Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Crypto, a daily Bloomberg I Heard podcast,
Speaker 1: and I'm Stacy Marie Ishmael, Managing editor of Crypto for
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Mush. Yes, I know it's Saturday, but we're here
Speaker 1: to offer you our listeners a special audio only version
Speaker 1: of a new weekly video series called Crypto I r L.
Speaker 1: That's I r L Like in Real Life, and it's
Speaker 1: hosted by friends of the show, Katie Greifeld and Tim Stenovic.
Speaker 1: This is episode two of the series. If you want
Speaker 1: the full video experience, head over to Bloomberg dot com,
Speaker 1: slash qt or check it out on YouTube. Okay, Tim,
Speaker 1: it's a new week. You have another silly little story.
Speaker 1: I understand, how dare you? But you're right, I do
Speaker 1: have a story. This actually happened. Yeah, like all my
Speaker 1: stories actually happened, right for sure? Okay. So I'm walking
Speaker 1: to work last week. I am about to cross the street.
Speaker 1: I look up from my phone. There's a kid in
Speaker 1: front of me and he's wearing a backpack and on
Speaker 1: the backpack it says block five. Really, And I'm thinking
Speaker 1: to myself, why does this kid have the backpack of
Speaker 1: you know, a once very highly valued that you know
Speaker 1: this sounds fake. I have I have a picture of
Speaker 1: this right here, because I was like this and so
Speaker 1: you said Block five just sounded like a story. That
Speaker 1: is a child wearing a black five back Is that
Speaker 1: your Child's not my kid? His kid is way older.
Speaker 1: I saw something the other day and I thought to myself,
Speaker 1: I have to take a picture. I have to show Stacy.
Speaker 1: I already showed Katie. I just want to know what
Speaker 1: you think when you see this. Oh Mom, it's a
Speaker 1: Block five. It's a backpack that says Block five and
Speaker 1: it's warned by like a thirteen year old kid. Well,
Speaker 1: that person is definitely not a qualified institutional investors. Okay,
Speaker 1: And I'm thinking to myself, why does this guy have
Speaker 1: a Block five backpack? Did his parents work at Block
Speaker 1: five and did they get laid off? Was Block five?
Speaker 1: Just like clearing inventory? Sounds like you really meditated on this. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean I kind of felt like I was living
Speaker 1: in some sort of metaphor here, like, you know, all
Speaker 1: that's left of Block five is this backpack. So I
Speaker 1: like that you said metaphor because in a sense, this
Speaker 1: is all just a convoluted device to get into the
Speaker 1: next episode, where we're going to talk about where we're
Speaker 1: actually going from this moment of destruction. Who are going
Speaker 1: to be the screeching phoenix? Is that rise from the fire?
Speaker 1: And you recorded another little video. Okay, Some legendary businesses
Speaker 1: have been built in the wake of massive market downturns.
Speaker 1: Look at Disney. It came of age during the Great Depression,
Speaker 1: and Airbnb was built after the Great Recession and the
Speaker 1: housing crisis. Is the two trillion dollar blow up in crypto?
Speaker 1: Is that going to provide some fertile ground for some
Speaker 1: revolutionary new company to emerge, one that could completely change
Speaker 1: the way that the world thinks about finance. Now that
Speaker 1: we understand how so much crypto wealth just evaporated in
Speaker 1: a few short months, let's try to understand what happens next.
Speaker 1: Who's left standing after this historic collapse? What about the
Speaker 1: lessons that we can learn from the crash? And what
Speaker 1: about the opportunities? Who are the people out there and
Speaker 1: the companies that are honkering down right now and building
Speaker 1: and what are they building? What's going to rise out
Speaker 1: of this? How does the industry earn back the trust
Speaker 1: of people who were scared off in the sell off?
Speaker 1: And how will companies have to work with regulators who
Speaker 1: might not like crypto that much. I'm just saying, if
Speaker 1: I had a Block five backpack, I would absolutely wear
Speaker 1: it to work. Yeah, if you saw me in the
Speaker 1: building with that backpack on, I would love you would laugh.
Speaker 1: And that's all I'm trying to do is make Stacy laugh.
Speaker 1: But we should talk about where we're going, because it's
Speaker 1: a good question. You have the Block fives and some
Speaker 1: of the other big lenders and other big success stories
Speaker 1: really come to their knees this summer, and I want
Speaker 1: to talk about next summer. I want to talk about
Speaker 1: the summer after that, the next few months and years,
Speaker 1: where we're going, whether the big players are still going
Speaker 1: to be the big players, or who is trying to
Speaker 1: rise and rebuild right now or build because it's time
Speaker 1: to build. It is time to build. I've heard that. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I think one of the more interesting things, or one
Speaker 1: of the more interesting questions that is going to absolutely
Speaker 1: drive the direction of that answer is what's going to
Speaker 1: happen with regulation and if the whether it's the SEC
Speaker 1: or the CFTC in the US, or political pressure from
Speaker 1: other places or whatever the EU and the UK decide,
Speaker 1: they want to do. How they approach who gets to
Speaker 1: do what is not just influential but in some cases deterministic. Well,
Speaker 1: that's the thing you just said. A lot of letters
Speaker 1: and there's any question over who actually regulates the industry
Speaker 1: going for and it feels like that is one of
Speaker 1: the big hurdles here. Who actually has any sort of say.
Speaker 1: Our genius colleague mc levine, in one of his recent columns,
Speaker 1: pointed out that the answers to the question of who
Speaker 1: regulates crypto is almost like unknowable, right, because on the
Speaker 1: one hand, you have the SEC being very assertive about
Speaker 1: establishing its jurisdiction in certain areas, but mostly doing that
Speaker 1: through enforcement actions rather than policy. You have a very
Speaker 1: clear and very public um. I wouldn't quite describe it
Speaker 1: as a dispute for it, but at least dissent between
Speaker 1: folks who think the CFTC should have more power in
Speaker 1: the US. And then you go to places like India
Speaker 1: where a lot of that regulation is coming through like
Speaker 1: tax policy rather than anything else. And so even in
Speaker 1: the US, whether you're thinking about you know, state level policy,
Speaker 1: New York, New Jersey have been very aggressive on what
Speaker 1: they're allowing various bills that are trying to work themselves
Speaker 1: through the House. If one of the ones that's under
Speaker 1: consideration passes, you would have to effectively be a bank
Speaker 1: to issue stable coins. That's going to have huge consequences
Speaker 1: for the circles and the tethers and the big stable
Speaker 1: coin issues of the world. So you know, there are
Speaker 1: a lot of lawyers making a lot of money right
Speaker 1: now trying to shape the direction of that regulatory conversation.
Speaker 1: That's like, that's like an evergreen thing, right lawyers. Lawyers
Speaker 1: make money, you have no matter what happens. What about
Speaker 1: like this being some sort of inflection point if we
Speaker 1: think about positively or negative Well, I don't I think
Speaker 1: positively because if you think about what happened up till
Speaker 1: you know, it's kind of the wild wild West, right,
Speaker 1: the idea of a lot of experimentation and really light
Speaker 1: touch regulation. And I'm not saying that by any means
Speaker 1: we've seen any sort of regulation at this point. But
Speaker 1: is this a different industry now than it was at
Speaker 1: the beginning of the year. Well, what, some people file
Speaker 1: for bankruptcy, So there's that. Um, there are various folks
Speaker 1: whose tokens are effectively out of Commission. I mean, I
Speaker 1: think back a year ago there was a squid game
Speaker 1: token that turned out to be a complete scam, you know.
Speaker 1: So I think there have been a lot of ways
Speaker 1: in which perhaps the less capitalized players, or the ones
Speaker 1: who had insufficient risk management or due diligence, have been
Speaker 1: like washed out a little bit. But the biggest players
Speaker 1: are still the biggest players, and in some ways they're
Speaker 1: even bigger than at the beginning of this year. You mean,
Speaker 1: like f t X coming in and essentially industry rescuing everyone.
Speaker 1: That is the narrative. But I don't look at them
Speaker 1: the same way that I look at the players that
Speaker 1: went under. Why. Uh, Well, for one, it's an exchange
Speaker 1: with many other businesses that aren't exchanges which haven't gone under.
Speaker 1: I feel like that's the big It doesn't seem like
Speaker 1: they had the same exposure to counterparty risk that you know,
Speaker 1: the Celsius Voyager Block five has had. All of those
Speaker 1: people that you mentioned were among their various counter parties.
Speaker 1: I think what you're seeing is who are the people
Speaker 1: who either manage that exposure better than others or better
Speaker 1: capitalized in the event that one of those counter parties
Speaker 1: blew up. And so you know, for me, the bigger
Speaker 1: question is like the tier to the sort of infrastructure players,
Speaker 1: people who you know, like maybe a couple of billion
Speaker 1: dollars in transactions at a time, mostly a retail customer base,
Speaker 1: flying slightly under the radar. They're the ones that have
Speaker 1: really been popping up with like, oh, we're seasoning withdraws
Speaker 1: and you're like, wait, I've never heard of you, Like
Speaker 1: what's going on here? Uh? And I think that part
Speaker 1: of the market. While we'll continue to have shakeouts there,
Speaker 1: I don't see the big players changing anything drastically other
Speaker 1: than perhaps more land MS. Okay, So if you're talking
Speaker 1: about these tier one institutions coming in and being the
Speaker 1: white Knight and sort of a process of consolidation, then
Speaker 1: I'm thinking to myself, this is totally the antithesis of
Speaker 1: the promise of crypto decentralization. But what I'm hearing right now,
Speaker 1: and what I'm seeing right now, is that big, well
Speaker 1: capitalized firms are coming in. They're buying up the dregs,
Speaker 1: the shadows of what's left from companies, and in that sense,
Speaker 1: they're getting bigger. So what we see on the other
Speaker 1: side of this is a consolidation that actually makes a
Speaker 1: fewer number of institutions much bigger and much more powerful.
Speaker 1: That is the that runs counter to the promise of crypto. Well,
Speaker 1: if I were a bitcoin maximalist, which to be clear,
Speaker 1: I'm not, But if I'm a bitcoin maximalist, one of
Speaker 1: the things I would point out is none of those
Speaker 1: companies affect what happens to bitcoin, right Like, there are
Speaker 1: going to be people who will say, sure, but at
Speaker 1: the blockchain layer, of the protocol layer, at the level
Speaker 1: of indie developers who are still in Ukraine and trying
Speaker 1: to build interesting things, is like bombs full around them.
Speaker 1: But it is also true that one of the things
Speaker 1: that happens when you have a crisis or a shake
Speaker 1: up or the prospect of looming regulation is you do
Speaker 1: have consolidation and you do have concentration. Is there anyone
Speaker 1: who's building and hasn't yet been acquired? I mean to
Speaker 1: go back to that narrative that we've discussed a few
Speaker 1: times that it's time to build, very popular on Twitter.
Speaker 1: Who is building right now? Are they not in my backyard?
Speaker 1: Do not build in my backyard? All right? Mr nimby Um,
Speaker 1: I think that where folks are really paying attention is
Speaker 1: some of the like say the Defy PROTOCOLI type things
Speaker 1: with names like Una Swamp and Sushi swamp um. I
Speaker 1: think folks are looking at the potential of they are large,
Speaker 1: but they are an interesting part of the ecosystem, like
Speaker 1: the Yuga lapses of the world, which went from hey,
Speaker 1: we have some apes in a collection, to hey, we're
Speaker 1: going to acquire various other n f T type collections
Speaker 1: and companies, to hey, we're signing deals with Hollywood and
Speaker 1: the music industry. And I think when you have that
Speaker 1: sort of we were a pure play crypto, but now
Speaker 1: we're extending into mass media lifestyle entertainment. You give opportunities
Speaker 1: for other folks who are like, oh, here's a new
Speaker 1: place for me to play that didn't necessarily exist before.
Speaker 1: And you know, one of my favorite types of coverage
Speaker 1: is when we find actual individuals or like the small
Speaker 1: midsize of the market who are able to be like,
Speaker 1: I am going to make a different kind of art gallery,
Speaker 1: or you know, I'm somebody working in um fashion who
Speaker 1: is able to do interesting things, or I'm a designer
Speaker 1: making virtual clothes and avatars for the methods of the world.
Speaker 1: I'm like, that's cool. So so do we have any
Speaker 1: sort of vision of the future where we see the
Speaker 1: technology that's being experimented experimented with right now and then
Speaker 1: we start to see that in everyday items in everyday life.
Speaker 1: If you talk to people about crypto long enough, eventually
Speaker 1: you'll hear the phrase, well, the underlying technology. At that
Speaker 1: point just like take a shot. I think she just
Speaker 1: said it's time to build. I literally did not say
Speaker 1: it's time to Fine. Nick, it's awesome to see you,
Speaker 1: it's great to be here. Thank you for including me
Speaker 1: on the new show. Thank you. It does it does
Speaker 1: look good. Your general partner at Castle Island Venturous. You
Speaker 1: guys just raised what two or fifty million for your
Speaker 1: third round earlier this year. Okay, cool, So you're like
Speaker 1: the perfect out to talk to about this stuff. I
Speaker 1: gotta tell you. I feel like at this point we've
Speaker 1: been hearing about the promises of the blockchain. It seems
Speaker 1: like for the better part of a decade. At this
Speaker 1: point a part though and and like and crypto too.
Speaker 1: But to me, apart from making a few people just
Speaker 1: fabulously wealthy, I still haven't seen how this technology has
Speaker 1: actually made our lives better. Yeah. I mean I think
Speaker 1: a lot of the promises were pretty vacuous, to be
Speaker 1: honest with you, So, um yeah, I can't sort of
Speaker 1: endorse things that you know, my predecessors may have said.
Speaker 1: But you know, the core thing, the number one thing
Speaker 1: we were endeavoring to solve as an industry was alternative
Speaker 1: monetary systems. Uh. Those have been built, Those exist. Whether
Speaker 1: or not they're going to achieve the penetration the you know,
Speaker 1: crypto acolytes, I think they might, that's an open question.
Speaker 1: We'll see. I think that depends on what happens in
Speaker 1: sort of the real world with you know, um, you know,
Speaker 1: currency crises and things like that. Um, there is sort
Speaker 1: of the Web three space which I would say we're
Speaker 1: seeing real, actual world, real world use cases which are emerging,
Speaker 1: which are fairly interesting. Um. And then the last thing
Speaker 1: on point out would be stable coins. To me, that
Speaker 1: is something that a lot of early crypto people didn't understand,
Speaker 1: didn't necessarily even want, they didn't seek to build that.
Speaker 1: But those are actually, you know, proved to be the
Speaker 1: first killer app of crypto. Use a lot of my
Speaker 1: favorite words between stable coins and Web three, but I
Speaker 1: want to start with one of the first things you said,
Speaker 1: which is alternative money systems, And this is something that
Speaker 1: we actually talk about a lot, and truly we do,
Speaker 1: so I guess we hear about crypto a lot as
Speaker 1: an investment rather than a utility. And when you say that,
Speaker 1: I mean the problem that has been trying to solve,
Speaker 1: Leaving aside all the bad promises that were made by
Speaker 1: some of your predecessors, the alternative money system. I mean,
Speaker 1: does crypto have to be a utility, doesn't need to
Speaker 1: be used transactionally? Um? I think any monetary good um
Speaker 1: satisfies all the all the qualities of money, so um yeah,
Speaker 1: there should definitely be transactional use. What we're seeing is
Speaker 1: the decoupling between sort of like crypto commodities like bitcoin
Speaker 1: and ether, which are you they have a lower velocity,
Speaker 1: and then versus stables, which are used um as a
Speaker 1: medium of exchange, almost as a collateral type and empirically
Speaker 1: they have higher velocities. So it's almost like that first
Speaker 1: idea that crypto assets like bitcoin would be used transactionally,
Speaker 1: that's not really proven to be the case. Why is
Speaker 1: that though, I mean because if you think back to
Speaker 1: what every few months, there was this new news item,
Speaker 1: right every few days. Actually it was like, oh, so
Speaker 1: and so company start is accepting crypto, and then you'd
Speaker 1: see the price of bitcoin go up. It was actually
Speaker 1: this company is accepting bitcoin. Then the present bitcoin would
Speaker 1: go up, and you know, Tesla was like, Oh, we're
Speaker 1: going to start accepting bitcoin until until they didn't. Why
Speaker 1: didn't that stick? That was kind of you know, I don't.
Speaker 1: I think it just doesn't really actually make that much
Speaker 1: sense to use a volatile crypto asset transactually for the
Speaker 1: reason that the US asserts the primacy of the dollar
Speaker 1: um from a tax perspective. Right, So even relative to
Speaker 1: foreign currencies, right, if you hold a foreign currency material
Speaker 1: amount and appreciates, you are now on the hook for
Speaker 1: you have a tax liability, right, so you have to
Speaker 1: you know, keep track of that. There's the accounting um overhead.
Speaker 1: So it's the same with the crypto asset. You have
Speaker 1: to track your tax basis when you spend it. That
Speaker 1: is a considerable friction. That means that nobody's really willing
Speaker 1: to conduct commerce in crypto terms. They would rather stand dollars. Uh.
Speaker 1: And so that's just a barrier which I don't really
Speaker 1: see being lifted anytime soon. Why would the government give
Speaker 1: up the privileged position that the dollar enjoys. This special
Speaker 1: audio only episode of Crypto I r L will be
Speaker 1: right back with more from Katie Greifeld and Tim Stanovic.
Speaker 1: If you want the full video experience, head to Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot com slash qt okay, I want to talk about regulators. Um,
Speaker 1: are you scared? No? Is this an industry that can
Speaker 1: be trusted to regulate itself? It has shown no willingness
Speaker 1: to regulate itself historically, none whatsoever. So Um, it's unclear
Speaker 1: to me what self regulation would look like. So then
Speaker 1: how do you as a VC, as an investor sort
Speaker 1: of navigate and build a portfolio with that sort of
Speaker 1: huge question mark overhang, the fact that this industry hasn't
Speaker 1: shown any willingness to regulate itself, and you have regulators
Speaker 1: over here making very worried noises haven't yet really done
Speaker 1: anything but made a lot of noise. From the securities
Speaker 1: regulation standpoint, the SEC has shown no willingness to engage
Speaker 1: productively with the industry, none whatsoever. What would I have
Speaker 1: expected a alternative model for tokens to engage in disc
Speaker 1: closure for material facts the same way we have that
Speaker 1: in the regular you know, public equity land. But we
Speaker 1: have seen no signs whatsoever of you know, legislative moves
Speaker 1: on that front or the SEC being willing to lay
Speaker 1: that out. So what are the repercussions of that? Does
Speaker 1: that mean that we start to see crypto firms increasingly
Speaker 1: leave the United States because there's no clear regulatory framework.
Speaker 1: You know, even though the U S is kind of
Speaker 1: challenged from that perspective, there's not that many other jurisdictions
Speaker 1: that are much better. Frankly, people thought Singapore was a
Speaker 1: safe haven proved not to be them as is just
Speaker 1: as tough as the SEC, if not worse. Um, people
Speaker 1: thought Europe might be. Europe has new super aggressive crypto legislation. Uh.
Speaker 1: The U S still maintains the most vibrant capital markets
Speaker 1: in the world, obviously the most venture capital UH. And
Speaker 1: you know, the bulk of activity is still here. My
Speaker 1: view is stay and engage and fight if necessary, rather
Speaker 1: than fleeing to some other uh you know, tax saven
Speaker 1: or something like that. The UK is actually you know,
Speaker 1: shown willingness to engage with the industry. But you know,
Speaker 1: I think American startups and crypto firms are going to
Speaker 1: have to, you know, do what they can with the
Speaker 1: local regulators. So if you could wave a magic wand
Speaker 1: or or go to Capitol Hill and write this legislation yourself,
Speaker 1: I mean, what are what's a framework that you would
Speaker 1: want to say? I would codify stable coins and give
Speaker 1: them access to the Central Bank directly. That would abate
Speaker 1: a lot of the questions that people have about their
Speaker 1: reliability and their ability to be liquid in times of stress. UM.
Speaker 1: I would give issuers of tokens an ability to acknowledge
Speaker 1: that they actually are serving as a kind of pseudo equity.
Speaker 1: I would give these issuers the ability to make the
Speaker 1: salient disclosures to investors that ought to be made UM
Speaker 1: and you know, craft framework such that they could do that.
Speaker 1: And frankly, I think that the disclosure quality would be
Speaker 1: better than what we have in public markets with quarterly filings.
Speaker 1: Because in crypto, if your business is an on Shaine component,
Speaker 1: you can get real time financials, right, you can pull
Speaker 1: the data literally directly from the block chain, and you
Speaker 1: can get financials on a per block basis. UM things
Speaker 1: are generally more transparent in crypto UM because the cash
Speaker 1: flows are on Chaine UH and you know public block
Speaker 1: chains are inherently transparent. What do you think will actually happen? Um,
Speaker 1: I think it's likely we do get stable coin legislation
Speaker 1: maybe this year. I think the SEC will continue to
Speaker 1: stone wall us. I would like to CEFDC to assert
Speaker 1: its authority maybe over spot markets. That seems right. A
Speaker 1: lot of these things look like commodities, so you know,
Speaker 1: would be nice if they were able to um, you know,
Speaker 1: win some more discretion there. But yeah, I think, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, Canceler is very ambitious, and from his outward
Speaker 1: public statements, he has not so far appeared willing to engage,
Speaker 1: and uh so, I think it's gona a really tough
Speaker 1: time the next few few months and years. Here I
Speaker 1: started off by asking you about the promises of crypto
Speaker 1: and the blockchain not necessarily being delivered at least what
Speaker 1: we were promised over the last decade. Let's look forward
Speaker 1: now and just think about the next decade. Ten years
Speaker 1: from now we're sitting here, what has gotten better in
Speaker 1: our lives as a result of this technology? Where are
Speaker 1: we touching it every day? I would say you are
Speaker 1: looking an explosion of Web three consumer So one I
Speaker 1: would point out would be social media communications networks where
Speaker 1: the topology, the hierarchy is much flatter. So you, as
Speaker 1: the owner of your credentials, can choose to engage with
Speaker 1: you know, particular platform you free entry and free exit.
Speaker 1: So like I take my followers from Twitter to a
Speaker 1: new site because you own your identity right literally, what
Speaker 1: is that identity? What do I own of that identity?
Speaker 1: Every tweet I've ever um said, Um, I would imagine
Speaker 1: a world where basically the specific platforms become much less
Speaker 1: empowered relative to the users. And we're not worried about
Speaker 1: Twitter's governance policies or their censorship policies or facebooks because
Speaker 1: there's so many more competing platforms because the costs of
Speaker 1: eggs at an entry are much lower. Um. And so
Speaker 1: I think that's an overall better situation because now you
Speaker 1: can opt into whatever platform, withever, whatever rules you want.
Speaker 1: Arguably that's a much better situation. And we don't have,
Speaker 1: you know, the situation where governments are trying to use
Speaker 1: these platforms as choke points to gain informational control. They're
Speaker 1: not trying to influence the Mark Zuckerberg's the world. And
Speaker 1: so I want to talk a little bit more about
Speaker 1: web three, though, because I like that you're excited, but
Speaker 1: I want to be cynical, and I mean to your
Speaker 1: point about the Mark Zuckerberg's of the world. A cynical
Speaker 1: person lights say that when you think about Web three,
Speaker 1: it's probably going to be built by the same guys
Speaker 1: who built Web two. That I know. It's a The
Speaker 1: ideal is that it's going to take power away from
Speaker 1: these huge social media companies, But realistically it wouldn't it
Speaker 1: be built by sort of existing companies that are already
Speaker 1: out there, sort of those big players who already exist,
Speaker 1: Or do you do you who do you see building it?
Speaker 1: That was a very ineloquently phrased question. Web three will
Speaker 1: be built by a new set of entities for the
Speaker 1: for the same reason that large companies don't disrupt themselves.
Speaker 1: They don't have the institutional ability to make wholesale pivots.
Speaker 1: Facebook maybe an exception, frankly, because Zuckerberg does exercise a
Speaker 1: lot of control there, and you know he's pivoting hard
Speaker 1: into the metaverse. So we'll see what you can do there.
Speaker 1: But generally speaking, large incumbents that are established there incentive
Speaker 1: is not to experiment and disrupt themselves, and so I
Speaker 1: think it would be a new set of entities that
Speaker 1: are much more open minded, much more willing to support
Speaker 1: natively open systems. Which is what Web three or blockchains
Speaker 1: get you is interoperability. None of these large you know,
Speaker 1: social internet platforms want interoperability. They want to lock you in.
Speaker 1: They want to create a wild garden. Right, you cannot
Speaker 1: leave Twitter with your followers, or leave Facebook. I don't
Speaker 1: even know how Facebook works. Something used in forever, and
Speaker 1: you know, I think that's just a fundamentally much better model.
Speaker 1: Nick Carter, thanks for coming to New York, my pleasure.
Speaker 1: Thank you. What did I actually knew all of that?
Speaker 1: So I didn't learn anything because I'm extremely smart. You
Speaker 1: knew all of that. We don't even get to seed oils.
Speaker 1: I know. I did get to talk a little with
Speaker 1: Nick off camera about what he eats one meal a day,
Speaker 1: eight pm. That's nuts, had nothing to eat. Yet I
Speaker 1: know this for long chevity purposes. I feel like that's
Speaker 1: not good for your metabolism. Well, he's gonna be laughing
Speaker 1: when we're dead, hopefully, So okay, that's a nice way
Speaker 1: down in the show. We have more chances. Yeah, this
Speaker 1: was the only episode two. We'll get your food next time.
Speaker 1: Thank you, you're so hungry. I want to see these
Speaker 1: episodes of Crypto I r L in video. Check them
Speaker 1: out on Bloomberg Quicktake at Bloomberg dot com, slash qt,
Speaker 1: or find Katie and Tim Over on YouTube on the
Speaker 1: next episode of Bloomberg Crypto. It used to be all
Speaker 1: of say a year ago, that if you worked on
Speaker 1: wall streets and we're looking for a change, then a
Speaker 1: crypto startup was the go to place to head over to. Now,
Speaker 1: as prices full and sentiment declines right along with those prices,
Speaker 1: these buzzy crypto companies are laying off staff, including those
Speaker 1: new fires. And what are those staffers doing heading right
Speaker 1: back to where they came from? Wool Street. This is
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Crypto, a daily podcast from Bloomberg and I Heart Radio.
Speaker 1: For more shows from I Heart Radio, visit the I
Speaker 1: Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: Send us your comments, questions, or suggestions for the show
Speaker 1: to Crypto at Bloomberg dot net or find us on Twitter.
Speaker 1: We're at Crypto. The supervising producer of Bloomberg Crypto is
Speaker 1: Vicky Verglina. Our senior producer is Janet Babin. Our producers
Speaker 1: are Mohammed Faruke and Sharon Barriro. Our associate producers are
Speaker 1: Ty Butler and Moses on Them Death to Wonder At
Speaker 1: is our engineer. Original music by Leo Sidrin. I'm Stacy,
Speaker 1: Marie Ishmael. Have a great weekend.