I kind of think I I like to explain
Speaker 1: yield curve control, quantity of using like these kind of
Speaker 1: big terms that that seem very complex. Um like quantity
Speaker 1: of using right is printing a fixed amount of money
Speaker 1: and buying bonds at any price. Right. Yield curve control
Speaker 1: is printing potentially an unlimited amount of money to keep
Speaker 1: the bonds at a fixed price. Right, so goes lower
Speaker 1: than this price, it goes higher than this yield Right,
Speaker 1: because bond prices and yields are inverse of each other.
Speaker 1: So if it if it goes above twenty five basis points,
Speaker 1: which they switch to fifty basis points zero point five,
Speaker 1: will print any amount of money to keep this ten
Speaker 1: year yield at this rate. And they have to do
Speaker 1: this why, because they're debt to GDP is the worst
Speaker 1: in the world. I believe it's right. So some mathematically
Speaker 1: they need to erode their real debt burdens. And how
Speaker 1: are they going to do that, Well, they need to
Speaker 1: let inflation ramp, and they need to keep their bond
Speaker 1: yields pinned, because otherwise the sovereign, the Japanese government goes
Speaker 1: goes belly up essentially, right. So so speculators all over
Speaker 1: the market are saying, all right, well, if you're gonna
Speaker 1: print this money, we're just gonna short the end. We're
Speaker 1: just gonna short the en and and and get dollars.
Speaker 1: And so the Bank of Japan comes in uh and
Speaker 1: and and really to kind of stem this speculate the
Speaker 1: speculators they sell a bunch of sell a bunch of dollars,
Speaker 1: and button by the end. Right, So it's almost a
Speaker 1: circular logic in a way, right, because they're printing en
Speaker 1: to buy their bonds and then they're selling selling dollars
Speaker 1: to buy the end, right, so they can keep this
Speaker 1: game going for a while because they are one of
Speaker 1: the world's biggest holders of treasuries. But eventually, right, the
Speaker 1: speculators who are both shorting the bonds and the end
Speaker 1: are gonna, you know, maybe not break the Bank of
Speaker 1: Japan because they're you know, quite the titan in the market,
Speaker 1: but they're gonna, you know, they're gonna burn through that
Speaker 1: treasure chest eventually. Um. So it's gonna be really interesting
Speaker 1: to follow that. So why do you think following that
Speaker 1: is even important? I mean, if it's if it's so
Speaker 1: far off, well, I think one of the biggest things,
Speaker 1: right is is you can see um and Bloomberg has
Speaker 1: released a couple of stories on this. Right. So there's
Speaker 1: the bond, there's the bond yields, right, but there's also
Speaker 1: the kind of the swaps, so traders, there's derivatives, and
Speaker 1: there's there's these swap rates are almost like kind of
Speaker 1: a bond futures. And so those swap rates while the
Speaker 1: peg was at twenty five basis point zero point, those
Speaker 1: swap traders had that that policy rate at like forty
Speaker 1: or fifty basis points, so they were already front running
Speaker 1: the move. And now those swap the swap rates for
Speaker 1: the for the ten year yield for the Bank of
Speaker 1: uh for the Japanese government bonds are at about eighty
Speaker 1: nine basis points, so eight zero point eight zero point
Speaker 1: nine percent, right, so they're already front running that next
Speaker 1: kind of capitulation move um by by shorting these bonds.
Speaker 1: And I think what the the key here is is
Speaker 1: that sovereign debt, rather whether whether it's the Eurozone or
Speaker 1: the you know, U. S. Treasuries or or Japanese government bonds,
Speaker 1: right these are the biggest markets, sovereign debt is fungible
Speaker 1: on a on a on a FX hedged basis. What
Speaker 1: I mean by that, it means that global debt, especially
Speaker 1: from sovereigns, that that won't nominally default on their debt. Right,
Speaker 1: a corporation may or may or may not default on
Speaker 1: their debt. Well for a sovereign, you know, they're just
Speaker 1: gonna print the money essentially, so they're never gonna nominally
Speaker 1: default on their debt. So there's derivatives that that you
Speaker 1: can basically hedge out the currency risk, So investors of
Speaker 1: Japanese government bonds would say, hey, maybe I'll just hedge
Speaker 1: my yen exposure and buy treasuries instead. So, so when
Speaker 1: the Bank of Japan is printing a ton of money
Speaker 1: to keep their bond yields artificially suppressed, that actually affects
Speaker 1: the bond yields of every other market in the world.
Speaker 1: And so you saw when they capitulated, and when they
Speaker 1: went from twenty five basis points to fifty basis points,
Speaker 1: global bond yields immediately ratcheted upwards. Right, So bonds sold off.
Speaker 1: And so I think that's that's the kind of the
Speaker 1: move here, is that you know, who knows what their
Speaker 1: policy you will go to next? Right, They certainly have
Speaker 1: a huge treasure chest and are willing to burn through it,
Speaker 1: but the yen the and really that the Japanese government
Speaker 1: bond market is basically one of the one of the
Speaker 1: biggest currency is one of the biggest bond markets in
Speaker 1: the world, aside from the dollar and the treasury market.
Speaker 1: And so you know, they own a whole bunch of it.
Speaker 1: They own the government bonds. But depending on where those
Speaker 1: yields go global markets could react quite quite meaniqually Okay, So, um,
Speaker 1: it's it's interesting for traders. It maybe isn't as important
Speaker 1: for the global macro picture because they have quite a
Speaker 1: long runway of a trillion dollars worth of bonds in
Speaker 1: front of them, So nothing really imminent there. It's more
Speaker 1: just kind of interesting than it is potentially imminent imminent
Speaker 1: moves for the rest of the global market. I think
Speaker 1: that's fair to say. I mean, certainly some good to
Speaker 1: keep an eye on. Um, you know, maybe for the
Speaker 1: average investor, uh, that's just you know, maybe passively holding
Speaker 1: up a portfolio or investing for the long term. It's
Speaker 1: it's you know, following the yen or the Japanese government
Speaker 1: bond policy rate probably believe isn't you know, top of
Speaker 1: top of mind. But for for you know, macro traders
Speaker 1: and the weeds, this is certainly one of the bigger
Speaker 1: variables in the market. Yeah, I think. I think when
Speaker 1: it eventually breaks, uh, then it will have massive impacts
Speaker 1: through the global economy. But you know, maybe that doesn't
Speaker 1: happen for a while. So now that we've kind of
Speaker 1: talked about the big macro, is there anything else big
Speaker 1: on the big macro before we maybe kind of start
Speaker 1: diving down in anything on the ECB or Euro that
Speaker 1: is like maybe big and happening that you see. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean I would just say, um, I expect you
Speaker 1: despite the recent weakness. Um. And I don't really have
Speaker 1: like a set timeline for this, for this thesis or
Speaker 1: or for this this move, but I think that the
Speaker 1: recent dollar weakness is something that I don't expect to
Speaker 1: continue forever. Right. You know that everybody says I and
Speaker 1: I agree over the long term, the dollars is guaranteed
Speaker 1: to debase and value, right, But what's you're what you're
Speaker 1: comparing it to when you're looking at like say the
Speaker 1: the d X Y, the Dixie um or when you're
Speaker 1: looking at you know, FX markets, you're comparing it to
Speaker 1: a basket other fiat currencies. Right. So uh, the Euro,
Speaker 1: the end, the pound, um, the Yuan right um uh,
Speaker 1: Well the biggest component of the Dixie is the Euro. Right. Uh.
Speaker 1: These are these their economies, their demographics, and and their
Speaker 1: monetary policy is actually in a far worst position than
Speaker 1: the U S and the and the FED. Right. So,
Speaker 1: so you know people say the FED is trapped, Well,
Speaker 1: you know, the bank of Japan is a lot more
Speaker 1: trapped than the FED ever was, and the and the
Speaker 1: ECB is a lot more trapped than the FED also
Speaker 1: was or is right, So um, I just suspect at
Speaker 1: some point, whether it's you know, next week, next month,
Speaker 1: next quarter, next year, I think this the dollar pool
Speaker 1: market against other currencies will continue against other currencies will
Speaker 1: continue because there's just this massive global dollar short position. Right,
Speaker 1: There's all this dollar denominated debt around the world. The
Speaker 1: U S is um and has been for the last
Speaker 1: fifty plus years the world reserve currency, and so because
Speaker 1: of that, there's this natural global short position. Right. People
Speaker 1: that are familiar with short squeezes and stocks, right, whether
Speaker 1: it's like meme stocks like game stock up, or you know,
Speaker 1: they're short squeezes in Tesla or whatever it may be, right,
Speaker 1: But the biggest short position in the world is dollars.
Speaker 1: So so I think that's kind of an important dynamic
Speaker 1: to understand as as we are in a tightening cycle,
Speaker 1: as the fat is tightening the belt, as rates an
Speaker 1: interest expense around the world for variable rate debt goes up,
Speaker 1: you know this game of musical chairs that is this
Speaker 1: global debt based monetary system the music is slowly stopping, right,
Speaker 1: And I'm not saying the music is gonna outright halt,
Speaker 1: but as these you know, as these chairs fill up,
Speaker 1: it's going to be interesting to see how it all
Speaker 1: plays out for the dollar and for for risk assets. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and risk assets have been catching a bid. Even specifically,
Speaker 1: gold has been catching a bit. I mean, if you
Speaker 1: look at the d X Y where it really started
Speaker 1: breaking down, and I mean that's right when gold and
Speaker 1: silver and pressures medals really caught a bit and done
Speaker 1: really well in that same time frame. And if you
Speaker 1: then go, well, DIXIE has only measured against these other
Speaker 1: basket of currencies which are even more weak than potentially
Speaker 1: the dollar rallies again, and what does that do for
Speaker 1: risk on assets? So typically you know, gold has moved
Speaker 1: off of real rates. Um, but it seems to really
Speaker 1: be correlated with the Dixie for now, So I guess
Speaker 1: we'll have to kind of keep an eye on that.
Speaker 1: But um, if we if we jump down even further
Speaker 1: back into risk assets, I mean, risk assets have been
Speaker 1: catching a bit. Specifically, bitcoin and cryptocurrency has been catching
Speaker 1: a bit. Bitcoin is trying to get to that nineteen
Speaker 1: dollar level, which is pretty amazing. We've been kind of
Speaker 1: stuck in this like sixteen thousand dollar range for for
Speaker 1: months now. UM Bitcoin was kind of almost traded like
Speaker 1: a stable coin there for a minute. You know, I've
Speaker 1: talked about extensively, and I know you dig into the
Speaker 1: on chain data a lot, and you know, really simply,
Speaker 1: I've always believed that UM. I think I think a
Speaker 1: lot of economics can be really boiled down simply, right,
Speaker 1: Like markets stopped going down when there's no more sellers,
Speaker 1: markets stopped going up and there's no more buyers, right,
Speaker 1: the price is typically set by supplying demand, right, things
Speaker 1: like that. And so if you look at like you know,
Speaker 1: from the Tera Luna Domino through the three Arrows and
Speaker 1: Celsius all the way to UM and then and then
Speaker 1: we had Celsius and then we had the minor capitulation
Speaker 1: where the miners basically dumped all their bitcoin and the
Speaker 1: bitcoin kind of hit that fifteen sixteen thousand dollar price point,
Speaker 1: and it seemed like we hit capitulation there. Then you
Speaker 1: see like ft X happened and it didn't really push
Speaker 1: bitcoin down anymore. Of course, we found out bitcoin uh
Speaker 1: ft X had what one point four billion of a
Speaker 1: bitcoin on their books and didn't have any to sell,
Speaker 1: so maybe it had something to do with it. There
Speaker 1: was no more sellers, And it seems like bitcoin kind
Speaker 1: of found that bottom massive buying volume when it tried
Speaker 1: to touch that, you know, just below the sixteen thousand
Speaker 1: and fifteen thousand dollar price point. Um, so it seems
Speaker 1: like it's found to bottom. It's now starting to catch
Speaker 1: a little bit of a bid here. I'm just curious
Speaker 1: what you think about that potential bottom. Uh, do you
Speaker 1: think it's found a good bottom, is an intermediate bottom?
Speaker 1: Or do you think really back to this global macro
Speaker 1: pictures still really in charge and we have to kind
Speaker 1: of see what happens there. Yeah, I think you know,
Speaker 1: in terms of the amount of fourth selling that happened
Speaker 1: in two, it's gonna be extremely hard to I mean,
Speaker 1: maybe even impossible to replicate that again. Right. Uh, they're
Speaker 1: at a certain point, especially for an absolutely scarce you know,
Speaker 1: fixed supply asset, the marginal seller does get exhausted. Right.
Speaker 1: So if you haven't sold your bitcoin uh in the
Speaker 1: latter months of one or two all two? Right, Uh,
Speaker 1: I'm not sure what's going to get you to to
Speaker 1: to dump all of your bags here, right, and certainly
Speaker 1: like if if equity is reverse, if the dollar strengthens,
Speaker 1: if global bonds sell off again, Uh, it's all off
Speaker 1: the table. But in terms of like bitcoin specific crypto
Speaker 1: specific force de leveraging, I think we've seen the brunt
Speaker 1: of that. But I think there's a key distinction between
Speaker 1: you know, if the low is in or at least
Speaker 1: you know, the low in terms of a range, right,
Speaker 1: whether it's you know, the tick of fifteen five or
Speaker 1: whatever it may be, or just like this sixteen k
Speaker 1: to eighteen k, twenty k range, whatever it is. I
Speaker 1: think there's a real difference between Okay, maybe the lows
Speaker 1: in which I believe is a strong possibility, versus the
Speaker 1: start of a new secular bull market. Right. So uh,
Speaker 1: you know, well, I think we'll see but I think
Speaker 1: three at least for bitcoin, at least for the start
Speaker 1: of it. Um, and maybe we see a nice you know,
Speaker 1: bear bear market rally, but I think it's going to
Speaker 1: be kind of characterized by a lot of chop. Right. Uh,
Speaker 1: There there are buyers a bitcoin here, and anecdotally and
Speaker 1: on via the data, I can see that there are
Speaker 1: priced agnostic buyers a bitcoin at any price that just
Speaker 1: continue to buy a hold and accumulate and not sell it. Right,
Speaker 1: So there are those flows, But in terms of you know,
Speaker 1: uh kind of this up only up only you know,
Speaker 1: generational bull market resuming at least today, I think that's
Speaker 1: a little bit of a waste off. So I think
Speaker 1: we got some time. I think bitcoin will consolidate for
Speaker 1: a while. Could certainly be wrong there, but I kind
Speaker 1: of expect just uh, you know, minimal volatility relative to
Speaker 1: maybe one up only bull market and relative to the
Speaker 1: forced de leveraging of two I think, you know, somewhat
Speaker 1: of a calmer period um fortunately or not for for
Speaker 1: bitcoin is ahead in sure. I mean that's what it
Speaker 1: always happens, right, That's that's the cycle of a market, right,
Speaker 1: So at the bottom you have you have the fouria
Speaker 1: at the top, right, the volatility of the top, and
Speaker 1: then the massive sell off. And so those are those
Speaker 1: two are both um traits of that. All the people
Speaker 1: that came in at the top of the mania that
Speaker 1: drove it higher are the ones that get out of
Speaker 1: the top and then force it back down and faster.
Speaker 1: And then at the bottom, the pit of despair. Nobody
Speaker 1: wants to touch it, and so you have to kind
Speaker 1: of sit there and wallow in this very slow uh
Speaker 1: increase again until eventually it starts to catch onto people's
Speaker 1: imagination and long before even that euphoria gets there. But
Speaker 1: that's kind of the market cycle we'll see. But yeah,
Speaker 1: it just seems like it could be there. And to
Speaker 1: your point, I would agree, I don't. I wouldn't expect
Speaker 1: the big firework here, um. But then you have this
Speaker 1: looming macro thing kind of hanging. So that seems to
Speaker 1: be the big thing which I want to come back
Speaker 1: to before we wrap it up, and I'll ask you
Speaker 1: about that. UM. Bloomberg had put out a piece of
Speaker 1: research at the end of last year and they said
Speaker 1: that they believe that bitcoin would um turn into a
Speaker 1: risk off asset by Q three of me too if
Speaker 1: you look at the world from a bigger perspective, you know,
Speaker 1: geopolitical perspective, and how the world's kind of breaking up,
Speaker 1: and you know, supply chains are being reshaped, and uh,
Speaker 1: I believe I talked about the time we're going into
Speaker 1: a decentralized world, We're going into a multipolar world. I
Speaker 1: think trade and supply chains is gonna suffer, right, It's
Speaker 1: gonna have to be reimagined. Um, a lot less trust.
Speaker 1: You know, there's new payment networks being set up. Um.
Speaker 1: I think that could be good for bitcoin, right, and
Speaker 1: we see a lot of nations are buying massive amounts
Speaker 1: of gold. Gold doesn't really work very well in technological age.
Speaker 1: Do you think, like Bloomberg that maybe we could see
Speaker 1: bitcoin kind of transform from this risk on asset to
Speaker 1: maybe more of a risk off asset and could that
Speaker 1: be this year? Yeah, I think that's uh, you know,
Speaker 1: I think it's a it's a it's a good narrative
Speaker 1: and and I would be delighted to see it actually
Speaker 1: unfold um in the in the interim, I think that
Speaker 1: you know, like bitcoin, like think of it as a fraction,
Speaker 1: which it is all all financial assets arts, you know,
Speaker 1: the new murrator, the denominator of the numerators BTC. It
Speaker 1: certainly has its own wave of adoption speculation, uh, you know, buying, selling,
Speaker 1: forced to leveraging. And then there's the USD component, right,
Speaker 1: and as bitcoin kind of monetizes across global balance sheets, uh,
Speaker 1: it's it's kind of nestling itself on the asset side
Speaker 1: of the global balance sheet. So there's assets you know, equities, bonds.
Speaker 1: Bonds are both on the asset and liability side. Bitcoin
Speaker 1: is only an asset, it's not a liability of anybody,
Speaker 1: similar to gold. And then on the liability side there's
Speaker 1: you know, dollar, zeros en all the currencies. And so
Speaker 1: I think that it's uh, you know, people necessarily are saying,
Speaker 1: you know, when's the decoupling? Is is bitcoin ever going
Speaker 1: to not be a risk on asset? And and personally like,
Speaker 1: I don't think the correlation with global risk is actually
Speaker 1: a bad thing. I think it's almost a good thing. Um,
Speaker 1: So we'll see. I think there's gonna be you know, momentary,
Speaker 1: momentary periods of decoupling or you know, like for instance,
Speaker 1: bitcoin could have an update due to a short squeeze
Speaker 1: or you know, a big buyer coming in while stocks
Speaker 1: are down and the dollars up. Um. But you know,
Speaker 1: a sustained period of inverse correlation to global risk is
Speaker 1: not something that I really expect here, um, But again,
Speaker 1: would be delighted to see it happened because that would
Speaker 1: certainly be a really strong narrative shift. Now you one
Speaker 1: thing that you've been all over and you're getting quite
Speaker 1: the following for is uh is breaking down some of
Speaker 1: these big moves you know, FTX, etcetera. And one you've
Speaker 1: been following a lot is this whole gray Scale GBTC
Speaker 1: thing now we talked about, you know, has the market
Speaker 1: bottomed as it has exhausted seller as you think that
Speaker 1: maybe it has exhausted sellers sort of like I was
Speaker 1: kind of saying, but what is the risk of a
Speaker 1: massive sell off in the GBTC thing? Why don't you
Speaker 1: kind of framed that that deal up for us? Yeah?
Speaker 1: So you know, essentially gray Scale GBTC as a closed
Speaker 1: end bitcoin trust. Um. Actually, Mark, do you want me
Speaker 1: to like kind of break down what GBTC is or
Speaker 1: are you let's let's let's do that give it a
Speaker 1: quite a little over you Okay? Cool? Yeah. So so
Speaker 1: GPTC as a trust offered by gray Scale. Gray Scale
Speaker 1: as as a subsidiary of Digital Currency Group, a big
Speaker 1: conglomerate in the crypto industry. Uh. It was kind of
Speaker 1: the first bitcoin trust that was offered via O t
Speaker 1: C over the counter rails. Right, so, um, you know
Speaker 1: you could buy it in New Roth, Ira or you know,
Speaker 1: uh in especially in one I was kind of a
Speaker 1: favorite of Wall Street to get bitcoin like exposure. This
Speaker 1: was before you know, the micro strategies of the world.
Speaker 1: A lot of the bitcoin miners go public before future
Speaker 1: z etf, right, so there wasn't really an easy vehicle
Speaker 1: for bitcoin like exposure to be access So so GBDC
Speaker 1: was that product, right. And and because it was a
Speaker 1: closed end trust, there was only creation of shares, no
Speaker 1: no redemptions, right, so you could bring dollars or bitcoin
Speaker 1: to to gray Scale and they would give you a
Speaker 1: shares of gptc um. And and because it was only
Speaker 1: one way, there was traded at a premium for a
Speaker 1: long period of time. So it was you know, say
Speaker 1: you'd you'd bring a dollar to gray Scale and they'd
Speaker 1: give you GPDC shares that were locked for six months.
Speaker 1: That's a big story. Uh. And and now those years
Speaker 1: a premium would say trade out a dollar twenty um.
Speaker 1: So so there was a lot of investors that even
Speaker 1: didn't really have much like interest in getting bitcoin exposure
Speaker 1: that would that entered the g BTC trade just to
Speaker 1: kind of harvest that premium. And that was a huge, huge,
Speaker 1: huge driver in the bull market. Right. So so everybody
Speaker 1: thinks of sailor Um, which he was a big driver
Speaker 1: of the bull market. But everyone thinks Sailor was the
Speaker 1: biggest catalyst um. Sailor bought, you know, hundred thousand bitcoin.
Speaker 1: He has a hundred thirty thousand bitcoin micro strategy currently
Speaker 1: does gray Scale from twenty two when they stopped buying
Speaker 1: bitcoin after the premium went to a discount, gray Scale
Speaker 1: bought like four hundred thousand bitcoin, right, So, so they
Speaker 1: were a massive, massive driver of this bull run momentum um.
Speaker 1: And what happened was that premium um as a bunch
Speaker 1: of you know, as it turns out, a bunch of
Speaker 1: firms were levering up to take on this trade, and
Speaker 1: and a subsidiary of of DCGH, Genesis Global, a trading firm,
Speaker 1: was lending against these collateralized GBTC shares to to lever
Speaker 1: up and and kind of repeat the trade. Right, So,
Speaker 1: there's a bunch of people going in giving bitcoin to
Speaker 1: to gray Scale, getting GBDC shares. They'd give those shares
Speaker 1: the Genesis borrow more money and do the trade again.
Speaker 1: Three arrows. You know, one of the industry's biggest hedge
Speaker 1: funds did this trade and made a whole lot of money.
Speaker 1: As it turns out, GBDC is not a very liquid
Speaker 1: market at least relative to bitcoin and all that leverage.
Speaker 1: As that premium in February whittled to zero and actually
Speaker 1: turned into a discount and net asset value, UH, the
Speaker 1: one of the biggest cattles for the bull market actually
Speaker 1: turned to be a big drag. And so right now
Speaker 1: that that premium or slash discount, the net asset value
Speaker 1: for GBDC shares is about thirty six percent discount that
Speaker 1: reached as lowest fifty and as it turns out, yeah,
Speaker 1: so so it has been getting a bid recently and
Speaker 1: there are some activist campaigns to organize shareholders um and
Speaker 1: so so we'll see what happens there. But those around
Speaker 1: six hundred thousand, six d eight thousand bitcoin wrapped in
Speaker 1: this trust and there's no kind of way out. It's
Speaker 1: almost like a hotel California of sorts UH and and
Speaker 1: a financial asset rapper. And so we'll see what happens.
Speaker 1: But I think this is one of the bigger stories
Speaker 1: and and genesis UH and and specifically d c G
Speaker 1: as this big industry conglomerate UH is kind of in
Speaker 1: the middle of of some big issues with with liquidity
Speaker 1: potentially solvency, and you have big claims from you know,
Speaker 1: say the Winkelvost Twins running Gemini Exchange, calling calling for
Speaker 1: fraud of of the CEO Barry Silbert of DCG. So
Speaker 1: we'll see what happens. They owe Genesis a whole lot
Speaker 1: of money about nine hundred million dollars um for their
Speaker 1: yield product, geminised yield product. There's a whole bunch of
Speaker 1: kind of crypto contagion that actually still hasn't played out.
Speaker 1: That was a story of two and it's not yet finished.
Speaker 1: So I think most of that for selling, that deleveraging
Speaker 1: and solvencies has taken place. But as it turns out,
Speaker 1: that daisy chain of leverage has a few potentially a
Speaker 1: few more victims to kind of washed ashore. So we'll
Speaker 1: see how it resolve. But I think that's certainly one
Speaker 1: of the things to watch into. Yeah, that's the thing
Speaker 1: with leverage. It works really good on the way up,
Speaker 1: and it works equally good on the way back down
Speaker 1: to destroy you. I often often call it like fire,
Speaker 1: right where like I can use fire to warm my house,
Speaker 1: or it can burn my house down. You know, like
Speaker 1: you've got to be really careful with that leverage. But
Speaker 1: in regards to that, I mean back to the original question, Um,
Speaker 1: you don't see in your research, and you've done a
Speaker 1: lot of them, you're doing really well with it. Follow
Speaker 1: the Dylan for that if you want it, Um, But
Speaker 1: you don't see I mean, so the company DCG at
Speaker 1: the top in genesis, you know, subsidies, etcetera. You don't
Speaker 1: see any risk of like a forced liquidation. I mean,
Speaker 1: if anything, it would be returning the bitcoin back to
Speaker 1: the owners that are owners of the trust. There's no
Speaker 1: reason why they would be like a forced liquidation or
Speaker 1: a mass dumping onto the market because of that, other
Speaker 1: than maybe going back to the owners the holders and
Speaker 1: then they want to sell it. Yeah, there's I think
Speaker 1: there's a lot of scenarios that can play out. I'm
Speaker 1: not sure how to how to quantify these things, um,
Speaker 1: And there's you know, I think that actually the smallest
Speaker 1: probability is that the status quo is remains for the
Speaker 1: next you know, two or three or four years. That's
Speaker 1: the smallest possibility. You know, maybe that's a bolt take, um,
Speaker 1: but I just you know, off of the allegations, off
Speaker 1: of the recent momentum in shareholder activism, Uh, you know
Speaker 1: the stories that have come across the PR newswire about uh,
Speaker 1: you know the sec uh and some other you know,
Speaker 1: potentially d o J looking into d c G S operations. UM.
Speaker 1: You know, there's there's the real potential for this thing too,
Speaker 1: for the trust to be unwound or to be acquired
Speaker 1: by new owner or manager of the trust. Um and
Speaker 1: potentially you know. One of the biggest things that's dragging
Speaker 1: out this uh, this discount, right is the fee structure.
Speaker 1: It's a two percent annual fee forever. Right. So so
Speaker 1: you know, similar to how you discount stocks earnings or
Speaker 1: a bond for you know, ten years, fifteen years, twenty years. Uh,
Speaker 1: the market is discounting is two percent fee in perpetuity, right.
Speaker 1: So why would I hold GBTC shares at a two
Speaker 1: percent feet forever when I could just hold bitcoin. So
Speaker 1: that's a big reason for the discount. Another big reason
Speaker 1: for the discount is like Genesis and DCG being levered
Speaker 1: against GBTC shares. UM. So I mean, you know that
Speaker 1: force selling that had to be absorbed didn't really have
Speaker 1: any natural buyers. Um. But in terms like what's resolved,
Speaker 1: I think there's a small, small chance. Um. And again
Speaker 1: I don't know how to exactly quantify this. I would
Speaker 1: love to if I could, UM, but I think there's
Speaker 1: a small chance that the trust is liquidated. I don't
Speaker 1: think it would be a six hundred thousand dollar you know,
Speaker 1: a six thousand bitcoin markets sell on coin base. I
Speaker 1: think there'd be a lot of interesting, uh interested OTC
Speaker 1: buyers potentially, you know that the buyers that had GBTC
Speaker 1: shares just stepping in with the cash they received. Um,
Speaker 1: It's really unclear how it all works legally, but I
Speaker 1: do know there's mounting pressure from regulatory bodies, from shareholders
Speaker 1: and and just you know, judging off some of the
Speaker 1: names that I've heard through the through the grape vine
Speaker 1: that are kind of interested in this, in this activist play,
Speaker 1: there's there's some serious momentum here. So um, you know,
Speaker 1: DCG potentially is on the ropes here. Uh. And I
Speaker 1: think that there's you know, potentially some change coming over
Speaker 1: the coming I don't know aboute like, I don't have
Speaker 1: a specific timeline for it, but uh, you know, it's
Speaker 1: more momentum than there ever has been to get a
Speaker 1: change to the structure. But the change, I guess the
Speaker 1: point I was trying to clarify for myself and for
Speaker 1: everyone else, is that the change whether that be you know,
Speaker 1: breaking it apart from dcg S grip, you know, getting
Speaker 1: silvered out of the way, putting somebody else there, or
Speaker 1: even potentially unwinding it and given the bit went back
Speaker 1: to the owners. Uh, there's not a big liquidity event.
Speaker 1: Most likely is not the base case that there's a
Speaker 1: big liquidity event off of this, And there's change for sure,
Speaker 1: but it doesn't mean there's a mass liquidation. Yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: I agree there. Um, I think there's you know, there's
Speaker 1: a tail risk for everything. But also interestingly, Mark, Um,
Speaker 1: there's even the chance that and again, you know, unsure
Speaker 1: how to quantify this, but I do know, just off
Speaker 1: of my own intuition and just some chatter. Uh you
Speaker 1: know with some market participants that a popular trade that
Speaker 1: has arisen recently give and you know, say GPTC is
Speaker 1: at a fifty discount to net asset value. Right, So
Speaker 1: a popular trade, um even at not maybe thirty thirty
Speaker 1: six percent to net asset value is long GBTC short
Speaker 1: bitcoin futures, right, So if that has to be unwound,
Speaker 1: what's what's the result, and I think the result is
Speaker 1: you have to unwind that short leg um. So unsure
Speaker 1: how of how it plays. I think, you know, it
Speaker 1: could interestingly go both ways or it could just you know,
Speaker 1: kind of resolve without without a bang and just kind
Speaker 1: of a little murmur So, so we'll see what happens
Speaker 1: on a on a On a little bit of a
Speaker 1: different note, but referencing the two percent premium on the GBDC,
Speaker 1: which is a very healthy premium. I mean, it's kind
Speaker 1: of industry standard, but it is very healthy premium. And
Speaker 1: why would they want unwind it when they're making so
Speaker 1: much money? But I recently just did a video on
Speaker 1: on counterfeit capitalism and Ponzi finance, and um, I was
Speaker 1: looking at black Stone. So black Stone has become like
Speaker 1: the largest owner of real estate like in the world,
Speaker 1: and they have this like sixty eight billion dollar breed.
Speaker 1: They call it like a reat but they call it
Speaker 1: a breat. Um. They charged three point six percent a year.
Speaker 1: They're pulling in two billion a year just off of
Speaker 1: that alone. Uh So, anyway, put the two perspective, Blackstone
Speaker 1: is charging you three point six and and with black Stone, um,
Speaker 1: they don't you know, they it's a real estate portfolio.
Speaker 1: They don't mark to market it right, um, and they
Speaker 1: don't even bring an auditor, so they have their own
Speaker 1: internal accounting team set the value of the portfolio that
Speaker 1: they then charged three point six percent on. So um
Speaker 1: at the investors of the breat have no control over
Speaker 1: what they're buying. So they're buying a bunch of probably
Speaker 1: toxic assets at this point, shopping centers and business parks
Speaker 1: in San Francisco, for example, who knows. You don't even
Speaker 1: know what you're getting. Um. And then you're getting uh
Speaker 1: it's not even being marked to market. Uh, they're setting it,
Speaker 1: they're controlling it, they're skimming three point six percent off
Speaker 1: the top of it. I mean, it's just a disaster, um.
Speaker 1: So Sign of the Times, right, that was the point
Speaker 1: of the video Sign of the Times, pondsy Finance time.
Speaker 1: That's gonna where we're mark. I think one of the
Speaker 1: most interesting things, just to just add one little quick
Speaker 1: tidbit to that point, is that you know, one of
Speaker 1: the biggest, uh, one of the biggest beneficiaries of this,
Speaker 1: you know, ten twelve year up only bull market and
Speaker 1: everything has been private equity, right, and you know private
Speaker 1: equity is this magical vehicle that has all of the
Speaker 1: upside exposure to financial asset market beta with none of
Speaker 1: the downside volatility because these things aren't marked to market
Speaker 1: on a daily basis. And as you see with Blackstone
Speaker 1: and some other private equity funds, as the withdrawals start
Speaker 1: to come in, are those marks real? Uh? Is there
Speaker 1: by side liquidity to to meet those withdrawals. I think that's,
Speaker 1: you know, maybe a potentially a big story in it's
Speaker 1: gonna be a real big story. Private equity is the
Speaker 1: big ponds e that I believe is gonna collapse assuming
Speaker 1: the market kind of continued on the directory that it's on,
Speaker 1: like we talked about before, If there's more pain ahead,
Speaker 1: I think private equity is going to take a massive hit.
Speaker 1: I was reading this article by Matt Staller. He writes
Speaker 1: a substance act called Big and he talks about monopolies,
Speaker 1: and he was talking about the private equity and how
Speaker 1: they've taken over like the medical industry, the hospital industry,
Speaker 1: and they're raising all this money. They're buying the hospitals
Speaker 1: and then they buy the they own the land separately,
Speaker 1: and UH, private equity they do all these roll ups,
Speaker 1: and they're not specialists in running these businesses. They bring
Speaker 1: in generalists to run a specialized business, and in most
Speaker 1: cases they do a horrible job at it. So they've
Speaker 1: rolled up these hospitals. They're having a horrible job. The
Speaker 1: hospitals aren't being run properly. Uh, they're going out of business.
Speaker 1: They can't afford the lease on the land that the
Speaker 1: PE also owns, and the PE is the private equity
Speaker 1: is loaning money to the hospital so the hospital can
Speaker 1: continue to pay the land lease, which they also own.
Speaker 1: So they're loaning money to get their payments back. But
Speaker 1: because they're separate entities, then private equity can go Look,
Speaker 1: we've never missed a payment. Oh look the revenues are
Speaker 1: still coming in even though they're losing over on this side.
Speaker 1: So it's Ponzi finances. Is back to that kind of thing.
Speaker 1: But yeah, private equity is a disaster waiting to happen. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, it'll reset like everything else. I guess. Um, Okay,
Speaker 1: what about what about tether fud. Let's talk about that
Speaker 1: for a second. Now, I got into this space in uh,
Speaker 1: as long as I can remember, there's been tether fud. Uh,
Speaker 1: tether prints you know, princes uh dollars to prop up bitcoin.
Speaker 1: You know, bitcoins price wouldn't be where it was if
Speaker 1: it wasn't for all these fake dollars. Which if that
Speaker 1: was the case, then why has it been sitting in
Speaker 1: a sixteen thousand? Like? Can't they can't they pump up
Speaker 1: back up already? But you know, um, there's there's there's
Speaker 1: a there's a lot of there's a lot of fund
Speaker 1: right fear, uncertainty and doubtcast on to tether a couple
Speaker 1: of things. I want to ask you one, um, what
Speaker 1: do you think the reality is of some of this danger?
Speaker 1: And then to the bigger one kind of back to this,
Speaker 1: is there more mass liquidations in front of us? Does
Speaker 1: it even matter? Right people are hold a bunch of
Speaker 1: dollars that they lose their dollars, does that matter to bitcoin?
Speaker 1: So what do you think about these two things? Yeah?
Speaker 1: I think the long term answer is no, it doesn't matter. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, like like bituoin is just this this machine
Speaker 1: that is unaware of any of us and how we
Speaker 1: interact with it, and it will continue to just chug
Speaker 1: a new block every ten minutes, and it's just this
Speaker 1: immutable network of value settlement and storage. Uh. In terms
Speaker 1: of the dollar exchange rate, Tether is obviously a massive player. Uh.
Speaker 1: You know, like I think I believe something like fifty
Speaker 1: sixty billion dollars in market capitalization. UM has a shoddy
Speaker 1: pass for sure, potentially you know, some some kind of
Speaker 1: commingling with bit fan x. Uh. They've you know, been
Speaker 1: sued by the New York A g Uh. All of
Speaker 1: these things have you know passed question marks UM and
Speaker 1: certainly like maybe they like that. That's the reason, right
Speaker 1: they can't get an audit is because there's there's somewhat
Speaker 1: of a shady pass. So do I hold Tether? No,
Speaker 1: I don't do. I think tether is is going to
Speaker 1: imminently collapse. No, I don't. Uh they I believe they
Speaker 1: have a big portion, a big chunk of treasuries and
Speaker 1: just based on everything that's happened in two if that,
Speaker 1: if that wasn't enough to kind of topple Tether, UH
Speaker 1: don't really see what's going to come that will. With
Speaker 1: that being said, Tether has had a history of saying, hey,
Speaker 1: like we don't we you know, we hold just assets
Speaker 1: backing our dollars. Right, and then Celsius when they go under. Uh,
Speaker 1: It's revealed that Tether actually was lending Celsius collateralized loans,
Speaker 1: was creating Tether's um through bitcoin collateralized loans. So Alex
Speaker 1: Maschinsky sent over some bitcoin over clatteralized of course, so
Speaker 1: Tether didn't actually sustain losses, but they printed Tether backed
Speaker 1: by bitcoin collateralized loans. So that was something that Tether
Speaker 1: said they didn't do. So are there are the questions? Certainly, um,
Speaker 1: would that actually help support the price of bitcoin? Certainly,
Speaker 1: But at this point Tether has done you know, they
Speaker 1: used to hold all this commercial paper, all of this.
Speaker 1: They are sitting on a on a portfolio mostly short
Speaker 1: term treasuries at this point, um And so I think
Speaker 1: they're okay. I think that the yield that they're now
Speaker 1: getting on this massive portfolio is certainly going to help
Speaker 1: bolster their reserves over the long term. UM And I
Speaker 1: don't really have a kind of an immediate doomsday prediction
Speaker 1: on Tether, like I've you know, like I've called out
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of these yield products right like to
Speaker 1: take off the box uh Celsius Voyager block five ft X,
Speaker 1: right like I've um among others rights like called for
Speaker 1: all these things to collapse before they did. Um. Do
Speaker 1: I think there's question marks about tether? Of course? Do
Speaker 1: I think that they, you know, are the next domino
Speaker 1: that's going to collapse this entire industry and bitcoin is
Speaker 1: a a scam like all these all these you know
Speaker 1: bears are saying for the last seven years, and now
Speaker 1: I don't believe so. Um, certainly it's a you know,
Speaker 1: a big market player, so you know, the dominant trading
Speaker 1: pairer on binance, right, But I think it's more so
Speaker 1: propping up, if it is propping up anything, it's more
Speaker 1: so propping up the broad based crypto industry rather than
Speaker 1: you know, bitcoin as a global as a global you know,
Speaker 1: free float financial asset. Yeah, yeah, I mean that that's
Speaker 1: kind of my take. And and and I guess just
Speaker 1: kind of back to the question is that it it's
Speaker 1: propping up the entire ecosystem to to the kind of
Speaker 1: point that you made on Binance etcetera, crypto coins, etcetera.
Speaker 1: But uh and and to your point, uh, and that's
Speaker 1: one thing that people should take from this is when
Speaker 1: you see that these like stable coins are percent reserved
Speaker 1: well reserved in what like if you're reserved in ft
Speaker 1: T token, your reservings up at zero, or like if
Speaker 1: you're like uh, um, Tara Luna was reserved in Tara token, right, Like,
Speaker 1: well then it went to zero. So reserved and what
Speaker 1: And to your point about tether, a good majority of
Speaker 1: that is now in treasury, so it's like basically in cash. Um.
Speaker 1: But I guess the question is if if they were
Speaker 1: hypothetically um, you know, a bunch of stuff comes out,
Speaker 1: they don't have the reserves, there's a run on tether
Speaker 1: orchestrated by whatever reason, and uh and tether were to
Speaker 1: go to zero, would that really have a big effect
Speaker 1: on bitcoins specifically? I mean they're not dumping bitcoin. I
Speaker 1: mean the people that had dollars there had those tether
Speaker 1: tokens now can't redeem it for the dollars they hoped for.
Speaker 1: But it doesn't really cause a mass liquidation of bitcoin necessarily. Nope,
Speaker 1: it doesn't. It would be really interesting to see happen
Speaker 1: mark because um, again, like I don't think this is
Speaker 1: a high probability, but we've seen temporary kind of like so,
Speaker 1: so tether trades free flow, right, it's it's it trades
Speaker 1: against other stable coins it trades against, like bitcoin, BTC
Speaker 1: U s D. Also there's there's BTC U s D
Speaker 1: T right. And so we've seen in the momentary kind
Speaker 1: of periods of of market panic, whether it was a
Speaker 1: collapse of terror Lune, at the collapse of ft X,
Speaker 1: we've seen tether trade from you know, a dollar to
Speaker 1: ninety seven cents, right, and it was quickly bought back up.
Speaker 1: But a lot of those traders, a lot of those
Speaker 1: people that bought tethers at cents went to tether and
Speaker 1: redeemed those redeemed them, right, so they got they got
Speaker 1: the cash, whether you know, through a bank wire or
Speaker 1: whatever the means. Maybe so uh And and at that time, right,
Speaker 1: it was interesting to see on say a binance that
Speaker 1: the price of of bitcoin in in USD was like
Speaker 1: twenty eight thousand, and the price of bitcoin and U
Speaker 1: s DT was like right, So it would be really
Speaker 1: interesting to see, uh, you know, bitcoin pump if if
Speaker 1: you know, the denominator of BTC U s DT was collapsing, right,
Speaker 1: And it would be interesting to see kind of what
Speaker 1: percent or what share of global market value was set
Speaker 1: by by tether. Uh And and you know, what would
Speaker 1: be the resolution I don't know, and I don't think
Speaker 1: really anybody knows. Um And and for some people, right,
Speaker 1: for some people, they say Bitcoin is un investable until
Speaker 1: Tether is out of the ecosystem. That's why That's exactly
Speaker 1: exactly what I was thinking. Um I see, I think
Speaker 1: that's uh, you know, that's an interesting take. Um I.
Speaker 1: The the problem with that is that they might be
Speaker 1: waiting for a very very, very very long time because
Speaker 1: you know, there's a whole lot of vested interest in
Speaker 1: kind of keeping this game going. And I think, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, the longer that that Tether is is around,
Speaker 1: and you know, they have now a very liquid portfolio
Speaker 1: short term treas furies, uh, it's gonna be really hard
Speaker 1: to bank run uh or you know, to see that
Speaker 1: that unresolved. So I'm not making any like bold predictions
Speaker 1: or not. Like, I'm not saying that there is absolutely
Speaker 1: a non zero percent chance that there's you know, bad
Speaker 1: outcomes with with Tether and with their holdings and maybe
Speaker 1: potentially with the prince of Bitcoin. But I think it's
Speaker 1: it's a you know, not it's not certain either way.
Speaker 1: I don't and I like and I don't think it
Speaker 1: would be really uh, I would really be in the
Speaker 1: in the right to come out here and make one
Speaker 1: both claim either way. Okay, all right, Well, I think
Speaker 1: that there's definitely risk, as you said, certainly risk there.
Speaker 1: I just don't I think the risk to actually bitcoins
Speaker 1: prices maybe a little bit overblown. To your point, a
Speaker 1: lot of people said it's un investable until we figure
Speaker 1: this out. It's like, why, Like, I don't see that, Like,
Speaker 1: they're not gonna sell it now. If they had said, hey,
Speaker 1: well you know, half of our collaterals in bitcoin will
Speaker 1: shoot them that had be forced to dump the collateral,
Speaker 1: that's not the case. So like, I just don't see
Speaker 1: why anybody would make that assumption. But but to your point,
Speaker 1: to a lot of people have I think a lot
Speaker 1: of people that are outside that are probably wouldn't buy
Speaker 1: bitcoin anyway. Uh, and they don't really understand how that works. Um.
Speaker 1: One last potential big blow up kind of just going
Speaker 1: back to are there any more sellers? Are there any
Speaker 1: more forced liquidations? Um? Something you've been talking about quite
Speaker 1: a bit is silver Gate Bank. Now, there's a lot
Speaker 1: of problems with silver Game Bank, including potential legal problems
Speaker 1: because apparently they were handling wires for Alameda and f
Speaker 1: t X and they weren't doing proper kyc and putting
Speaker 1: money into the wrong accounts. Some who knows what will
Speaker 1: come with that? Um, lots of other risks with silver Gate.
Speaker 1: What are you seeing with risks with silver Gate? And
Speaker 1: I guess frame that up. Yeah, So I mean I
Speaker 1: really I was aware of silver Gate and their role
Speaker 1: in the kind of the bitcoin crypto ecosystem dating back
Speaker 1: to one uh. There it was kind of big news
Speaker 1: because they were, you know, a FED member bank that
Speaker 1: was giving clatteral lized loans to micro Strategy and Marathon, um,
Speaker 1: some big public names. Right. It was the first FED
Speaker 1: member bank to to extend USD credit against bitcoin collateral.
Speaker 1: Like that's obviously a big story. Aside from that, like,
Speaker 1: they had a really dominant role in the crypto ecosystem,
Speaker 1: the bitcoin ecosystem due to the Send Network s e
Speaker 1: N network silver Gate Exchange Network, that's what SCN stands for. Uh.
Speaker 1: And and really that was just crypto firms. Bitcoin firms
Speaker 1: could deposit to silver Gate and then transact with each
Speaker 1: other seven uh kind of on dollar rails, so similar
Speaker 1: to kind of a dollar stable coin, but not it
Speaker 1: wasn't a public ledger and and and unlike a stable
Speaker 1: coin like tether or even a USDC, this was in
Speaker 1: an account at a FED member bank, so so they
Speaker 1: you know, their deposits grew massively. I believe it was
Speaker 1: over tens of billions of dollars UH and and you
Speaker 1: know some of these seven of these exchanges that had
Speaker 1: trouble getting you know, official dollar rails like an ft
Speaker 1: X per se UH kind of leveraged silver Gates UH
Speaker 1: send network to do so and so UH. Post ft
Speaker 1: X collapse, there's been a ton of regulatory pressure. And
Speaker 1: that's when I really started to pay attention to them, was, Okay,
Speaker 1: what's their dollar rails? Because this is a massive fraud FTX,
Speaker 1: al amita what they were doing, the commingling of funds.
Speaker 1: This was a massive fraud. And it took about three
Speaker 1: to four minutes for me to just land on on
Speaker 1: silver Gate's website and you know, funny enough, uh FDx
Speaker 1: collapsed on the eighth right. I went on silver Gate's website,
Speaker 1: I believe in the ninth and I posted this and
Speaker 1: on the main page they didn't even delete it yet
Speaker 1: was a quote from SPF saying, like silver Gates really
Speaker 1: revolutionized the role of for for for blockchain companies. It's
Speaker 1: it's made this all so much easier, UM and so.
Speaker 1: And I look in you know, silver Gate connects all
Speaker 1: of these counterparties through this send network. UM so. I
Speaker 1: mean since then, the shares of silver Gate or down.
Speaker 1: Um they're down nine percent from the all time highs
Speaker 1: uh And I don't really know how it resolves. I
Speaker 1: just know that there's been a big run on their deposits, right,
Speaker 1: so they've had to sell a lot of their their
Speaker 1: bond and securities portfolios to stem that run. They now
Speaker 1: have more excess cash than they do crypto deposits. So
Speaker 1: I don't think like an insolvency is around the corner
Speaker 1: per se. But what I do think is going to
Speaker 1: really intensifies the regulatory pressure, right not just for Silvergate,
Speaker 1: but also like say a signature bank. There's like really
Speaker 1: the only two crypto banks UH for for US UH,
Speaker 1: for US companies that that worked with US crypto firms
Speaker 1: at scale. And due to just like the Alameda ft
Speaker 1: X money laundering situation, I think that the you know
Speaker 1: a m l Anti money laundering and you know, the
Speaker 1: the bank regulators are really going to clamp down hard here.
Speaker 1: So I mean I don't have a you know, bullish
Speaker 1: or bearish view on silver Gate stock here disclosure like
Speaker 1: I was short at the stock, I'm no longer um.
Speaker 1: But but yeah, I think that's just an interesting story
Speaker 1: from a crypto native liquidity standpoint, is that there's only
Speaker 1: so many dollar rails here on ramps, off ramps and
Speaker 1: at silver Gate you know Serves, Circle, coin Base, Gemini
Speaker 1: like all of these big names use silver Gate at
Speaker 1: least partially for their dollar on and off ramps. So uh,
Speaker 1: depending on what happens there, that could have an impact
Speaker 1: on the on the crypto NATed liquidity. So I don't
Speaker 1: have a strong stance of how it resolves, but I
Speaker 1: think it's something worth watching. Yeah. Uh if we put
Speaker 1: that aside, I mean, what what happens with silver Gate
Speaker 1: and uh do they stay in business or not? The
Speaker 1: stock go up down whatever, put that at the side.
Speaker 1: But if they were to go down, what does that
Speaker 1: have effect on bitcoin? If any? Uh? Yeah, So I
Speaker 1: mean there's uh really There's one one thing I think
Speaker 1: of is that you know, micro Strategy has a two
Speaker 1: million dollar bitcoin collateralized line of credit with silver Gate. Uh,
Speaker 1: silver Gate doesn't hold the collateral, so it's not like
Speaker 1: it's gonna be a force force sell, but it would potentially,
Speaker 1: you know, there would be maybe a call of of
Speaker 1: margin or a call to to to pay off that loan.
Speaker 1: I'm unsure. I can't speak with with certainty of of
Speaker 1: how the loan documents work there, but that's a potential.
Speaker 1: I know that that USDC, who has like eight or
Speaker 1: nine banks but banking partners, but one of one of
Speaker 1: their relationships is with silver Gate, so is potentially, uh
Speaker 1: some some risk there. I mean, again, I'm not saying
Speaker 1: that USDC is unsafe, but I just think that you know,
Speaker 1: it would put it would just kind of be another
Speaker 1: problem for a lot of these crypto company companies, and
Speaker 1: specifically the unregulated ones. Right. So we we've seen that
Speaker 1: silver Gate, uh and and and say even Signature right
Speaker 1: have serviced Binance on and off ramps for dollars through
Speaker 1: like Shell Corps. Right, So they have a different name
Speaker 1: than than Binance because they're not a US institution, but
Speaker 1: they've you know, accessed dollar rails, same with like Huabi
Speaker 1: and other names. So who knows how many you know,
Speaker 1: crypto crypto relationships they have disclosed. They're not underneath the surface,
Speaker 1: and so if they blew up, like I don't know
Speaker 1: if it would have an immediate impact on the bitcoin market.
Speaker 1: Right bitcoins a three hundred four hundred billion dollar asset.
Speaker 1: Silver Gates market cap is like less than a billion,
Speaker 1: So it's not like a massive, massive thing at this
Speaker 1: stage in the game, but just certainly, you know, something
Speaker 1: just maybe keeping the back of the mind. Yeah, yeah, good,
Speaker 1: well man, we walked through a whole bunch of stuff.
Speaker 1: I feel like we've done a pretty good job there.
Speaker 1: I want to just kind of circle back to where
Speaker 1: we started at the beginning and talking about this the
Speaker 1: big fed kind of macro Outlook, you threw out something
Speaker 1: I didn't ask you out, but you said, uh you
Speaker 1: you you you mentioned the SMP going down to three thousand.
Speaker 1: We're at about four thousand now, going down to about
Speaker 1: three thousand. Is that you're charted kind of a case
Speaker 1: of where you think it could go to this year? Uh? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean I I think that's certainly in the realm
Speaker 1: of possibility, probably more so than market participants expect um.
Speaker 1: I think that would that be would that be your
Speaker 1: base case? Like above fifty chance that that happens. It's
Speaker 1: a tough question mark, you're putting me on the spot.
Speaker 1: Uh yeah, I think I think we see a thirty
Speaker 1: two at least UM, and maybe not even in three UM.
Speaker 1: One of the things that I've been pleasantly surprised with
Speaker 1: is how strong and resilient the economy has been to
Speaker 1: the rate hikes. But in terms of you know, if
Speaker 1: you just think about the pricing of of stocks, right, um,
Speaker 1: whether you look at you know, market value to g
Speaker 1: DP historically over over bloated, overvalued in two UM, that's
Speaker 1: reset a bit, but it's still historically overvalued in uh
Speaker 1: historical measures, and so something like that. I think really
Speaker 1: the only thing that's been discounted in equities has been
Speaker 1: the discount rate. Right. Earnings haven't really been revised lower
Speaker 1: at all. If we see a recession, that will happen.
Speaker 1: And also credit standards, right, So if you just think
Speaker 1: about one of the biggest drivers of the bull market
Speaker 1: for the last ten twelve years, then debt finance corporate buybacks. Right,
Speaker 1: So if that's done, if the boomers are retiring and
Speaker 1: forced to liquidate, right, like two was the line in
Speaker 1: the sand for the boomers actually crossing the threshold of
Speaker 1: average retirement age the biggest generation in history. So are
Speaker 1: those boomers now and that buyers or sellers of equities
Speaker 1: as they're retiring, right, So these are all things that
Speaker 1: I think are more structural. I don't you know, I
Speaker 1: think making a call with a specific number line in
Speaker 1: the sand is like, is you know, not something that's
Speaker 1: you know, it's it's tough to do, right, But I'm
Speaker 1: not uber uber bullshe with SNP at fourth thousand, I'll
Speaker 1: say that you throwout the number three thals and I
Speaker 1: was just circling back to that. That just for frame
Speaker 1: of reference, that's about where we were in twenty nineteen
Speaker 1: in uh so we'd kind of go back to a
Speaker 1: level we kind of sat there for most of the year.
Speaker 1: Um In reference to what you were just saying about
Speaker 1: our you know, the baby boomer generation, the largest secment
Speaker 1: of the population. They're all retiring. Will they be been
Speaker 1: net buyers or net sellers? Will The answer is, actually
Speaker 1: they'll be net sellers because if you go back to
Speaker 1: a law that was passed in the nineteen seventies, which
Speaker 1: is called ARISA, which is basically allowed people to put
Speaker 1: money into their pensions but they have to start selling
Speaker 1: them when they retire so that the government can now
Speaker 1: recoup that tax dollars. So they were able to put
Speaker 1: money in tax free. The government knew that they would
Speaker 1: have to sell, and then they get the tax dollars back.
Speaker 1: So there will be they're they're forced to sell, uh,
Speaker 1: And they're certainly not buyers, right, They're gonna be moving
Speaker 1: out of the market. They're forced to sell. They're not
Speaker 1: gonna be buyers. So I think there's gonna be massive
Speaker 1: downward pressure from that law. Unintended consequence of government intervention
Speaker 1: in the seventies is gonna come home to us now.
Speaker 1: And then with the interest rates so high, these corporations
Speaker 1: are gonna have a very hard time rolling over debt
Speaker 1: and getting in getting financing at all. And over the
Speaker 1: last couple of years, the majority of the stock buybacks
Speaker 1: were being done with cheap, cheap access to credit exactly.
Speaker 1: And so you take away the cheap acts to credit,
Speaker 1: then the then the buy backs go away, and then
Speaker 1: you have the force selling from the baby boomers. There's
Speaker 1: a lot of downward pressure on stocks. I don't see
Speaker 1: where the upward pressure is gonna come from. And so
Speaker 1: I think that's gonna be a big trend to follow
Speaker 1: for sure. Yep, I think you nailed it on the head.
Speaker 1: The biggest biggest trends for me in terms of equity
Speaker 1: markets in three two was the year of duration. Right,
Speaker 1: yields repriced higher, the valuations repriced lower. I think three
Speaker 1: the story it's earnings. We'll see how that, how that
Speaker 1: plays out, and maybe that goes into four. And also
Speaker 1: we have credit standards, right, so credit, credit spreads, credit risk,
Speaker 1: these are the things that really equity markets today have
Speaker 1: not experienced in the last in the last two decades,
Speaker 1: and so you know, if it comes throost, then you know,
Speaker 1: the pressure certainly remains skewed to the downside. Yeah, the
Speaker 1: one benefit that they might have is that inflation is
Speaker 1: gonna push up their earnings and it's gonna it's gonna
Speaker 1: look like maybe maybe that might help them a little bit.
Speaker 1: We'll see. But anyway, man, Dylan, we've covered so much.
Speaker 1: I think we've we've hit it all, starting with a
Speaker 1: big picture and kind of diving all the way down
Speaker 1: into kind of bitcoin risk assets and and back out
Speaker 1: to Dylan's prediction of where the market's going. I'm just kidding.
Speaker 1: We won't put that out but anyway, man, I appreciate
Speaker 1: it so much. Uh, you can check them out Dylan
Speaker 1: Leclair Underscore on Twitter and you certainly should give him
Speaker 1: a follow. Um anything else we missed, I think we
Speaker 1: covered it all, Mark. This is a good written man,
Speaker 1: A lot of a lot of action packed our Yeah. Well,
Speaker 1: thanks so much for joining me man, always a pleasure.
Speaker 1: Uh look forward to seeing you sometime soon. And with
Speaker 1: that we'll go ahead and sign it off. Cheers. That's
Speaker 1: what I got. Thanks so much for listening.