Oil, The Fed, Strategy, And The Bear Market

[0:02] Yo, welcome back to another episode of
[0:05] the Jack Mallers Show. I am your host
[0:07] Jack and you are listening to yet
[0:08] another edition of Mailbag Monday
[0:11] episode 123.
[0:13] Today's title is oil, the Fed, strategy,
[0:17] and the bear market. Uh we're getting
[0:20] back to some macro updates, some broader
[0:22] general Bitcoin updates. We'll take a
[0:24] look at oil's drop, the Strait of
[0:27] Hormuz, whether it's open or not, what's
[0:30] going on with the US Treasury
[0:32] unsanctioning Iranian oil.
[0:35] Take a look at the dollar strengthening,
[0:38] gold dropping, Bitcoin continuing to
[0:40] react to the lack of fiat liquidity in
[0:43] the world. And then I I will talk about
[0:46] strategy, hopefully for the last time.
[0:49] Um so stick around if you want to hear I
[0:51] got the answers to my question. So for
[0:54] those who don't know, asked a bunch of
[0:55] questions, um was genuinely confused.
[0:59] I feel like I got answers and I'm over
[1:01] it. I'm over the topic. Um I'll I'll
[1:04] I'll walk you guys through what I
[1:08] think is going on and then
[1:12] uh
[1:12] I'm done. I'm over it. I want to talk
[1:14] about Bitcoin.
[1:16] Uh so without further ado, let's
[1:19] timestamp this episode. I'm talking to
[1:22] you all at a Bitcoin price of 64,320
[1:26] US dollars. That put puts Bitcoin's
[1:29] market cap at a clean 1.29 trillion
[1:32] dollars. Our all-time high made on
[1:35] October 6th, 2025
[1:37] remains. It's 126,160
[1:40] dollars. We are almost 50% off that
[1:43] all-time high. We are technically 49%
[1:46] down from that all-time high that we
[1:48] made 259 days ago.
[1:50] The last Bitcoin block height that was
[1:52] mined, our Bitcoin block that was mined,
[1:56] was block height 954,906
[2:00] ticktock next block.
[2:04] Okay.
[2:06] Uh let's get into today's episode. As we
[2:10] always start, now I think this has been
[2:12] a month straight. Before you waste time,
[2:15] let's answer these questions first cuz
[2:17] we're not going to make this a political
[2:19] show. We're not going to chase around
[2:20] politicians and their headlines and
[2:22] mainstream media's version of what's
[2:24] going on in the world.
[2:26] One, is the Strait of Hormuz still
[2:28] closed? Yes or no? This one, I don't
[2:31] actually know the answer, which we'll
[2:32] get into in a second. Next, is the
[2:34] conflict still ongoing? Uh again, it's
[2:37] unclear although it seems to be yes, it
[2:40] is. I'll get into that in a second. Are
[2:42] global supply chains still disrupted?
[2:44] Absolutely. And can global debt survive
[2:46] that level of disruption? Absolutely
[2:48] not. So, an interesting week because we
[2:51] have now a signed MOU a a memorandum of
[2:56] understanding, which is not a
[2:59] resolution. It is a deal to negotiate a
[3:03] deal,
[3:04] which is which is progress. Um but uh
[3:08] that is not an actual resolution to the
[3:10] conflict. So, uh let's get into it and
[3:13] try and understand a bit deeper as to
[3:15] the macro updates, what's actually going
[3:17] and going on because the impact to oil,
[3:20] which impacts the Fed, which is
[3:21] impacting the dollar, which is impacting
[3:23] things like Bitcoin. Um it's all a very
[3:26] clean story, in my opinion. Uh and I'll
[3:28] tell you guys what I make of it, what I
[3:31] think of it, and what I think is going
[3:32] to happen next. Although, I don't know
[3:34] the future, don't claim to, but um this
[3:36] show is about just trying find truth
[3:39] together.
[3:41] So, first and foremost, let's pull up
[3:43] our handy-dandy chart of the Strait of
[3:44] Hormuz. Um the Strait of Hormuz remains
[3:47] pretty closed, and we can tell just by
[3:49] looking at how many tanker vessels are
[3:52] crossing through the Strait itself. This
[3:55] is easily accessible data and so despite
[3:57] what people say online, despite what the
[3:59] media tries to tell you, you can just
[4:01] pull up this chart and we used to get
[4:04] anywhere between 50 to 100 vessels
[4:06] crossing through the Strait a day and
[4:09] we're still in the single digits. We're
[4:11] talking 1 2 3 or 4 as of yesterday. So
[4:15] we are seeing a bit of a spike, but
[4:18] that's because the number three is a lot
[4:21] higher than the number zero. But
[4:23] relative to where we were pre-conflict
[4:26] levels, which was 50 60 70 80 90 100, um
[4:30] we are far from that. So on a relative
[4:32] basis, the Strait remains closed, but
[4:36] technically we are making progress and I
[4:38] will continue to monitor this chart.
[4:41] Now,
[4:42] the headlines continue to fly. Are we
[4:45] still in a crisis? We being I'm
[4:47] American, the United States of America,
[4:49] but I'll I'll speak uh more broadly.
[4:52] Is the United States still in conflict
[4:54] with Iran?
[4:55] And I just want to be clear that what
[4:58] was signed was an MOU, a memorandum of
[5:01] understanding, uh which is interesting.
[5:04] You should go Bloomberg uh released an
[5:06] article kind of digging through the MOU
[5:09] and what it consists of. For example,
[5:11] there's $300 billion of uh
[5:14] capital that the US gives to Iran so
[5:16] that they can rebuild everything that
[5:17] was destroyed. So, you know, we've
[5:19] talked previously, who's got the upper
[5:21] hand, who's got the leverage? It seems
[5:23] like both sides have leverage. I I would
[5:25] wage to guess that the United States
[5:27] greatly underestimated
[5:30] the amount of leverage that Iran had in
[5:32] basically being willing to wait this out
[5:34] until the financial markets and the
[5:36] price of oil and the Treasury market
[5:37] started to dysfunction, which it did.
[5:40] We'll get into in a second. But
[5:43] I woke up uh yesterday and this came
[5:46] out. Um so from CNN, Trump says the US
[5:49] might take over the Strait of Hormuz if
[5:51] Iran doesn't uh
[5:53] reach uh a deal and threatens Iranian
[5:56] negotiations are now in talks with
[5:57] President Vance. And so I woke up and
[5:59] was like, "Wow, okay." So clearly the
[6:01] conflict is not over. Clearly the strait
[6:04] is not completely open because we are
[6:06] now threatening Iran again over the
[6:09] Strait of Hormuz. And so I just want to
[6:11] remind everyone despite the MOU
[6:14] uh that is that is not an actual deal.
[6:16] That is an understanding to eventually
[6:19] make a deal. Um and so the headlines
[6:21] continue to fly. So as far as this show
[6:23] is concerned, I'm going to say the
[6:25] strait is not yet open and operational,
[6:28] especially if what we consider open and
[6:30] operational is pre-war levels.
[6:33] And the conflict is certainly not
[6:35] officially over. Uh we might be getting
[6:37] some ceasefires. I think we're working
[6:39] towards it. I think both sides are
[6:41] highly incentivized. The United States
[6:43] cannot continue to operate with this
[6:46] level of inflation, with this level of
[6:48] Treasury uh yields spiking. Uh they have
[6:52] to get oil down. And so I think that's
[6:54] what Trump is doing, especially with the
[6:56] midterm elections coming up. Um with all
[6:59] that being said
[7:00] uh
[7:01] we will see. Um now, oil is on its way
[7:05] down. So oil is down I think from well
[7:09] over $100 a barrel to now under I I
[7:11] didn't check the price right before I
[7:13] hit stream, but I think it's under $75 a
[7:15] barrel, so a significant drop over 20%.
[7:18] Um and you'd have to ask yourself why if
[7:21] it's not flowing through the strait,
[7:22] what's going on? What is the oil market?
[7:25] We all know that markets are the
[7:27] ultimate source of truth.
[7:29] You know, people can say what they want,
[7:31] tweet what they want. Words are cheap,
[7:33] but capital, proof of work
[7:36] that's the signal in a sea of noise.
[7:39] And what happened is that the US
[7:40] Treasury issued a 60-day waiver to help
[7:43] out the oil market. So, this from Javier
[7:46] Blas, which by the way, uh pretty
[7:48] informative Twitter account through all
[7:50] this conflict in the oil market. So, um
[7:52] I've referenced this account a lot.
[7:54] Would recommend giving it a follow.
[7:56] Uh
[7:57] and I quote, "It may only last 60 days.
[8:00] I doubt it. Likely would become
[8:02] permanent. But, the US Treasury's waiver
[8:04] is effectively rolling back 40-year plus
[8:07] of American oil sanctions against Iran.
[8:09] Even US refiners are allowed to import
[8:12] Iranian oil and pay for it in greenback.
[8:14] Pay for it in dollars." And he takes a
[8:16] screenshot of the waiver itself.
[8:19] And so, again, we're living in this time
[8:21] of fiscal dominance. The bond market,
[8:24] the United States' ability to attract
[8:26] lenders so that it can continue to
[8:28] finance these massive deficits and
[8:30] continue to spend more and more and more
[8:32] money,
[8:33] that is the driving force of all
[8:35] decisions at the end of the day. And so,
[8:37] the US Treasury, Scott Bessent, and the
[8:40] federal government, I think are far more
[8:42] important than the Federal Reserve, than
[8:44] things like short-term interest rates.
[8:46] And so far, we've seen the US Treasury,
[8:49] they've removed sanctions on Russian oil
[8:52] at one point, and now Iranian oil. And
[8:55] And this is rolling back what Javier
[8:57] says is 40-year plus of sanctions
[9:00] against Iran.
[9:01] And so again,
[9:02] really, really interesting. And this is
[9:05] a signpost. There's no doubt about it.
[9:07] Why would the US unsanction Iranian oil,
[9:10] especially a 40-year sanction? Why would
[9:13] they lift that? Well, you guys know that
[9:15] prices are a function of supply and
[9:17] demand, right? Very simple. And in order
[9:20] to get a price down, you can inject a
[9:23] lot more supply that hopefully outweighs
[9:26] the the current demand. And so right so
[9:29] far, oil should be at $200, $300 a
[9:32] barrel. But, all of the countries around
[9:34] the world have been releasing their
[9:36] strategic petroleum reserves, so their
[9:37] oil reserves, to just overwhelm the
[9:41] market with more and more supply, um
[9:44] just to get the price down. And now the
[9:47] US, despite only signing an MOU,
[9:49] seemingly not having the straight fully
[9:51] open yet, seemingly not having a full
[9:54] resolution to the conflict yet, they're
[9:56] trying now to fight the oil price down
[9:58] further by lifting sanctions. So, you've
[10:00] got countries around the world having
[10:02] extremely depleted oil reserves. What's
[10:05] going to be really interesting is even
[10:07] when this conflict is over, surely all
[10:09] the countries around the world are going
[10:11] to have to replenish their oil reserves.
[10:12] So, that'll be interesting. I wonder how
[10:14] low oil can go because all of the
[10:17] biggest countries in the world,
[10:18] especially in the West, I mean, after
[10:20] you've seen this conflict, you can't
[10:21] think to yourself like, "Oh, we're good.
[10:23] This will never happen again." It looks
[10:25] like we are entering a multipolar world.
[10:28] We're entering a world where people
[10:29] trust each other less, rely on fiat and
[10:32] treasuries less, rely on gold and
[10:34] neutral reserve assets like Bitcoin
[10:37] more. And you're going to need to
[10:39] replenish all of your reserves in case
[10:42] conflict arises once more. It's not
[10:44] clear to me that the world is going to
[10:45] get more calm. In fact, it feels like
[10:48] consensus is the world's going to get
[10:49] more chaotic.
[10:51] And so, really interesting stuff. And I
[10:53] think that this is a sign that the US is
[10:56] feeling the stress of inflation, is
[10:58] feeling the Trump administration is
[11:00] feeling the stress of unpopularity going
[11:03] into midterms, and the price of oil. You
[11:05] got to get the price of oil down, and
[11:07] they they're trying to come to terms
[11:09] with Iran. It's not moving as quick as
[11:11] they like, and so they are rolling out
[11:14] 60-day waivers that Javier predicts
[11:17] might be permanent, which is undoing
[11:19] sanctions, which is crazy. This is just
[11:22] finding supplies of oil at all costs.
[11:25] So, this from NBC, oil falls on the
[11:28] 60-day waiver of sanctions. So, I I
[11:30] wanted to make the point crystal clear.
[11:32] Um, it fell below $75 today for the
[11:34] first time since the pre-war levels. So,
[11:37] why is the price I I wanted to give you
[11:40] guys my thoughts on Well, it doesn't
[11:43] look like the strait is open. It doesn't
[11:44] look like the conflict's over. Why is
[11:46] the price of oil coming down? Because
[11:47] this obviously has implications on
[11:49] inflation and energy markets and AI. So,
[11:52] what's going on? Well, they are
[11:54] releasing sanctions. That's finding new
[11:56] supply. So, they're doing whether it's
[11:58] strategic reserves, uh rolling back
[12:00] sanctions, anything to find more supply
[12:03] to buy a little bit more time and
[12:06] hopefully put a cap on inflation and put
[12:09] an end to the conflict and get to what I
[12:12] predict will be juicing markets
[12:14] eventually. But, we clearly aren't there
[12:16] yet.
[12:18] Speaking of, let's talk about uh Warsh.
[12:21] So, the new Fed chair, he had his first
[12:23] FOMC press conference and it was really
[12:26] interesting. I mean, he's coming in in
[12:28] some respects gun blazing guns blazing
[12:31] and in other respects,
[12:33] I found it pretty interesting that he
[12:35] definitely tried to position himself as
[12:38] if he's not a Trump puppet. And I'll
[12:41] explain that in a sec. So, uh let's get
[12:43] into it.
[12:45] Um, well,
[12:46] I actually didn't give myself a slide.
[12:48] So, I'll get into it right now. So, one,
[12:50] he wants to create all of these
[12:52] committees. So, he wants to change a
[12:54] bunch. He wants the Fed to talk less. He
[12:56] wants to remove things like forward
[12:58] guidance. And so, this goes into this
[13:01] kind of school of thought that Scott
[13:02] Bessent has talked about a lot, that
[13:04] Trump has talked about a lot, and that
[13:06] Warsh is now talking about a lot. And
[13:08] he's suggesting pretty significant
[13:10] changes to the way the Fed operates.
[13:13] Which is fine. I mean, I have a
[13:15] suggestion to the Fed, just abolish it.
[13:17] We don't need it.
[13:18] But, fine. Let's Let's continue on. Um,
[13:22] assuming we need the Fed, Warsh thinks
[13:24] that they can have a significant less
[13:26] footprint on the world and a significant
[13:29] lesser sized balance sheet.
[13:31] So, I found that to be really
[13:33] interesting because he was doing a lot
[13:35] of chitter-chatter and a lot of talk
[13:37] leading up to taking this role and he
[13:39] stayed consistent through his first
[13:41] press conference with those ideas and
[13:44] that broad thesis. Now, what was
[13:48] interesting is no one knew whether he
[13:50] was going to hint at cutting rates or
[13:53] raising rates being
[13:55] a a dove or a hawk.
[13:57] And what I found fascinating is he
[14:00] definitely presented more hawkish. So,
[14:03] Trump over the last 12 months, don't you
[14:05] guys dare forget, was cut rates, cut
[14:08] rates, cut rates. We need rates lower.
[14:09] We need to juice the economy. We're
[14:11] going to reshore production. We're going
[14:13] to weaken the dollar. Right? We're going
[14:15] to unwind globalism.
[14:18] And we're going to win the AI race and
[14:20] he was very clear about that. And mind
[14:22] you guys that the US interest expense on
[14:24] an annual basis is now over a trillion
[14:26] dollars. And so, Trump was trying to
[14:28] solve for his biggest ex- one of his
[14:30] biggest expenses, not quite his biggest
[14:32] yet, but one of his biggest expenses.
[14:34] And as I'll get into later on in the
[14:37] next few slides, the US needs to
[14:39] engineer a weaker dollar or else it
[14:42] collapses. And this is just math. This
[14:44] not really That's not a
[14:47] opinion. That's not a Bitcoiner
[14:50] uh psyop religious statement. That's
[14:52] just math, which I'll get into in a
[14:54] second.
[14:55] And the question was is Wurst going to
[14:57] come in and just obey Trump's orders and
[14:59] cut rates as fast and as much as he can
[15:02] or is he going to respond to all the
[15:04] inflation that's been caused by this
[15:06] conflict in Iran and potentially hike?
[15:08] And he chose the latter. And I don't buy
[15:11] for a second that he's actually going to
[15:14] hike. I think I saw on some prediction
[15:16] market that they have the odds of a rate
[15:19] hike at 90%. I would fade that so hard.
[15:23] I think that there's no way that they
[15:25] actually hike. But, he came out and he
[15:28] said, "I care about or we care about one
[15:30] thing, and that's prices, and we're
[15:32] going to do what we need to do to
[15:34] protect prices." which is his way of
[15:36] saying we're going to fight inflation.
[15:38] But, as I'm about to present, I think
[15:41] he's full of [ __ ] There's no way, the
[15:43] math just doesn't allow it. But,
[15:47] here So, here's my prediction, and you
[15:48] guys take it for what it's worth. I
[15:49] can't predict the future, I have no
[15:51] idea. This show is not my profession, I
[15:54] don't do advertisements. You're welcome
[15:56] to listen if you want. If you think my
[15:58] opinions are stupid, please by all
[15:59] means, there's plenty other videos on
[16:01] YouTube. But, what I think is happening
[16:04] is Warsh had to come out and basically
[16:07] disassociate himself from being Trump's
[16:08] puppet, establish some sense of
[16:11] independence
[16:12] at the Fed, and give himself some
[16:14] credibility. And in the face of rising
[16:16] inflation, and in the face of $100 per
[16:18] barrel of oil, he had to come out and
[16:20] say the right things. Now, I think
[16:22] simultaneously the United States is
[16:24] going to really put pressure on the oil
[16:26] market, unsanction Iran, deplete all the
[16:29] strategic reserves, try and come to a
[16:31] deal with Iran. I saw this morning, J.D.
[16:33] Vance is out in Switzerland continuing
[16:35] to negotiate. If they can put a deal
[16:37] together, continue unsanctioning or
[16:40] existing oil supply, and flood the
[16:42] market with more supply than there is
[16:44] demand, and continue to deplete their
[16:45] strategic reserves, they could put a cap
[16:48] to oil prices, which will fight
[16:50] inflation, and I would bet before the
[16:52] year's over, Warsh comes out and says,
[16:53] "Hey, that inflation was transitory. It
[16:56] turns out it wasn't structural. It turns
[16:58] out" I mean, this is not true. Inflation
[17:01] is all about money creation and and the
[17:03] purchasing power, increasing purchasing
[17:05] power in the market. But, you know,
[17:06] according to central bankers, he'll say
[17:09] it was a reaction to the Iranian war,
[17:11] and we're going to look past that
[17:13] because we need to win the AI race, and
[17:16] because X Y and Z and because and
[17:18] because and because and because and I
[17:20] don't think they will actually hike
[17:21] rates, at least not materially. Last
[17:23] time I checked, the market was
[17:24] potentially pricing in two rate hikes by
[17:26] this time next year and I fade that
[17:29] entirely. So, put it on the record. I
[17:31] will continue to update. That's my
[17:33] opinion. That's my thesis. That's my
[17:35] best guess. We'll check in on this as
[17:37] the weeks and months go on because it's
[17:39] as I'll explain in a second, it'll
[17:40] become critically important to Bitcoin,
[17:42] the bear market, and when I think it
[17:44] will end. So, let me walk you guys
[17:46] through the math as to Again, this is
[17:48] not a Bitcoin opinion, a gold opinion, a
[17:50] hard money opinion, an anti-central bank
[17:53] libertarian opinion. This is just a math
[17:54] opinion. I'll walk you guys through the
[17:56] math as to why I don't think they can
[17:58] hike and the Fed is fairly stuck and
[18:02] we're living in this era of fiscal
[18:03] dominance where all that matters is how
[18:05] indebted the US government is and how
[18:08] expensive interest is and how weak the
[18:11] Treasury market is. Said another way,
[18:13] nobody's left to lend to the United
[18:15] States and the United States is
[18:17] unwilling to spend less money and
[18:19] basically put the world through a great
[18:21] depression on steroids. And so, the only
[18:23] way out is through the currency. You
[18:25] know, in
[18:27] the dot-com crash, they kicked the
[18:28] problem to the housing market and then
[18:30] in 2008, the housing market blew up,
[18:32] they kicked the problem to the bond
[18:33] market. In In 2020 during COVID, the
[18:36] bond market blew up and now they've
[18:38] kicked the problem to the currency. And
[18:40] the currency's the last man standing.
[18:42] It's the final boss. And you know, the
[18:44] bond market is is entirely dead. You
[18:47] know,
[18:48] China, a lot of our trading partners,
[18:51] especially those that operate in a
[18:52] surplus, they haven't been net buyers of
[18:54] Treasuries in a very long time, like a
[18:56] decade, I'm saying. And they're now net
[19:00] buyers of gold and gold is the reserve
[19:02] asset on net at central banks on their
[19:05] balance sheets. And so, I I would say,
[19:07] you know, the bond market for all
[19:08] intents and purposes is already dead.
[19:10] It's surviving on its last leg from
[19:13] levered hedge funds in the Cayman
[19:15] Islands and from domestic bank deposits
[19:17] here in the United States via regulation
[19:19] changes.
[19:21] The last final boss standing is the
[19:22] currency.
[19:24] And the escape valve of this entire
[19:26] thing is a weaker fiat currency. So,
[19:29] it'll collapse two ways, either through
[19:31] extreme austerity and a great depression
[19:34] that none of us can possibly fathom
[19:37] because the amount of leverage and
[19:39] indebtedness that would have to collapse
[19:40] on society would be it would I mean
[19:45] what happened 100 years ago would pale
[19:47] in comparison to what we would all go
[19:49] through, but it's fine. I mean, I think
[19:53] Bitcoin would win the ultimate
[19:54] competition of what monetary system we
[19:56] would adopt next.
[19:58] The other option, which is probably far
[20:00] more sneaky and far less painful
[20:04] depends on who you ask, is by debasing
[20:06] the currency and going through an
[20:08] extreme uh extended period of inflation.
[20:11] So, here's the math. Uh I write here the
[20:13] Fed is stuck.
[20:15] What they want to do is very different
[20:18] than what they have to do.
[20:20] Now, the big three expenses that, you
[20:22] know, I consider and other macro guys
[20:25] like Luke Grommet consider to be true
[20:28] expenses for the United States are
[20:30] entitlements. So, you know,
[20:33] the United States has been unwilling to
[20:35] cut entitlements and say we're not
[20:36] paying those anymore.
[20:38] Defense spending, so we know that Trump
[20:40] wants to increase defense spending by
[20:42] 50% year over year.
[20:44] It seems like the world is getting
[20:48] people trust each other less.
[20:50] People are going into conflicts more.
[20:52] The need to defend oneself and have a
[20:54] strong military is only increasing over
[20:56] time. So, the United States is not
[20:58] willing to reduce and slash
[20:59] entitlements, they're not willing to
[21:01] reduce and slash defense, and their
[21:03] grossed interest expense. So, if you're
[21:05] $40 trillion dollars in debt, and
[21:07] interest rates are above 3%. That's
[21:10] really, really expensive, okay? And so,
[21:14] those three, the big three, entitlements
[21:16] plus defense plus interest have crossed
[21:19] over the US's revenues again.
[21:22] Now,
[21:23] they were those three were higher than
[21:25] the US revenues pre-COVID, and during
[21:28] COVID, they actually flipped where the
[21:30] US was earning enough revenue to pay its
[21:33] base expenses.
[21:35] Does this make sense? So, hold on. I'm
[21:36] just trying to, you know, make it as
[21:38] clean layman's terms as I possibly can
[21:40] where if the United States was a
[21:42] business, it's not generating enough
[21:44] revenue to just pay the basic bills,
[21:46] like turn the lights on, have rent, and
[21:48] pay their basic salaries.
[21:50] Like functionally insolvent. And now I
[21:53] want to walk through the math of, well,
[21:55] how did they fix it during COVID?
[21:58] And then how did it become unwound again
[22:00] where now these expenses are way higher
[22:03] than the revenue that the United States
[22:05] is bringing in.
[22:06] Um so, let's walk through the two
[22:08] options that the Federal Reserve has and
[22:10] why I think it doesn't really matter
[22:13] what they do and if they try and do what
[22:16] they probably should do, which is raise
[22:18] rates extremely high, kill any amounts
[22:20] of inflation, they will crash the
[22:23] Western world as we know it. Let me walk
[22:25] you through the math. So, scenario one
[22:27] is if Warsh cuts rates. So, if he does
[22:30] what Trump wants to do, if he does what
[22:32] Bessant has talked about, which cutting
[22:34] rates means the US dollar significantly
[22:37] weakens, okay? Creating new currency and
[22:39] creating more credit becomes a lot
[22:41] easier. So, US dollar goes down,
[22:44] inflation goes up, and nominal tax
[22:46] receipts go up. So, the amount of
[22:49] revenue that the US generates in dollar
[22:51] terms goes up because the
[22:54] uh economy is booming. Now,
[22:56] real terms is different, right? The
[22:58] dollar's going down, so nominal tax
[23:00] receipts going up is kind of a misnomer.
[23:03] It's misleading. But bear with me.
[23:06] Foreign buying of US Treasuries would
[23:07] rise. The bond market would get a little
[23:10] bit more reliable. Now, I still am a
[23:13] bond bear. These things are pieces of
[23:14] trash, but relative to where it is
[23:17] today, it would be stronger because the
[23:19] dollar would get weaker. The reason a
[23:22] strong dollar is bad for assets is
[23:25] because everyone around the world has
[23:27] dollar denominated debt. And so when the
[23:29] dollar gets stronger, it gets harder to
[23:31] pay your debt, pay the interest on your
[23:33] debt. And so you have to sell
[23:35] dollar-based assets like US Treasuries,
[23:38] like US stocks. So a stronger dollar is
[23:41] very bad for gold, for Bitcoin, for US
[23:45] stocks, for US Treasuries. A weaker
[23:47] dollar is very good for assets. It's a
[23:50] very fancy way of saying debasing the
[23:52] currency and making it worthless means
[23:54] assets are going to inflate. And which
[23:56] assets inflate the most depends on their
[23:58] scarcity level predominantly, and their
[24:01] monetary characteristics, which is why
[24:02] Bitcoin has been the best performing
[24:05] asset since it's been invented is it's
[24:07] the best way to monetize a debased
[24:10] dollar.
[24:11] Make sense so far?
[24:12] Now,
[24:13] if Warsh does the opposite and does what
[24:16] he kind of hinted at he's claiming to
[24:18] do, which is hike rates, well, the
[24:20] opposite would happen. The US dollar
[24:22] would go up.
[24:24] The stock market would fall.
[24:26] Bitcoin would fall. Gold would fall.
[24:30] Tax receipts for the United States would
[24:32] collapse. So the US's revenue would go
[24:35] down.
[24:37] People would be getting poorer because
[24:39] the dollar is getting stronger.
[24:41] Foreigners would sell their US
[24:43] Treasuries because again, I mentioned
[24:46] the US denominated debt. There's about
[24:47] 13 to 14 trillion dollars
[24:50] worth of
[24:52] USD denominated debt around the world.
[24:55] So as I mentioned earlier, Bitcoin's
[24:57] market cap is 1.2 trillion. So, there's
[25:00] about 14 Bitcoins worth of debt that
[25:02] would need servicing if they started
[25:05] hiking rates.
[25:07] And the 10-year would spike again.
[25:10] Housing unaffordability, mortgage It
[25:12] would be So, the the point is they're
[25:14] stuck. What are you going to do? You
[25:17] have inflation.
[25:18] Inflation's not going away. Remember the
[25:20] Fed's 2% target? We still haven't gotten
[25:24] there.
[25:25] So, if Worsch was real about wanting to
[25:29] fight inflation, I don't know why he
[25:31] didn't just cut. What's the point of
[25:33] telling us you're thinking about it?
[25:34] You're the Fed chair now. Cut.
[25:37] He didn't. Why did he not? Because if
[25:40] you cut, the dollar strengthens, assets
[25:44] crash, and the US revenue declines. And
[25:48] you go into this death spiral, where the
[25:50] United States is not bringing in enough
[25:52] revenue
[25:54] to pay its baseline expenses. And the
[25:57] only way only way
[26:00] to make the math work would be to print
[26:02] the money in in a very literal way. So,
[26:05] you don't hike rates to fight inflation
[26:07] only to have to print the money no
[26:09] matter what.
[26:10] Make sense so far?
[26:12] So, these two charts are from Luke
[26:14] Gromen, and this will help you guys
[26:16] visualize it. So, on the left, let's
[26:19] look at Let me zoom in here. This is
[26:21] what cutting interest rates from the Fed
[26:25] would do to help the situation. Now, I'm
[26:27] not saying both both uh decisions have
[26:31] pros and cons. Both Both are not good
[26:34] for someone. And that's the problem with
[26:36] central planning. This is why we must
[26:38] separate money and the state.
[26:41] Money should not be monopolized by any
[26:45] central party, any central planner. We
[26:47] have to get money out of the hands of
[26:49] government, central banks, in in Money
[26:52] needs to live in a distributed digital
[26:54] network. It has to. It has to for this
[26:57] very reason. There is no good option,
[27:00] but
[27:01] the United States, if they want to
[27:03] improve their fiscal position. So, let's
[27:05] just say that is the definitive goal,
[27:07] improve the fiscal position. They need
[27:10] to cut rates. So, what you're looking at
[27:12] in blue here is the United States
[27:14] revenue.
[27:15] Okay? As I mentioned, if they cut rates,
[27:18] the dollar gets weaker, assets go up,
[27:21] their tax revenue goes up as well. So,
[27:23] the blue line would increase. And if
[27:26] they were to cut rates, the orange line,
[27:28] which is their total expenses, would
[27:30] begin to flatline. Why? Well, their
[27:32] interest payment for one would go down
[27:34] because obviously, if you lower the
[27:35] interest rate, you're paying less on the
[27:38] total debt that you've taken out.
[27:40] Right? And so, you're starting to
[27:42] flatline and bring down your expenses,
[27:45] and you're starting to grow your
[27:46] revenue.
[27:47] That's exactly what happened. If you
[27:49] look before COVID, look at how much
[27:51] higher the US's expenses were versus its
[27:54] revenue. We saw from 2019 leading into
[27:57] 2020,
[27:58] US revenue receipts were coming down,
[28:01] and its expenses were skyrocketing. And
[28:03] so, how did the you how did the orange
[28:05] line go down and the blue line
[28:06] skyrocket? Well, what happened in COVID?
[28:09] They cut rates to zero, and they printed
[28:11] a bazooka ton of money. Stimulus checks,
[28:14] every amount of liquidity and money
[28:17] printing, money printer went burr. And
[28:20] that's how the US got back into relative
[28:22] solvency. But Bitcoin went from 3,000 to
[28:25] 69,000.
[28:27] Bitcoin 20x'd.
[28:31] Insane level of asset inflation.
[28:34] And now, we're in the same position
[28:36] where the total expenses for the United
[28:38] States has skyrocketed, and revenue has
[28:40] started to tail off.
[28:42] And so, if I go to the right now, this
[28:44] is what would happen if the Fed starts
[28:46] to hike rates. The blue line starts to
[28:48] come down
[28:49] because the overall revenue that the US
[28:52] would bring in would start to tail off.
[28:54] The economy would get weaker. We all
[28:55] know rate hikes crash Silicon Valley
[28:58] Bank. Rate hikes make credit creation
[29:00] harder. Rate hikes will crush assets,
[29:03] crush the bond market. So money gets
[29:04] tighter, the dollar gets stronger, US
[29:06] revenue comes down, and their expenses
[29:08] go up cuz if you think the interest
[29:10] payments are expensive now, wait until
[29:12] war starts hiking rates. He's just
[29:14] adding more to your baseline expenses.
[29:18] And so Wurst can say whatever he wants
[29:20] to say, but this is just math.
[29:24] Right now, the United States does not
[29:26] bring in enough money to pay its
[29:28] baseline expenses.
[29:31] Let me say it another way.
[29:32] If the United States does not want to
[29:35] cut rates, weaken the dollar to juice
[29:38] the markets to make the economics work,
[29:41] they could tell everyone that
[29:43] entitlements are off the table. We could
[29:45] have no defense budget.
[29:47] And then we'd start be we'd start making
[29:49] progress cuz the orange line would come
[29:51] down.
[29:52] But the question is, can the US
[29:54] government say we no longer can service
[29:56] a military and we're no longer to pay
[29:57] entitlements? And this is the problem
[29:59] with politics is even if Trump came out
[30:02] and actually said that, well,
[30:05] no one like he wouldn't All right, well,
[30:07] he can't run, but the Republicans
[30:09] wouldn't win the next election. You know
[30:10] who's going to win the next election?
[30:12] The person that's going to say, "I'm
[30:13] going to protect you. I'm going to pay
[30:14] all your entitlements and I'm going to
[30:15] give you a bunch of free shit." That's
[30:17] politicking 101. "I'm going to give you
[30:19] a bunch of free [ __ ] and I'm going to
[30:21] make your dreams come true."
[30:23] So even if we have a politician that
[30:25] wants to do the right thing, spend less,
[30:28] not go to so much war, it doesn't
[30:30] matter.
[30:31] It doesn't matter cuz then that's not
[30:33] who wins elections.
[30:36] And so
[30:37] I think it's math.
[30:38] And so why are we in a bear market.
[30:42] Well,
[30:43] if you understand what I just said, the
[30:46] only thing that matters is the level of
[30:47] the US dollar. The US dollar is too
[30:50] strong, and I've talked about this on
[30:52] plenty of times, plenty occasions on
[30:54] this show, is we can all solve the US
[30:58] problem in 10 seconds. Don't be the
[31:00] world reserve currency. The US dollar
[31:03] has a permanent premium baked into it
[31:05] because it is the world reserve
[31:07] currency. And for many, many decades,
[31:09] that was a privilege. You get cheaper
[31:11] access to energy, you get to finance
[31:13] your military to be the strongest in the
[31:14] world.
[31:15] But eventually, it becomes a problem.
[31:18] And the problem part is right now.
[31:21] The dollar's way too strong.
[31:23] And the stronger the dollar gets, the
[31:25] worse it becomes for a world that's
[31:27] indebted denominated in dollars.
[31:30] And so I write here, the US and the West
[31:32] need a much weaker dollar and higher
[31:34] inflation to avoid a sovereign debt
[31:35] crisis. Everything else is noise.
[31:38] Nothing else matters. Now, in the
[31:40] meantime, if I pull up the DXY, so the
[31:43] dollar index chart, look at this chart,
[31:45] the dollar's on the rise.
[31:48] So,
[31:49] through 2020 through the beginning of
[31:51] 2025, the dollar fell dramatically. And
[31:54] what happened right around then and
[31:56] going into October? Bitcoin went to
[31:58] 126,000.
[32:00] Since then, the dollar's bottomed out
[32:02] and it's back on the rise. Why is it
[32:03] back on the rise? Well, everything we
[32:05] just talked about, especially with the
[32:07] new Fed chair coming out and saying he
[32:08] might raise rates.
[32:10] Well, that's going to get the dollar up,
[32:13] and that's going to hit asset prices
[32:15] hard. And so, with the dollar on the
[32:17] rise, well, what did gold do? Gold's
[32:20] down 10% about this month,
[32:23] which for gold is a huge move. Huge
[32:26] move.
[32:29] Let's look at SpaceX. SpaceX was down
[32:32] 10% today,
[32:35] and is now trading below its IPO price.
[32:38] So, again, the Fed and the US government
[32:41] is stuck.
[32:43] You guys want to come out and talk a big
[32:45] game that you're going to fight
[32:46] inflation, you're going to raise rates.
[32:48] Well, watch all the fancy tech stocks
[32:50] fall, watch gold fall, and this, as I've
[32:52] said before, Bitcoin has been warning us
[32:56] this whole time. Bitcoin tells the
[32:58] future. It is the ultimate source of
[33:00] truth because it's the freest market we
[33:01] have access to. Bitcoin's been screaming
[33:04] for months now that there's not enough
[33:06] liquidity in the system to survive. They
[33:09] have to start printing money. Bitcoin's
[33:11] been screaming that from the rooftops.
[33:14] And people's had an all-time high stock
[33:16] market while consumer sentiment is at
[33:18] all-time lows. The stock market is a
[33:20] centrally planned phenomena. It is not
[33:23] now. I'm not saying the stock market's
[33:25] kicked Bitcoin's ass in recent
[33:26] performance. I'm not talking [ __ ] I'm
[33:29] saying if you want a truly free market,
[33:31] if you want the truth, if you want a
[33:33] self-sovereign neutral money that
[33:35] actually operates with integrity,
[33:38] that's what Bitcoin is. And you can look
[33:40] back the last few months and go, "Holy
[33:41] cow, Bitcoin was just foreshadowing the
[33:44] inevitable reality, which is we're faced
[33:47] with inflation, but they can't hike
[33:49] rates." They can't.
[33:51] Or they can, and like I said, we all go
[33:54] through a level of austerity and Great
[33:56] Depression that's so severe and so
[33:57] profound, but there's just no way, with
[34:00] the way modern politics work, that
[34:02] that's going to be allowed to last.
[34:04] Because someone's going to campaign and
[34:07] say, "I'm going to give you a bunch of
[34:08] free shit," and they're going to print
[34:09] the money.
[34:11] You know, I it's
[34:12] modern-day society has no pain
[34:14] tolerance. There's no concept of proof
[34:16] of work and self-responsibility.
[34:18] That's why I I just think that the
[34:20] political system and modern day the way
[34:24] society functions and has been
[34:26] conditioned, I just my bet is that they
[34:29] are going to print the money.
[34:31] But, this is why Bitcoin has been
[34:34] struggling and I think we're in a bear
[34:35] market and will continue to struggle.
[34:37] The liquidity is not there. If I go back
[34:40] to these charts from Luke,
[34:42] the the difference between the orange
[34:44] and blue line is is profound.
[34:47] They have to find a way to get liquidity
[34:50] into the system and it seems that
[34:52] Warsh's plan and Besant and these guys,
[34:55] it seems that their plan
[34:58] is to
[35:00] deregulate the banking system so that
[35:02] banks can enter the Treasury market and
[35:04] credit creation. So, giving loans to AI
[35:07] companies and such
[35:09] with unlimited leverage. So, basically
[35:11] allow bank balance sheets to leverage up
[35:13] unlimited with an implicit government
[35:15] back guarantee while leaving the Federal
[35:18] Reserve fairly unchanged or not, you
[35:20] know, changing short-term rates too
[35:23] much. We'll see what happens, but the
[35:26] point is the market cannot survive like
[35:29] this much longer. And this is why my
[35:31] recommendation has been hanging there.
[35:33] These markets are tough. You know,
[35:34] Bitcoin,
[35:36] there's no central planner that pads you
[35:38] and protects you. There's no one in
[35:40] Bitcoin that says, "Oh, no, the market's
[35:41] going to close at 5." Or, "Oh, no,
[35:43] there's a shock break absorber so that
[35:46] so that
[35:47] you know,
[35:48] if Bitcoin's down 10% that the market's
[35:51] halted and it can't go any lower."
[35:53] Bitcoin, you are
[35:55] you are experiencing the world as it
[35:58] truly is, which is hard for most people
[36:01] because people have been conditioned and
[36:02] raised in a false reality.
[36:07] Politicians and central planners and big
[36:09] corporations have protected their life
[36:12] experience. Has made sure oil was
[36:14] permanently affordable no matter how
[36:16] hard they worked.
[36:18] Made sure that stocks couldn't go down
[36:21] too much. Made sure that markets closed
[36:23] on time so you could have a beer with
[36:24] your friends.
[36:26] And Bitcoin is a truly free market that
[36:28] doesn't protect you from reality, from
[36:30] the truth. It's a very raw and real
[36:32] experience. And so seeing Bitcoin lead
[36:35] the market and crash down and be in
[36:37] these bear markets, it's gut-wrenching.
[36:38] It's hard. But I've given this
[36:40] motivational speech before. Um this is
[36:45] you know, this is this is the part that
[36:47] makes it all worth it, right? Obviously,
[36:49] you could buy the top forever if you
[36:51] want and there's no wrong problem with
[36:53] that strategy, but you know, the people
[36:55] that say, "Oh, I wish I got into Bitcoin
[36:57] early. I wish I was there to buy the
[36:59] dips. I wish I was there last bear
[37:00] market." Those people just got lucky.
[37:02] Well,
[37:03] everyone wants to buy the dip until it's
[37:05] time to buy the dip. And that time's
[37:07] now. This is where it's painful. This is
[37:09] where it hurts. This is where you get
[37:11] paid to show up and give this monetary
[37:14] network that is attempting to solve some
[37:16] of the world's hardest problems. It
[37:19] needs attention. It needs resources.
[37:22] You know, when when people say,
[37:25] "Didn't your dad just get lucky buying
[37:27] Bitcoin in 2013?"
[37:29] So no, Bitcoin needed attention. It
[37:33] needed time, energy, effort, labor. It
[37:36] needed someone to start meetups. It
[37:38] needed someone like my dad to go on
[37:40] Reddit and answer questions. It needed
[37:42] someone to press buy.
[37:45] Because if the price was always zero, we
[37:47] wouldn't be here today.
[37:50] And so what was the hard thing that
[37:52] people back then did? Well, before
[37:54] regulatory clarity,
[37:56] before institutional adoption,
[37:59] before a strategic reserve, before an
[38:02] ETF,
[38:04] when Bitcoin was written off as
[38:05] something that was surely going to go to
[38:07] zero,
[38:08] there were people that took their time,
[38:10] energy, effort, labor, and showed up.
[38:14] And those are the same characteristics
[38:17] that are going to get you paid today.
[38:21] You want to buy the dip? You want to buy
[38:23] low?
[38:25] You want returns.
[38:27] And if you don't, that's fine, too. But
[38:29] this is why I encourage everyone, don't
[38:31] try and pick the bottom, don't stress
[38:33] out looking at charts, earn more than
[38:35] you than you consume,
[38:37] and turn on your DCAs. Touch grass, work
[38:40] on relationships, be healthy.
[38:42] You know, that's what for everyone that
[38:44] wants to know, that's what my dad did.
[38:45] My dad didn't have one giant large
[38:47] purchase. He DCA'd from 2013 to today.
[38:51] Legend.
[38:54] Um so, I end kind of this little section
[38:57] here with we're seeing the largest
[38:59] outflows from ETFs, uh I think since
[39:02] they've launched. And it's just to me,
[39:05] it's a story as clear as day. If you
[39:06] guys want to know where Bitcoin's going,
[39:08] look at the DXY chart. Let's watch the
[39:10] strength of the dollar. The level of the
[39:12] dollar is all that matters, okay?
[39:15] If the dollar gets too high, they're
[39:17] going to have to do something. I
[39:18] wouldn't be surprised if we saw a rate
[39:19] cut. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw
[39:21] new legislation, some stimulus.
[39:23] They need a weaker dollar. It's just
[39:26] math.
[39:28] And I don't know when that's going to
[39:29] come. I don't know how long the bear
[39:30] market's going to last, but Bitcoin's
[39:32] been telling us that this whole time,
[39:34] for many, many months now. And markets
[39:37] either scare you out or wear you out.
[39:39] And Bitcoin typically tries to do both.
[39:42] You got to hang in there. You got to
[39:43] stay humble. You got to stack sats. You
[39:45] got to turn your DCAs on. Or obviously
[39:47] don't, and come back in a year or two or
[39:50] three or four or five, and you know,
[39:53] my fiance's going to want something
[39:55] really nice, and you know, you can buy
[39:57] some of my sats at a much higher price.
[39:59] But
[40:01] that's my analysis and my
[40:03] recommendation.
[40:05] Any questions you guys have on that? Uh
[40:07] obviously, leave them in the comments.
[40:09] Uh Dylan's in there in the live chat. Um
[40:12] and I'm happy to go deeper into the
[40:13] macro, but uh it's good to be back
[40:16] talking about macro stuff. Chapter two,
[40:19] uh we're going to revisit the strategy
[40:20] topic um one last time. I'm I'm over it.
[40:24] I'm kind of sick of it. Um I genuinely
[40:26] had questions. I feel like I got those
[40:28] questions answered. So, I'll walk you
[40:29] guys through uh those answers um and
[40:32] then we'll uh get to some Q&A. And I
[40:34] know a lot of you want to hear my
[40:36] thoughts on Illinois uh and the
[40:38] potential new bill. Uh that's for grind
[40:41] my gears. So, just want to don't want to
[40:42] leave you guys hanging there. Let me
[40:43] take some
[40:45] sip of some water and we'll get into uh
[40:47] strategy.
[40:57] Okay, cool.
[40:59] Chapter two, strategy. Uh I got answers
[41:01] to my questions. So, for those that
[41:03] don't know, uh it's 2 weeks ago at this
[41:06] point. Oops.
[41:09] It's 2 weeks ago at this point that I
[41:11] basically started to ask myself some
[41:14] questions. Eventually, I'll get to this
[41:15] part. I asked Michael Saylor some
[41:17] questions, but
[41:19] the questions that I asked on this show
[41:21] 2 weeks ago, so episode 121 was
[41:25] that
[41:26] Bitcoin treasury companies used to have
[41:28] a very simple capital structure. Um they
[41:31] found leverage through convertible debt.
[41:34] And so, they had Bitcoin, common equity,
[41:37] and convertible debt and they would
[41:38] raise convertible debt. It was very
[41:39] simple. Um in my opinion, they got a lot
[41:42] more complex when they introduced these
[41:44] preferred equities. And so, 2 weeks ago
[41:47] when everyone on this show and in my
[41:50] Twitter DMs and just basically around
[41:52] the world was asking like, "Hey, what
[41:54] what's happening? Uh are these
[41:56] preferreds going to be successful?" Uh
[41:59] there's lots of questions about the
[42:00] Bitcoin treasury companies. And so,
[42:01] obviously I have this platform and I
[42:05] really try to be as accessible and as
[42:07] transparent as I possibly can. So, I
[42:10] presented some of my thoughts. And my
[42:12] thoughts were it was unclear to me how
[42:14] everyone in the new capital structure
[42:17] post the preferred equities wins,
[42:19] especially when Bitcoin is in a bear
[42:22] market. So, what do I mean by that?
[42:25] Well, if you are sitting on a Bitcoin
[42:26] position that's underwater. So, right
[42:28] now now MicroStrategy's been buying
[42:30] Bitcoin for 5 years, but they're
[42:32] currently sitting at about a $10 billion
[42:34] loss,
[42:35] um unrealized obviously. And listen,
[42:37] there's no problem with that. You just
[42:39] stay humble, keep stacking sats, and
[42:41] hoddle, right? So, you know, there's no
[42:43] issue with that in isolation, but if
[42:45] your Bitcoin is underwater,
[42:47] um you also are trading under net asset
[42:51] value. So, if you issue more shares,
[42:54] then that is dilutive. So, you can't
[42:57] sell Bitcoin necessarily cuz you'd be
[42:59] selling all your Bitcoins at a loss. You
[43:01] can't issue more common stock because
[43:03] you'd be diluting existing shareholders.
[43:05] So, but you've signed up for this
[43:07] perpetual payment that you must make
[43:09] every month, and they owe billions of
[43:11] dollars a year. And so, then what do you
[43:13] do? And I basically walked through all
[43:17] of the options where every single option
[43:20] some everyone benefited except for one
[43:22] group. So, for example, if you just sell
[43:24] the Bitcoin, then Bitcoin
[43:28] is disadvantaged, but you know, you're
[43:30] not diluting MSTR shareholders, you're
[43:32] still paying the preferred holders their
[43:34] dividends, and you're not screwing with
[43:36] the existing debt. Okay, fine. If you
[43:39] issue MSTR, then you're not selling
[43:41] Bitcoin, which is good for Bitcoin, but
[43:43] you are diluting and damaging MSTR
[43:46] common shareholders while still making
[43:48] whole on the preferred payments. Um
[43:51] okay, fine. Now, if you wanted to make
[43:54] both Bitcoin and MSTR happy by not
[43:57] selling Bitcoin and not diluting MSTR
[43:58] shareholders, well, then you can just
[44:00] tell the preferred people, "Hey, sorry,
[44:02] it's a bear market. We don't have the
[44:03] money right now because we're trading
[44:05] below NAV, and our Bitcoin position is
[44:08] down. We have to wait for Bitcoin to go
[44:10] up again.
[44:12] Fine. Good for MSTR shareholders, good
[44:14] for Bitcoin, bad for the preferred, bad
[44:17] for people that invested in things like
[44:19] stretch as a savings.
[44:21] Okay, but there was no option that I
[44:24] could see where everyone wins.
[44:28] Once you have a preferred where stretch
[44:31] is not convertible debt, it doesn't
[44:33] convert into equity. So, you owe what is
[44:37] now 11 and 1/2% forever. So, you owe $2
[44:39] billion forever. So, it doesn't matter,
[44:42] you know, if Bitcoin was in a bear
[44:43] market and you didn't have to come up
[44:44] with the cash, you can just kind of stay
[44:46] humble right now and just do nothing.
[44:48] But, you constantly have to be coming up
[44:51] with money forever, no matter if
[44:53] Bitcoin's in a bull or bear market,
[44:54] which makes this now a bit trickier for
[44:57] Bitcoin treasury companies and that is
[44:58] basically what I was confused about and
[45:00] I gave my opinion 2 weeks ago.
[45:03] Fast forward,
[45:05] I then was presented from a bunch of
[45:07] people online and even Saylor himself
[45:10] saying things like, "Well,
[45:11] MicroStrategy's not trading below NAV."
[45:14] And I was like, "Wait, what?" According
[45:16] to classic definitions of enterprise
[45:19] value and classic and I went over this
[45:21] on the last episode just how finance has
[45:24] traditionally been measured, it is
[45:26] trading below NAV and issuing MSTR is
[45:29] dilutive. And so, that is when I asked
[45:31] Michael. And for those that don't know,
[45:34] I'll repeat the story. I was on a panel
[45:36] before I asked that question. Um I was
[45:39] getting in my Uber. Uh my chief of
[45:41] staff, who you guys all know, Dylan, he
[45:43] was texted that Michael had made mention
[45:46] that he welcomes my questions on his
[45:49] panel and invited me back in. And so, I
[45:52] only went back in because I was invited.
[45:54] It felt weird to say, "Hey, why don't
[45:57] you ask your questions in front of
[45:59] Michael and engage in a conversation
[46:01] with him instead of asking questions
[46:02] when he's not present. It felt like I
[46:04] was almost being called out in a way,
[46:05] not in a bad way, but I just couldn't
[46:07] imagine saying no, never mind, I'm going
[46:09] to keep asking questions on my show when
[46:11] Michael's not there. It felt, I don't
[46:14] know. And I mean, it's part of Bitcoin's
[46:15] culture to continue to ask questions in
[46:17] the open. People can disagree. I don't
[46:19] find the fact that I had questions like
[46:21] a problem within itself. So, anyways,
[46:24] that's what happened. Now,
[46:26] fast forward, last time we spoke,
[46:28] stretch was at $100 last episode. Now,
[46:31] stretch is at $88. So, a lot has
[46:33] happened. Obviously, stretch had a a not
[46:35] the best week. Uh it fell over 10% um
[46:39] and it is an instrument that's designed
[46:41] to stay at around 100 bucks. I think
[46:44] technically between 99 and 101. And it
[46:47] being at $88 is obviously not a good
[46:50] thing. Um and so, what is strategy doing
[46:54] about it? Um strategy today came out and
[46:57] says that they raised $335 million for
[46:59] the capital. They bought $300, like 300
[47:04] US dollars, and
[47:06] $35 million worth of Bitcoin. And if you
[47:09] click into the filing, um you realize
[47:12] that this was all raised with MSTR
[47:14] common stock. Um so, they did not sell
[47:17] Bitcoin.
[47:18] They did not. So, if you go back to my
[47:20] slide, who burdened the cost this week?
[47:25] And it was MSTR shareholders. So, they
[47:26] didn't sell any Bitcoin, so the Bitcoin
[47:28] holders were unaffected. Uh they didn't
[47:31] pause the preferred payment, so the
[47:33] preferred payments the preferred holders
[47:35] were unaffected. They didn't mess with
[47:36] the convertible debt, so the convertible
[47:38] debt holders were unaffected. But, the
[47:40] people that were impacted and that did
[47:43] have to suffer the consequences were the
[47:46] MSTR common shareholders. Uh and you can
[47:49] see evidence of that just by this screen
[47:52] in their filing that shows that they
[47:54] issued $335 million of proceeds of MSTR
[48:00] and they used that money to do the
[48:02] activity that they did. I also found it
[48:04] interesting that they prioritized buying
[48:06] so much fiat over Bitcoin cuz clearly
[48:08] they are listening to the market and
[48:10] worried about the price of stretch and
[48:12] they're trying to instill some
[48:13] confidence into the creditworthiness of
[48:16] stretch which is totally reasonable. I'm
[48:18] not saying this decision was bad by the
[48:19] way. You guys can tell the tone of my
[48:21] voice like I'm over it.
[48:23] Uh I'm going to give you guys my opinion
[48:24] and the answers that I found and if you
[48:26] disagree, great. Invest in whatever you
[48:28] want. Um but uh I initially wanted
[48:31] answers to my questions and I got them
[48:33] and I'm going to present my thoughts.
[48:34] So,
[48:35] they're trying to they're they're
[48:37] basically buying fiat right now to uh
[48:39] try and get stretch back to 100. It
[48:41] doesn't look like 300 million dollars
[48:43] was enough.
[48:44] Um now,
[48:46] uh
[48:48] listen.
[48:49] I'm going to get into it, but people are
[48:50] telling me that no, this transaction
[48:52] isn't dilutive. No, uh MSTR shareholders
[48:56] aren't the ones carrying the burden.
[48:58] You're just trying to sell your own
[49:00] companies. You're just trying to be an
[49:02] [ __ ] You're just misleading. You're
[49:03] just a nepo baby. You're just all these
[49:05] things and I'll address all this in a
[49:06] second.
[49:08] But guys, like
[49:10] I mean, the reality is Bitcoin was up 2
[49:12] and 1/2% today. So, on the left I have
[49:15] the IBIT ETF. So, IBIT was up 2.47%
[49:18] today which I would think people that
[49:20] actually buy There's nothing that
[49:21] replaces Bitcoin in cold storage. So,
[49:24] I'm not even going to compare Bitcoin in
[49:25] cold storage to these two instruments. I
[49:28] think if you are not buying something
[49:30] like a Bitcoin treasury company, you're
[49:31] probably investing in IBIT. I don't
[49:33] know. You have a retirement account. You
[49:35] have some brokerage. You have some
[49:36] capital that can't buy Bitcoin and move
[49:38] it to cold storage.
[49:40] But if you look, IBIT today was up 2 and
[49:42] 1/2% and MSTR was down 2.73%.
[49:46] So, like
[49:49] I'll get into why these are just facts
[49:51] that like I'm not asking questions
[49:53] anymore. This isn't up for debate. Like
[49:56] MSTR shareholders got hurt today
[50:00] for the benefit of Bitcoin and
[50:03] preferreds. That's just a fact. And if
[50:05] you're okay with that
[50:07] and you're an MSTR shareholder, fine. I
[50:09] mean, what I'm not going to tell you how
[50:11] to live your life, how to invest your
[50:12] money. I'm a free market maximalist. I
[50:15] don't really care. But for all of the
[50:18] people that do support me and do ask my
[50:20] questions and do want my genuine
[50:22] opinion, you know, I've got a lot of a
[50:24] big following on X, a big following on
[50:26] YouTube. I mean, I'm not here to talk to
[50:29] the people that think I'm a piece of
[50:30] [ __ ] and hate my guts. That's not who
[50:33] I'm talking to. I'm talking to the
[50:35] people that respect me and support me
[50:36] and want my opinion. And my opinion is
[50:38] it seems like right now
[50:40] the MSTR shareholder is expected to
[50:43] carry the burden, which obviously begs
[50:45] the question of why would you hold it
[50:47] right now if it is the escape valve, if
[50:50] it is how
[50:52] you know, they're going to monetize the
[50:54] bear market. I don't know the answer to
[50:56] that. I could be wrong. That's my
[50:58] opinion. Now,
[51:00] I want to just cite a little bit of FUD
[51:03] and the reactions I've gotten online.
[51:05] So, I tweeted yesterday, I'm trying to
[51:07] talk about Bitcoin again. Like again,
[51:09] I'm over this. I got my answers. I don't
[51:11] think they were great answers, which
[51:13] I'll get into in a second, but I got
[51:14] them.
[51:15] And I'm I'm moving on. So, I'm trying to
[51:18] talk about how governments are
[51:19] misallocating our dignity and how this
[51:22] is [ __ ] And this guy replies to me
[51:25] and he says, "We all believe in the same
[51:26] thing. Why do you have to create FUD
[51:28] against MSTR? It's like you want to win
[51:31] by pushing them down. That is the
[51:33] mentality of a loser."
[51:35] Uh okay. Next, this post on Reddit um
[51:41] which claims I'm a performative
[51:43] financial elite insider from a powerful
[51:46] family. I'll just read the beginning
[51:48] just cuz I'm going to reference it
[51:50] later. Jack is not a genuine person.
[51:53] He's very performative. He comes from a
[51:55] family of financial insiders with the
[51:57] CBOE etc. However, he attempts way too
[51:59] hard at appearing like a common person.
[52:02] The stunt he pulled at Prague proved why
[52:04] I would never invest in a company that
[52:06] he runs.
[52:07] There's only two possible reasons he
[52:09] would publicly ask Saylor
[52:12] what shareholder dilution means. A, he
[52:14] genuinely doesn't know how dilution
[52:16] works and wants more insight or B, he's
[52:18] openly confronting Saylor in public
[52:20] trying to spark some debate and fuel
[52:22] public hostility against MSTR.
[52:25] Either one of those reasons are not why
[52:27] you want the CEO of a company, blah blah
[52:29] blah.
[52:30] He says, "Motherfucker, you have a $5
[52:32] million penthouse in Chicago. Do you
[52:35] think we're stupid? Your closet's big.
[52:39] Uh if you're not materialistic and you
[52:41] aren't using 500 square feet worth of
[52:43] space in your house, why do you even own
[52:45] that place? Just use the goddamn room.
[52:47] No one's going to care. You look like a
[52:48] weirdo. You're disingenuous."
[52:51] Okay, fine. So, I'm a I'll get to I'm a
[52:55] financial insider because here's the
[52:57] thing, none of this is true about me.
[53:00] Um
[53:01] which I'll get to in a second and I'm
[53:04] not a high-flying executive. I don't
[53:06] consider myself to be some elite
[53:09] compared to normal plebs where I can't
[53:13] just hop on here and address it. And
[53:16] honestly, on Father's Day, it just
[53:17] became too much. Like, I love my dad
[53:19] more than anyone in the world.
[53:21] Everything that people say about him and
[53:23] my family is a lie.
[53:25] And so,
[53:27] yeah, I just [ __ ] that. Um
[53:31] the other thing is that people are
[53:32] genuinely just confused. So, this person
[53:35] someone sent me this tweet said,
[53:37] "According to their website,
[53:38] MicroStrategy's MNAV is 1.13. Are you
[53:41] calling this fake? This is a company
[53:43] regulated by the SEC, listed on a public
[53:45] stock exchange, and audited. I'm sure if
[53:47] these numbers were wrong, we would hear
[53:49] about an official lawsuit rather than
[53:51] some Twitter influencers complaining.
[53:54] Okay? And then this guy
[53:57] This guy made a actually don't know it I
[53:59] think his name is Michael. Sorry, I
[54:02] really didn't even mean to this is a
[54:04] unpleasant screenshot of your face. I
[54:06] did not mean to do that. But he made
[54:09] basically a 20-minute video
[54:11] blasting my character. Basically, more
[54:14] or less, he acknowledged some
[54:16] achievements I've had in my career in
[54:18] the 13 years I've been working on
[54:19] Bitcoin, but basically said
[54:22] I'm a disingenuous, misleading piece of
[54:24] [ __ ] and attacked my character and
[54:28] basically said I'm a bad person.
[54:30] So,
[54:32] I'm going to Here's what I'm going to
[54:33] do. Cuz I'm over this, guys.
[54:36] Uh
[54:37] I'm over debating and asking questions.
[54:40] I got the answers. I have facts. I'm
[54:42] going to present my facts.
[54:44] And I'm going to keep building. That's
[54:46] what I do. I build like I control what I
[54:49] can control, which is, you know, I'm
[54:51] keep building products at Strike, and
[54:53] we're going to keep crushing it and
[54:55] hopefully making things useful and
[54:56] making the world a better place for what
[54:58] we believe in.
[54:59] And I'm happy to address all of my
[55:03] incentives, my family, all of that
[55:06] stuff, and then I move on. Okay?
[55:09] First of all,
[55:11] was this accretive? So, I just want to
[55:14] bring you guys back to MicroStrategy's
[55:16] last quarterly earnings where they
[55:18] presented this slide and they said the
[55:21] actual threshold to issue
[55:24] accretively is 1.22x.
[55:28] So, going back to this where the guy
[55:29] says the MNAV's at 1.13. This is why I
[55:33] was asking the questions in the first
[55:34] place. I I not trying to be an [ __ ]
[55:36] I was not trying to do any secret
[55:38] messaging. I was not trying to cause any
[55:41] drama.
[55:43] There These All of these metrics were
[55:45] invented out of thin air. These are not
[55:47] traditional finance metrics. Nobody grew
[55:50] up learning these metrics. Nobody's
[55:52] heard of these. These were all invented
[55:55] by the company themselves. So, in order
[55:57] for someone like me to understand them
[55:59] and whether they are reasonable or not,
[56:01] how to apply them, how to think about
[56:03] them, I have no choice but to start
[56:05] asking people. And I didn't only ask
[56:07] Michael. I was invited to ask Michael
[56:09] during his panel. I also asked people
[56:11] from the strategy team. By the way,
[56:13] everyone, including Michael, has been
[56:15] super kind. Super kind. Nobody's been
[56:18] disrespectful to me. The strategy team
[56:20] answered my questions. I had coffee with
[56:21] the Strive guys. Was able to get
[56:23] answers. Made complete sense, okay? But,
[56:26] the reason I have to ask the questions
[56:27] is exactly this. This guy's like, "MNAV
[56:30] is above one. How is this dilutive?"
[56:32] Well, it's dilutive because
[56:35] in their own quarterly earnings, they
[56:37] said, "If we issue it below 1.22, it is
[56:41] dilutive. It has to be above 1.22." So,
[56:44] you would ask, "Well, what's the point
[56:45] of the Like, this metrics feels a little
[56:47] bit misleading. Why don't we measure it
[56:49] the right way, where we're not like
[56:51] having 1.22 be the break even?" But, I
[56:55] mean, you guys forced my hand. I brought
[56:57] my receipts. So, this is a clip from the
[56:59] strategy earnings call
[57:01] where they said exactly what they just
[57:04] did was dilutive. So, again, I'm not
[57:07] here to cause FUD. I'm I'm like, guys,
[57:11] I'm not I'll tell you this. I'm not the
[57:13] type of man and I'm not the type of
[57:14] Bitcoiner that's going to stick his tail
[57:16] between his legs and not like be genuine
[57:19] and be curious. I'm not afraid to be
[57:21] wrong. I'm not afraid to ask questions.
[57:23] And if that becomes a cultural problem
[57:25] within Bitcoin, we have way bigger
[57:26] problems. So, these are not my words.
[57:29] Let's listen to the CEO of Strategy, by
[57:32] the way, very nice guy, never been mean
[57:34] to me, but this is what he said on their
[57:37] earnings call. Let me mute myself and
[57:38] play this.
[57:42] >> So, where it used to be a 1x MNAV, as we
[57:46] add debt and as we add preferred
[57:48] primarily to our structure, the break
[57:50] even increases. Right now, it's about
[57:51] 1.22x.
[57:53] That means at 1.22x
[57:56] or higher MNAV, it's accretive for us to
[58:00] sell MSTR and buy Bitcoin.
[58:02] Below 1.22x MNAV, it's actually more
[58:06] accretive
[58:07] for us to sell Bitcoin,
[58:09] right, and pay off our dividends than it
[58:12] is above 1.22x MNAV. So, where
[58:16] >> Okay, that's a direct quote from the CEO
[58:19] on an earnings call. He said,
[58:22] "Below 1.22x MNAV," which by the way,
[58:24] they are, they're at 1.1 right now,
[58:27] "we should sell Bitcoin to cover these
[58:30] expenses that we've accrued and not sell
[58:33] MSTR, cuz that would be dilutive to
[58:35] MSTR."
[58:37] I didn't say that. They said that.
[58:39] And I'm just trying to figure out what
[58:41] the [ __ ] going on, okay? I care at the
[58:44] end of the day, I care deeply about
[58:46] Bitcoin. I've been doing this for almost
[58:48] 14 years.
[58:50] It's part of my family at this point,
[58:51] which I'll get into.
[58:53] And that's them on the earnings call.
[58:56] And if you disagree with that, I don't
[58:58] know what to tell you, cuz that's the
[58:59] leadership on a public earnings call in
[59:02] plain English saying what they just did
[59:04] was dilutive. And I go back and you look
[59:07] at the market, Bitcoin was up and MSTR
[59:11] was down. And why is that? It's because
[59:15] it was hurtful to MSTR, which is fine.
[59:17] There's Like, I'm not going to tell
[59:19] Saylor's built an incredibly big
[59:21] company, super successful, way more
[59:23] successful than any company I've built
[59:24] so far. That's fine. Whatever. I'm just
[59:27] God, like, it's just crazy to be so
[59:29] defensive while I'm trying to be honest.
[59:32] Oh, and also this guy made this video.
[59:34] He basically said,
[59:36] I go back on my promises
[59:38] and that, you know, I
[59:41] basically like my Yeah, I'm disingenuous
[59:45] and I can't be trusted. And so I also
[59:47] just want to claim, you know, sure. Let
[59:50] me say something. I'm no stranger to
[59:51] humble pie. Like I often times get my
[59:54] ass kicked and I deserve it. That's part
[59:57] of being in Bitcoin. This isn't about
[59:59] me. I don't want to be the main
[60:00] character. Bitcoin has humbled me and
[60:03] and taught me very, very valuable life
[60:06] lessons that I needed to learn. And
[60:10] every time you guys and the internet and
[60:12] Bitcoin says, "Yo, dude, you're not
[60:15] being humble enough. You're being an
[60:16] [ __ ] You said something that wasn't
[60:18] true." I don't argue with that. I
[60:20] acknowledge it. I put my hand up and I
[60:22] say you're right. Cuz I'm here to help.
[60:25] I'm here to play, hopefully, a small but
[60:27] valuable role in Bitcoin's inevitable
[60:29] success. And Bitcoin's not about me.
[60:32] Bitcoin's not about, right? And so
[60:35] I also want to say, you know, here's an
[60:38] example of the strategy team that said
[60:41] something on an earnings call and did
[60:43] the opposite. They said if they were in
[60:45] this situation, they would be selling
[60:47] Bitcoin and they did the opposite. This
[60:49] is not the first time that they've done
[60:51] this.
[60:52] Previously,
[60:54] Saylor came out and gave guidance that
[60:56] they would only aggressively sell MSTR
[60:59] between a 2.5 times and 4 times MNAV.
[61:02] This was last year.
[61:03] And above 4 times MNAV, above $1,000 per
[61:07] MSTR share. And this is an article from
[61:10] Yahoo Finance strategy updates its MSTR
[61:12] 2.5 x MNAV guidance after 2 weeks. So 2
[61:15] weeks after they gave this guidance,
[61:17] they undid it. So, this is the second
[61:20] time in 12 months that what they've said
[61:22] on an earnings call, they violated weeks
[61:25] afterwards, which is fine. I just want
[61:28] to restate building companies is hard.
[61:31] It's really easy for people sitting in
[61:33] the audience to be commenting and
[61:35] telling people in the arena what to do.
[61:38] It's hard. It's hard. But, I'm not going
[61:41] to have people question my character
[61:44] and my
[61:46] willingness to be authentic and
[61:48] accessible. You don't like my hair, you
[61:51] don't like my voice, you don't like my
[61:52] closet, that's fine.
[61:54] Um
[61:55] especially on Father's Day, I'm not
[61:57] going to stand for people attacking my
[61:59] family and making up lies about my dad
[62:02] and attacking my character claiming that
[62:05] I'm full of [ __ ] I lie, I make too many
[62:07] promises when literally what happened
[62:10] today
[62:11] the strategy leadership team told us on
[62:13] their earnings call they wouldn't do.
[62:16] Okay, I only have a few more receipts
[62:18] cuz I feel like I've already made my
[62:19] point.
[62:20] Uh now, why is stretch down so much?
[62:24] Well, this tweet was sent to me. Um
[62:27] there it's much longer, not trying to
[62:28] short-circuit Jesse here. You can read
[62:30] what he has to say if you want. But, he
[62:33] says uh at the bottom, "Why the
[62:35] sell-off? This appears to be a
[62:36] liquidation cascade." And there was this
[62:38] thesis that um there was a carry trade
[62:41] unwind and all this liquidation and it
[62:43] wasn't necessarily STRC's fault and uh
[62:47] you can't blame
[62:48] uh strategy and STRC for this. Uh
[62:52] let me play you two clips from two
[62:54] separate conference presentations.
[62:57] >> Stretch is like the risk-free rate in
[63:00] the crypto economy. If you're looking
[63:02] for the free market risk-free rate,
[63:05] it's 11 and 1/2% and it compares to, you
[63:08] know, nothing in yen or or Swiss francs.
[63:12] But, now if you look at this chart, you
[63:14] see there's a mother of all arbitrage
[63:16] opportunities here. If you're looking
[63:17] for the carry trade,
[63:19] you borrow at 2% in euros and you invest
[63:22] in stretch, you catch the difference.
[63:24] If you're a DeFi trader, imagine looping
[63:27] 2% to 11.5% capturing 9.5% * 10.
[63:33] Now, 10% 10x leverage sounds dangerous
[63:36] on a 40 vol asset, but what if I give
[63:38] you a two vol asset?
[63:40] At two vol, you can 10x leverage and the
[63:43] and the volatility is like the S&P
[63:45] index,
[63:46] but you captured 95% yield.
[63:50] >> Okay.
[63:52] Guys, I'm sorry, but you made me do it.
[63:56] Why was there so much
[63:58] leverage carry trade DeFi [ __ ] in
[64:02] like all in stretch? Well, because they
[64:06] told everyone to do that.
[64:08] Mind you, there were Bitcoiners,
[64:10] including myself, they were like, why
[64:12] are we promoting shitcoins? Why are we
[64:14] promoting DeFi? There's going to be a
[64:16] ton of extreme leverage in these things.
[64:20] I mean, Dylan, sorry Dill, I hope that
[64:23] you're okay with me sharing this. He was
[64:24] like, damn, bro, I've got some cash that
[64:27] I'm saving up for my wedding. You know,
[64:29] Dylan and I are both recently engaged.
[64:32] He's like, should I put it in one of
[64:34] these Bitcoin treasury instruments
[64:36] because it'll give me 10 plus percent on
[64:38] my savings? And I was like, dude, please
[64:40] be careful. Obviously, do whatever you
[64:42] want, but they're going around at these
[64:46] conferences literally, like you can't
[64:48] say, oh, the carry trade, this isn't
[64:50] their fault. They're literally keynotes
[64:52] saying this is the risk-free rate. This
[64:55] is direct quote, guys. This is the
[64:57] risk-free rate.
[65:00] Imagine
[65:02] running a carry trade and leveraging it
[65:04] 10x.
[65:06] So, what did you think was going to
[65:07] happen?
[65:09] Like, what are we Like, come on, guys,
[65:11] this is Bitcoin. What the [ __ ] are we
[65:13] talking about?
[65:16] And this was not just like one one-off
[65:18] thing.
[65:20] Let me go to the next slide. Totally
[65:22] separate conference.
[65:24] Same thing.
[65:27] >> Now what you see is we've created the
[65:30] short end of the yield curve, like the
[65:31] one-month Bitcoin bond, the the
[65:34] risk-free rate
[65:36] in the crypto ecosystem.
[65:38] So what is the free market rate of
[65:41] capital or the free market cost of
[65:44] capital?
[65:45] It's 11 and 1/2% right now.
[65:49] And you can see what the what the
[65:50] risk-free rate is in every other
[65:52] currency. 3 2 1
[65:56] 0
[66:00] >> So yeah, I mean Okay, so
[66:06] Again, I said it last episode.
[66:08] You know, preferred equities are fine
[66:10] and there's lots of dividend stocks and
[66:13] it looks like strategy is going to keep
[66:14] paying it, which is great. And I have
[66:17] nothing but love and respect for
[66:18] Michael. Um no problem the way he's
[66:21] running things. No problem. Do whatever
[66:24] you want.
[66:25] But you know, to to say that this recent
[66:29] transaction wasn't dilutive, guys, on
[66:31] their earnings call they literally said,
[66:34] "We will not do what they just did." And
[66:37] then why did STRC's price blow up? Well,
[66:40] not only was there leverage involved in
[66:42] it, but there was explicit
[66:46] recommendation to go extreme DeFi
[66:49] shitcoin leverage.
[66:51] Like
[66:52] did a keynote on it.
[66:56] So back to the guy that basically said
[66:59] I'm a piece of [ __ ] And I'm sure
[67:00] there's going to be plenty more videos.
[67:02] I I actually really did not mean to take
[67:05] the these screenshots I've taken are not
[67:07] very flattering. I did not mean to do
[67:09] that, obviously. I just
[67:11] the video was playing. Um
[67:14] and this guy was very respectful. So,
[67:16] you know, I have no personal None of
[67:18] this is very personal, but I mean, this
[67:20] is the same thing where it's like, does
[67:22] stretch have the best risk-adjusted
[67:24] return?
[67:25] Uh recently, I measured the Sharpe
[67:27] ratio. And so, he goes into this video.
[67:30] So, I think most of the people that say
[67:33] I'm a piece of [ __ ] and say my dad is a
[67:35] piece of [ __ ]
[67:36] basically really like strategy. And I
[67:39] have I just want to say I've no problem
[67:40] with that, but it doesn't It seems very
[67:42] emotion like emotion-driven. This
[67:44] doesn't seem like it's driven by much
[67:45] logic. Because the things I'm saying,
[67:47] I'm citing facts, I'm doing math, I'm
[67:50] asking questions.
[67:51] I don't regret anything that I've done.
[67:54] Like, I know I wouldn't change it. This
[67:56] is how I've operated in Bitcoin and in
[67:59] life, and I will continue to do so. I
[68:02] mess up all the time, raise my hand,
[68:03] admit when I'm wrong, learn from my
[68:05] mistakes, hopefully do so publicly so
[68:07] people can learn with me, and and build
[68:09] really good products, and promote
[68:10] Bitcoin. That's what I'm all about.
[68:13] So, anyway, this guy
[68:14] uh
[68:15] because once I saw this video, my fiance
[68:18] like watched a little bit of the video
[68:20] basically like why I'm a piece of [ __ ]
[68:21] And we're like, oh my goodness, this
[68:23] guy. And I clicked on his profile. I was
[68:25] like, this guy did a uh video on MSTR's
[68:28] stretch Sharpe ratio and why it's the
[68:31] best risk-adjusted return. Okay.
[68:34] And just so you guys know, the Sharpe
[68:36] ratio was something that has been
[68:38] promoted a lot by Michael himself and
[68:41] strategy and all of the shareholders and
[68:43] stuff like that. So, I went on today
[68:46] because after stretch fell from 100 to
[68:49] 88, the Sharpe ratio should be negative.
[68:52] It should be a negative number. Um based
[68:54] on, again, the Sharpe ratio Hold on.
[68:57] We're not even going to do this right
[68:58] now. We're going to do this live because
[69:01] I
[69:02] I swear to you after this, I am done
[69:05] with this nonsense. This is literally a
[69:08] waste of my time now and nonsense.
[69:10] So guys, the Sharp ratio is not
[69:13] something new. This is something that's
[69:15] existed for a very long time. It is a
[69:17] very normal finance metric.
[69:21] Let's let's click in Wikipedia. In
[69:23] finance, the Sharp ratio, also known as
[69:25] the Sharp index, the Sharp measure, and
[69:27] the reward to variability ratio,
[69:29] measures the performance of an
[69:30] investment such as a security or
[69:32] portfolio compared to a risk-free asset
[69:35] after adjusting for its risk. It is
[69:37] defined as the difference between the
[69:39] returns of the investment and the
[69:40] risk-free return divided by the standard
[69:42] deviation of the investment returns.
[69:45] Okay. This is the point This is the part
[69:47] I wanted to show. It was named after
[69:49] William Sharpe who developed it in 1966.
[69:54] Guys, this was invented 60 years ago. So
[69:58] it is very well known. It is very
[70:01] standard. We know exactly how to
[70:03] calculate it. We know exactly what it is
[70:04] because it was invented 60 years ago.
[70:09] So I go on Strategies website as I'm
[70:10] making this uh keynote today. Basically
[70:13] saying like I found the answers to my
[70:14] questions.
[70:16] I don't know, you know, if you're an
[70:17] MSTR shareholder, you might not love my
[70:19] opinion, but whatever. You guys buy
[70:21] that, I'll buy Bitcoin in cold storage.
[70:23] I don't really care. I'm not going to
[70:24] talk about it anymore. I cuz I'm not a
[70:26] shareholder and um whatever. Doesn't
[70:29] matter.
[70:30] But how is the Sharp ratio 0.43?
[70:34] So I start thinking to myself like,
[70:36] wait, what? Did do I now not know what
[70:40] Sharp ratio is? And I almost started
[70:42] asking questions again online. Where I'm
[70:44] like, wait.
[70:46] How am I getting this wrong? The Sharp
[70:48] ratio should be negative for this asset
[70:50] because it just fell 10%.
[70:53] And then I read, if you see here at the
[70:55] bottom left,
[70:57] the red underline, I read the fine print
[71:00] and it says with respect to credit
[71:02] instruments, 30-day sharp is calculated
[71:06] as effective yield minus risk-free rate.
[71:10] Not the return.
[71:12] So, basically,
[71:14] they made up their own version of sharp
[71:16] ratio.
[71:19] And so, if I go back to the guy that
[71:20] made a really long video about how I'm a
[71:22] piece of [ __ ]
[71:24] this in lies the whole conundrum of the
[71:28] issue, is that
[71:30] there's brand new metrics that are being
[71:32] made, overriding very like standard
[71:36] metrics. What is enterprise value for a
[71:39] company? That's been defined for
[71:41] decades. What is sharp ratio? Been
[71:43] defined for decades. But then when
[71:46] people say it's above 1M NAV, it's
[71:48] accretive. What are you talking about?
[71:50] Well, they're inventing their own
[71:52] version of MNAV. They invented their own
[71:55] version of the sharp ratio. And they
[71:57] they're not very like in your face about
[71:59] it. You had to I had to read the
[72:00] disclaimer in the bottom of the chart.
[72:04] And so, if you look here,
[72:07] Strategies methodology methodology of
[72:10] sharp ratio is taking the effective
[72:12] yield
[72:13] of the instrument, which gives Stretch a
[72:16] sharp ratio of about .5. It's actually
[72:19] on their website now .43, which is
[72:20] important. I'll get to that in a second.
[72:23] But if you did the normal methodology,
[72:25] which is total return, so effective
[72:28] yield instead of total return just
[72:30] ignores the price of it entirely. So,
[72:32] Stretch falling from 100 to 88 like
[72:36] doesn't matter because they're not using
[72:38] total return, they're using effective
[72:40] yield. Which,
[72:42] again, like either way is fine. You want
[72:44] to invent your own metrics, that's fine.
[72:46] But you guys can't blame me for having
[72:48] questions. And then once I get answers
[72:49] now, the answer to my question is like
[72:51] they're just using brand new different
[72:53] metrics that I've never heard of, never
[72:55] seen, don't understand why they're
[72:57] inventing their own metrics. So, that's
[72:59] the answers to my questions. What is
[73:01] MNAV? I don't know. How how how do how
[73:03] do this company define their financial
[73:05] metrics? I have no idea.
[73:07] I have no idea, and that's the answer to
[73:09] my question. I'm not crazy. Um I just
[73:12] didn't I have just didn't like I've
[73:14] never heard of this version of Sharpe
[73:16] ratio.
[73:17] Uh by the way, according to their own
[73:19] KPIs, they write a Sharpe ratio above
[73:22] three is excellent, above two is very
[73:24] good, above one is good, between 0.5 and
[73:27] 1 is decent but suboptimal, and below
[73:30] 0.5 is poor. So, according to their own
[73:33] KPI now, Stretch is poor, but they're
[73:36] using a different Sharpe ratio than what
[73:40] was invented 60 years ago and has been
[73:42] used pretty consistently this entire
[73:44] time.
[73:46] So,
[73:47] you know, what what's the what why is
[73:49] this guy I think I'm an [ __ ] and you
[73:51] know, why do I not seem to be able to
[73:53] understand what he's saying? Well,
[73:55] because we're using different
[73:56] definitions of stuff, I guess. Like I'm
[73:59] thinking Sharpe ratio means Sharpe
[74:00] ratio. I'm not reading like the bylaws
[74:02] of this thing. And am I an [ __ ] for
[74:06] uh not, you know, building businesses is
[74:07] hard. You try and launch products,
[74:09] sometimes they don't go your way. But to
[74:11] say that, you know, I'm
[74:13] saying things and then renacking on my
[74:16] word, while strategy in two of their
[74:18] last eight earnings calls said something
[74:21] and did the complete opposite, it's
[74:22] like, come on, man. Like
[74:24] we got to be okay in this industry with
[74:26] asking questions. We got to be okay with
[74:28] seeking truth. We got to be okay with
[74:29] disagreeing.
[74:31] Like people disagree with me all the
[74:33] time. Michael can disagree with me on
[74:34] stuff. He could say, "Hey, Strike is a
[74:36] piece of [ __ ] I don't think this." But
[74:38] we both agree on Bitcoin. We both are
[74:40] Bitcoiners, and I got no problem. Like I
[74:42] don't agree with creating your own
[74:43] metrics. I don't agree with
[74:45] incentivizing and promoting
[74:47] DeFi shitcoin leverage. I don't agree
[74:50] with this stuff. I don't It doesn't make
[74:52] sense to me. It's not something I want
[74:54] to build, but whatever. Who cares? Like
[74:56] it's a free market. The market will
[74:58] figure it out. The market will MSTR will
[75:01] be like the biggest thing since sliced
[75:03] bread or it won't and Michael hopefully
[75:05] will still be a Bitcoiner no matter what
[75:06] and we'll all move on with our lives.
[75:08] But like I'm not crazy and I I couldn't
[75:11] tell if this tweet was satire cuz I
[75:12] think this guy this guy's responded to
[75:14] my tweets before as like a MSTR guy, but
[75:18] he writes MSTR's genius. When the
[75:20] metrics don't work, just switch over to
[75:22] another metric and keep the party going.
[75:24] That's kind of like how I feel. Like
[75:26] every single time I try and understand
[75:29] there's new metrics or every single time
[75:32] I reference their earnings, they're
[75:33] violating what they said in their
[75:34] earnings.
[75:36] So I don't know, man. Like those are the
[75:38] answers to my questions. I don't feel
[75:40] crazy, you know, if I am the guy that
[75:43] takes bullets for asking questions, so
[75:45] be it. Um
[75:47] cuz the other option is I get basically
[75:50] bullied into not speaking my mind, not
[75:53] asking questions,
[75:55] and not promoting public conversation
[75:57] around Bitcoin, which I just can't stand
[76:00] for that. I think the reality of the
[76:02] situation is somehow I've
[76:05] garnered a a
[76:06] bigger following than others on the
[76:08] internet. It's been I mean people think
[76:11] like, you know, some of this is some
[76:12] overnight following. I've been posting
[76:15] about Bitcoin for almost 14 years. So
[76:17] it's just a lot of proof of work over
[76:18] the years and so maybe when I say things
[76:20] they get amplified and when I say things
[76:22] there's more eyeballs on them, but I
[76:24] don't necessarily think at least broadly
[76:27] that should change my behavior, that
[76:29] that should limit my speech, that I
[76:30] should be afraid to ask questions and
[76:33] try and figure out like what's going on
[76:35] because people ask me and want to know
[76:37] my opinion and I want to contribute to
[76:40] the public conversation and to building
[76:41] this space. And so, yeah, there you guys
[76:44] go. And I listen, I could have this
[76:46] episode could have been 10 hours long.
[76:48] There's a lot of new definitions and
[76:52] ways to define things. I've already read
[76:54] through to you guys their 8K, went
[76:56] through some of the earnings. That's
[76:57] enough. You guys get my point. That's
[76:59] why I asked the question because these
[77:01] variables are being redefined in
[77:03] real-time. Nobody knows the definition
[77:05] of these things. Do I think that someone
[77:07] has to lose currently? Either Bitcoin
[77:09] has to be sold, MSTR has to be diluted,
[77:11] or preferred to have to be paused? Yes,
[77:13] I do believe that. And that's why I
[77:15] think if you pull up Bitcoin versus
[77:19] MSTR, so this is BTC USD versus MSTR,
[77:22] Bitcoin is in a bull market against MSTR
[77:25] since the preferreds were introduced. I
[77:27] still don't totally understand them.
[77:30] But, you know, let the market prove me
[77:32] wrong. I don't know. I like who cares?
[77:34] If I
[77:36] uh if if I end up being wrong and I lose
[77:38] out on one of the best investments ever,
[77:40] so be it. I prefer Bitcoin and cold
[77:42] storage anyways. I still don't
[77:44] understand uh what's going on. But, um
[77:49] whatever. I asked the questions, I got
[77:50] my answers, I stand 10 toes down.
[77:53] The last thing,
[77:55] uh people are asking me, well, do you
[77:58] think MSTR can outperform Bitcoin? What
[78:00] do you think is going to happen, Jack?
[78:02] Again, this is not for the people that
[78:04] think I'm a piece of [ __ ] and don't
[78:06] value my opinion. This is for the people
[78:08] that do value my opinion and support me.
[78:11] Um I have no idea what's going to
[78:12] happen. Um I think I don't just to be
[78:15] clear, I don't think strategy's in a
[78:16] death spiral. I don't think they're
[78:18] going to fail or collapse. None of that.
[78:20] I'm not prescribing any of that at all.
[78:23] Um I'm not making any predictions
[78:25] either. Um what I will just say is it
[78:28] depends on the on the NAV, basically.
[78:32] Like is it going to trade at a premium
[78:35] or a discount? And so, Jeff Dormann has
[78:38] this tweet here. I just want to uh read
[78:40] it to you guys and give my quick
[78:42] thoughts here. And then again, unless
[78:44] you guys have questions for me in Q&A in
[78:46] future episodes and stuff, or unless
[78:47] something really, really big happens and
[78:49] I have to talk about it, I'm done with
[78:51] this stuff. I'm done with invented
[78:53] metrics. I'm done with people talking
[78:54] about my family. I'm done with people
[78:56] questioning my character.
[78:58] I ask questions and we move on.
[79:01] Okay, the tweet from Jeff. The only bull
[79:03] case for MSTR is that if Bitcoin
[79:05] skyrockets higher quickly, then MSTR
[79:08] could outperform Bitcoin. If Bitcoin
[79:10] doubles from here, you'd have And these
[79:12] are a bit stale, but just bear with me.
[79:15] You'd have $100 billion roughly on
[79:17] balance sheet up from $50 billion. You'd
[79:20] have $0 billion in USD cash, which was
[79:22] used to pay the dividends.
[79:24] You'd have minus about $5 billion of
[79:26] debt, about $14.5 billion of prefs. So,
[79:28] you'd have call it like 85 to $90
[79:31] billion of unencumbered Bitcoin if
[79:33] Bitcoin were to double for strategy.
[79:36] Now, if you believe that MSTR stays at
[79:39] around the same MNAV,
[79:41] which
[79:42] Jeff writes it shouldn't, but let's say
[79:44] that it does. So, let's say strategy
[79:46] stays at this kind of 1.1 MNAV as
[79:49] defined by them, not not the enterprise
[79:51] value that I'm used to, but their their
[79:53] version of MNAV.
[79:54] Um so, $100 billion in MSTR equity
[79:57] market cap up from 40 billion today. So,
[80:00] MSTR would do about a 2.4x while Bitcoin
[80:03] in cold storage would do about a 2x.
[80:06] And Jeff writes that only assumes that
[80:09] Bitcoin doubles quickly, and they aren't
[80:11] still on the hook for all of the
[80:12] dividends, which continue to eat away at
[80:14] their premium, and that they didn't have
[80:15] to sell a ton of Bitcoin or MSTR or more
[80:18] prefs to raise the dividends, all of
[80:20] which would dilute any possible MSTR
[80:23] gain. So, MSTR could technically
[80:25] outperform, but slightly
[80:27] uh and not enough outperformance to
[80:30] compensate for all of the risks.
[80:33] And so, I
[80:34] broadly agree with this point. His point
[80:37] is
[80:38] unless you think MSTR is going to go to
[80:40] 2 MNAV, 3 MNAV, 4 MNAV and trade at
[80:44] these crazy multiples,
[80:46] which I think increasingly is unlikely
[80:48] because of these preferreds,
[80:50] then it could definitely outperform, for
[80:53] sure, but more marginally. You're
[80:55] talking about a 2.4 X versus a 2 X.
[80:59] And there's a lot more risk because what
[81:01] I have on the right is the GBTC
[81:04] uh GBTC my dad was a
[81:07] beta tester of GBTC, one of the first
[81:09] ever accredited investors allowed to buy
[81:12] it. Um and so, I used to get home from
[81:14] boxing with my dad and we would open
[81:17] trading account and we would stack some
[81:19] GBTC from one of his brokerage accounts.
[81:22] And I remember when GBTC traded at a
[81:24] serious premium and it traded at a
[81:25] premium because it was the only way for
[81:28] accredited investors to get buy Bitcoin
[81:32] pre-ETF, [snorts]
[81:33] pre-MicroStrategy, right? The market has
[81:35] changed so much.
[81:37] But after a bunch of changes and a bunch
[81:39] of stuff happened, it started to trade
[81:41] at a very significant discount.
[81:43] And I would just say like I don't know
[81:47] if strat- like you're basically are
[81:48] saying strategy's going to trade at a 2
[81:50] 3 4 5 X MNAV, which I guess in theory it
[81:54] might. I just don't I wouldn't bet on
[81:57] it. I don't think so. And in fact, it
[82:00] might end up trading at a discount
[82:02] because you have a pile of Bitcoin
[82:03] that's encumbered by needing to come up
[82:06] with cash all the time to pay these
[82:08] dividends, which we're watching now.
[82:09] You're watching Bitcoin go up 2 and 1/2%
[82:11] today, but MSTR 2 and 1/2% down. And
[82:15] obviously, if you are being explicitly
[82:18] told that you need to be diluted and
[82:20] burden the cost for the bear market,
[82:22] then the question is why wouldn't you
[82:24] just buy Bitcoin in cold storage? Like
[82:26] that's what Saylor's doing. Saylor's
[82:28] sell selling MSTR for real Bitcoins.
[82:32] So, I don't know
[82:33] why you wouldn't do that, but
[82:37] I don't know. I'm going to get
[82:38] absolutely torn apart online for this
[82:42] episode.
[82:44] But, I just I I looked myself in the
[82:46] mirror and I just wasn't going to be
[82:47] afraid to give my opinion. Now,
[82:49] strategy could go to $10,000 a share.
[82:52] Saylor could like I could be so wrong
[82:55] and I'm okay with that. This isn't about
[82:57] me. This isn't about my ego. This isn't
[82:59] about This isn't about me being right or
[83:02] wrong. This is just about public
[83:04] conversation, sharing opinion, and
[83:07] hopefully contributing to Bitcoin's
[83:09] success. At the end of the day, that's
[83:10] why we're all here and that's why I'm
[83:12] doing this. So, uh yeah, you guys you
[83:16] guys asked for it. You said stop asking
[83:19] questions. You should have gotten your
[83:20] answers now.
[83:21] Well, here are my answers. Um I am going
[83:25] to stick with Bitcoin and cold storage.
[83:27] Um that's why I'm
[83:29] not the biggest Bitcoin treasury bull,
[83:31] but I wish them all the best. If they
[83:34] can contribute to Bitcoin inevitably
[83:36] being successful, I'm all for it,
[83:38] obviously, and I think the free market
[83:40] will uh
[83:41] figure things out for good or for bad or
[83:43] for indifferent anyway. So, and none of
[83:45] the people I've met are bad people.
[83:47] Like, they've all been kind to me. I
[83:50] have no personal issue with anybody.
[83:52] Um I do want to play one more clip real
[83:55] quick. Um
[83:57] Hold on.
[84:09] >> 10,000. The reason Bitcoin went from
[84:11] 10,000 to 100,000 is because the ETFs
[84:15] invested 100 billion, because strategy
[84:17] invested 64 billion, because we got 30
[84:20] billion from other institutional
[84:22] sources. If that money didn't flow,
[84:24] Bitcoin would be trading 5,000 or 10,000
[84:26] a coin right now. The reason Bitcoin
[84:28] went from 10,000
[84:32] >> Yeah, and the last thing I'll say is I
[84:34] just don't want uh I just disagree with
[84:37] that. I find that I found that one to be
[84:39] a little bit offensive. That without
[84:42] strategy, Bitcoin would be at $5,000.
[84:45] So, right now it's a $1.2 trillion asset
[84:48] and without strategy, it would be a
[84:51] uh
[84:52] $100 billion asset. I found that
[84:54] offensive. There's been a lot of people
[84:57] in the space that have worked really
[84:59] hard. Everyone between entrepreneurs to
[85:01] just open-source developers. Like how
[85:03] many you know, my dad and I always try
[85:05] and find ways to fund and support
[85:07] open-source developers cuz there are
[85:08] people that have built the very code
[85:11] that I get to run for free and store my
[85:13] life savings in for free.
[85:15] Uh and there I mean you know, how can
[85:18] you take away
[85:20] what everyone has done for this asset
[85:22] class? So, um
[85:23] yeah, I also just want on record I don't
[85:26] believe in that. I don't think that
[85:28] without Bitcoin treasury companies,
[85:30] Bitcoin would be basically like a
[85:32] worthless project and a piece of [ __ ]
[85:36] Like I found that I mean there's I don't
[85:38] know.
[85:40] There's a lot of people that have worked
[85:41] really hard to carry this vision forward
[85:43] and
[85:44] um that one I did I did find offensive.
[85:47] I know
[85:48] he probably didn't mean it in an
[85:49] offensive way. It's all good. I'm
[85:52] definitely one to acknowledge that
[85:54] misquotes in podcasts and clips on the
[85:56] internet can be
[85:58] uh taken carried away. But um
[86:02] but yeah, I just wanted that as well cuz
[86:04] people will say, "We need more treasury
[86:06] companies. Like without them, we we
[86:08] Bitcoin would fail." Like I just
[86:10] couldn't disagree more. And uh
[86:13] I'll leave it at that for now.
[86:14] Um okay.
[86:16] Last thing.
[86:17] Uh,
[86:18] just
[86:19] on the topic of like, I just want to say
[86:21] this. Um,
[86:24] people have been making [ __ ] up about my
[86:26] family for a long time now, and you
[86:28] know, most of the time I ignore it. I
[86:30] know a lot of you guys in the YouTube
[86:31] comments that do support me, you
[86:32] encourage me, you like, "Dude, you
[86:33] should meditate more. You got to drop
[86:35] this stuff. Don't pay him no mind." And
[86:36] you guys are right. You're all right,
[86:38] and I know you're right, but it just hit
[86:40] a little different on Father's Day to be
[86:42] reading some of the slander about my dad
[86:45] because and and my grandfather because I
[86:48] asked some questions to somebody. It's
[86:50] [ __ ] ridiculous.
[86:52] So, I just want to say something really
[86:53] quick because it's super unfair to my
[86:55] father.
[86:56] Um,
[86:57] you guys should know that
[86:59] all the rumors about me being part of
[87:01] some financial elite are not true. It's
[87:03] [ __ ] Uh, yes, it's true that my dad
[87:06] or excuse me, my grandfather was once
[87:09] the chairman of the Chicago Exchange
[87:11] here. That exchange no longer exists,
[87:13] and it was not nearly what it is today.
[87:16] My grandfather died fairly broke.
[87:19] And he passed away when I was a very,
[87:22] very young kid. I was in I think I was 9
[87:25] years old. I only got to meet him twice.
[87:29] And my grandfather was my dad's hero,
[87:32] and my dad is my hero, and the life that
[87:36] I was afforded to live
[87:38] was because of my dad. And my dad busted
[87:42] his [ __ ] ass.
[87:45] Uh, it's going to get me emotional. My
[87:46] dad worked so hard for me.
[87:49] He didn't inherit any money.
[87:52] And you guys should know that cuz, you
[87:54] know, if if I'm going to become a public
[87:57] figure and my dad's name and his
[87:59] legacy's going to get dragged into
[88:01] whatever mess is on Twitter, then I got
[88:03] to set the record straight for my
[88:04] father.
[88:06] My dad didn't inherit anything. There's
[88:09] no financial elite anything.
[88:13] My dad worked his ass off to make sure
[88:17] that I had an opportunity to become the
[88:19] man that I am. And he founded his own
[88:21] business
[88:22] and he sold that business and he sold
[88:25] that business and aped all of his
[88:27] proceeds mostly into Bitcoin
[88:30] and supporting me and my siblings.
[88:34] And I'm not going to get into too much
[88:35] personal information, but I'll tell you
[88:37] guys this.
[88:38] The amount of money he sold his business
[88:39] for is a fraction compared to the size
[88:42] of his stack today. So, you guys want to
[88:44] know how the Mallers family has really
[88:47] done well? It's cuz of Bitcoin. And the
[88:49] reason that I have an image here with my
[88:52] stepmother
[88:53] is because that's
[88:55] Brooke's not my mom. I went through a
[88:56] really messy divorce when I was a kid.
[88:59] And Bitcoin also really helped me
[89:02] reclaim any sense of family that you
[89:05] know, I really lost when I was a child.
[89:07] And Brooke, my dad, and I really bonded
[89:10] over Bitcoin. She's now the Bitcoin mom
[89:12] on Twitter. And as you guys know, the
[89:15] legend that is my dad worked his ass off
[89:18] and was
[89:20] smart enough and humble enough to stack
[89:22] sats before everyone figured out what
[89:24] Bitcoin was.
[89:25] And he allowed me to drop out of college
[89:27] and join the Bitcoin mission with him.
[89:30] And so, just I was on a ride home from a
[89:34] wedding yesterday
[89:36] and it was just super painful to read
[89:38] all this stuff. And the And the The most
[89:40] painful thing is that
[89:42] my dad doesn't get the credit that he
[89:43] deserves
[89:45] cuz it's that, you know, we're part of
[89:47] some financial elite or some banking
[89:50] elite. It's all [ __ ] It's all a
[89:52] lie. And you guys want You guys don't
[89:55] want to give me any credit for my
[89:57] career. You guys want to make fun of me.
[89:59] You guys want to [ __ ] with me. That's
[90:00] fine.
[90:01] But leave him out of it.
[90:06] Because that guy built everything from
[90:09] scratch and he's the best dad in the
[90:11] world.
[90:13] So you guys want to tear me down
[90:16] and you want to come at me for asking
[90:17] questions and you want to [ __ ] with me?
[90:20] That's fine.
[90:21] I'm a man. I can take it.
[90:23] But let the record know
[90:25] that my dad
[90:27] is a legend and he's the best dad in the
[90:29] world.
[90:30] And all of that [ __ ] is a lie.
[90:32] And happy Father's Day to him.
[90:36] Drives me [ __ ] nuts, man.
[90:39] This This like being a public figure
[90:41] thing
[90:45] sucks.
[90:53] >> [sighs]
[90:54] >> Okay. Uh
[90:57] Grind my gears, let's talk about
[90:58] Illinois. So what grinds my gears is
[91:01] obviously
[91:02] this shitty ass state, this dystopian
[91:05] [ __ ] I have to live through,
[91:07] that we all have to live through. I'm
[91:09] sorry for those of you that are in this
[91:11] state, that are in the city of Chicago.
[91:13] It's been a mess. I mean, we are part of
[91:16] the decline in this country. It feels
[91:19] like San Francisco, Chicago, New York
[91:22] are carrying the brunt of some pretty
[91:25] unstable, a rise in crime, a rise in
[91:29] deficit, in debt, in pension troubles. I
[91:32] mean, it's just bad. I mean, Chicago, I
[91:34] used to take the public train as a kid
[91:36] and nowadays, I wouldn't want my fiance
[91:39] riding it alone. It's just dangerous.
[91:41] And
[91:42] so to see this, it doesn't surprise me.
[91:44] I mean, we talk about this on the show
[91:45] and then when things actually, you know,
[91:47] actualize and become real,
[91:50] it's uh
[91:52] I mean, it sucks, but I can't say I'm
[91:54] surprised. Like listen, guys, these
[91:57] people are broke. They've carried on way
[91:59] too much debt. They They no growth to
[92:00] pay for it. They can't pay their bills.
[92:03] So, how are they going to pay it?
[92:05] They're going to come after your
[92:06] property. They're going to come after
[92:07] your Bitcoin. They're going to come
[92:09] after your real estate.
[92:11] There's no other way. And the state
[92:13] can't print money like the government
[92:15] can like the federal government can
[92:16] print money.
[92:17] And so,
[92:19] the fact that Illinois basically tried
[92:22] to violate property rights and see if
[92:24] they can get away with it,
[92:25] it's terrifying. It's disgusting. It's
[92:27] pathetic, but it's a sign of the times.
[92:31] This is not a drill. This is not a joke.
[92:33] They don't have the money.
[92:38] They need your money to pay for their
[92:41] mistakes.
[92:43] Oh, nice Bitcoins you have there. Take
[92:45] out your cold card and give me that
[92:47] [ __ ]
[92:48] That was their proposal. Now, for those
[92:51] saying, "What am I going to do about
[92:52] it?" Well, I was going to sue. That is
[92:55] unconstitutional, a violation of my
[92:58] constitutional rights. Over my dead
[93:01] [ __ ] body was I giving any Bitcoin to
[93:04] this state.
[93:06] I was going to sue them, and if I lost,
[93:08] I was going to move.
[93:11] It is an affront to my dignity. It is an
[93:14] affront to Bitcoin. It is affront to any
[93:16] constitutional freedoms that this
[93:18] country claims that I have. [ __ ]
[93:22] But, as of today,
[93:25] they moved to repeal the Bitcoin tax.
[93:28] So, the screenshot reads, "Illinois
[93:30] moves to repeal aggressive Bitcoin tax
[93:32] just days after its passage."
[93:34] So, it doesn't seem like this is going
[93:36] to be passed anyway. It's an utter and
[93:38] complete joke, but even the mere fact
[93:40] that this state could do something like
[93:42] this and propose something like this is
[93:44] embarrassing. It's a shame. It's a sign
[93:46] of the times.
[93:50] And I don't know. Hey, the most
[93:53] entertaining outcome is sometimes the
[93:54] most likely. When is the next Chicago
[93:56] mayoral election? 2027, February.
[94:01] Do we need a Bitcoin mayor here?
[94:03] Would you guys support me? Would I get
[94:05] the the support from the Bitcoin
[94:07] community
[94:08] if I tried to save my great city? I
[94:11] don't know, man. Someone's got to save
[94:14] it or I don't know how much longer. We
[94:15] might have to say goodbye to the empty
[94:17] closet. A lot of you guys don't like it
[94:18] anyway. You don't like how just big and
[94:21] spacious my beautiful empty closet is.
[94:24] [clears throat and laughter]
[94:27] Uh so, I might have to run for mayor. Uh
[94:30] I'll let you guys know on that. But,
[94:32] anyway, seems like a false alarm. Looks
[94:34] like they're going to repeal it. So, I
[94:35] know a lot of you guys are how does that
[94:37] affect my Strike account? Um what's
[94:39] going to happen? Is this a doomsday? Um
[94:41] false alarm. All is well. Don't worry
[94:44] about it. Uh if they did try it, you
[94:46] already know I would have sued the [ __ ]
[94:48] out of them, protected our
[94:49] constitutional rights, and if I had to,
[94:52] I would have left, and if I had to had
[94:53] to, or if I have to, I'm going to run
[94:56] for mayor.
[94:57] We fight. We fight.
[95:02] If there's one takeaway from this
[95:03] episode, I ain't no sucker. Tell you
[95:06] that much. All right. Now, to the things
[95:08] that I can control. I like building
[95:10] things. I think 99% of the solution is
[95:13] to just keep your head down and keep
[95:14] going.
[95:16] And that's what we do at Strike. We just
[95:18] keep [ __ ] building. So, uh as always,
[95:23] let me pull up what we launched last
[95:24] week. And then, I've got some exciting
[95:26] updates on some stuff that's coming up.
[95:29] So, for one, uh
[95:31] every single Monday, we tweet what we
[95:32] launched last week. Uh Strike is now on
[95:35] Plaid. So, you can search Strike on any
[95:38] Plaid. So, I hooked up Strike to my
[95:40] Venmo account, which some of my high
[95:42] school buddies still use. You can link
[95:44] Strike now to anything. Your bank
[95:46] account, your Robinhood account. You can
[95:48] use it to pay off certain credit cards
[95:50] that didn't take an account and routing
[95:51] numbers. So, we are officially a Plaid
[95:53] partner. We've integrated with Plaid,
[95:55] and you can use Strike with Plaid like a
[95:57] traditional financial account, which I
[95:59] know many of you
[96:01] were really, really looking forward to
[96:03] and helps you live more on a Bitcoin
[96:05] standard and with Strike.
[96:07] We also added loan closures with ACH or
[96:09] wire. So, if you want to close a Bitcoin
[96:11] back loan with some fiat, you can send
[96:14] in a wire or an ACH to close out that
[96:16] loan. And last but not least, we got our
[96:19] consumer loan license in Washington. So,
[96:22] consumer loans launch in Washington with
[96:23] the $5,000 minimums. Super, super happy
[96:26] about that. I know that a lot of you
[96:28] have been in our DMs, both the Strike
[96:30] and my personal DMs, asking for
[96:32] Washington, and we're really sorry for
[96:33] the delay, but couldn't be more thrilled
[96:35] to actually get it to you.
[96:37] Now, more Strike stuff.
[96:40] We call them volatility-proof loans, but
[96:42] loans that will not liquidate you. We're
[96:45] going to charge an extra, I believe it's
[96:47] 2% for these loans, but then you get no
[96:50] margin call, no liquidation. A lot of
[96:52] the biggest feedback are people like,
[96:54] "Oh, when I open a loan, I could get
[96:57] liquidated. The Bitcoin price is going
[96:58] to go down. Jack is so misleading for
[97:00] offering these products, blah, blah,
[97:01] blah." Well, I said, "Hey, can I offer a
[97:05] Bitcoin back loan where you pay a little
[97:07] bit extra? I take the extra fee and I
[97:09] put on hedges for you so that there is
[97:12] no liquidation. The loan just, you know,
[97:14] we'll see in 12 months. I don't care
[97:15] about the Bitcoin price." And we, this
[97:18] is a little bit for the loyalists, for
[97:19] the ride-or-dies.
[97:21] We're launching this probably next week.
[97:23] But,
[97:24] early access is going to open probably
[97:26] this week. I'm going to refinance my
[97:29] loan to remove any possibility of
[97:31] liquidation. I'm more than happy to pay
[97:34] a couple extra percentage points to
[97:36] remove any margin call or liquidation. I
[97:39] believe we're one of the first, if not
[97:41] the first, to have this wide scale
[97:42] in-app. Anyone can get a Bitcoin back
[97:44] loan and don't even stress about
[97:47] liquidation. I'm super proud of that,
[97:49] especially in the bear market, allowing
[97:51] people to borrow without stress, without
[97:53] losing sleep. We At Strike, we do only
[97:56] do partial liquidations. We never fully
[97:58] liquidate your position. We just
[98:00] liquidate enough to get you back in good
[98:01] standing, and we were really proud of
[98:03] that. We got a lot of business for that,
[98:04] just for We don't want to liquidate you.
[98:06] We don't want your Bitcoin. We want to
[98:08] provide you with a service so that you
[98:10] don't sell the Bitcoin. But this to me
[98:12] is just the cherry, cherry, cherry on
[98:13] top. Super proud of the team.
[98:16] On top of that, interest on cash, our
[98:18] first version of that has a chance of
[98:20] launching in July, which is in about 8
[98:22] days.
[98:23] Um and if not, uh it will launch for
[98:26] sure, for sure in August. So, we're just
[98:29] about there with getting interest on
[98:30] cash paid out in Bitcoin, uh which is
[98:33] really, really, really exciting. Uh and
[98:35] then we should have some very exciting
[98:37] Europe news for you guys soon that I
[98:39] cannot disclose early, but it will be
[98:41] exciting. So, those are some of the big
[98:44] projects. Europe, uh liquidation-free
[98:46] loans, uh and interest on cash, all
[98:49] coming. Very excited. We just keep
[98:52] building, and there's more in the pipe.
[98:53] Couldn't be more excited. And uh
[98:55] yeah, bear markets are for building. 99%
[98:58] of the solution is just keep your head
[98:59] down, keep going, man. Keep going. You
[99:02] just got to keep fighting.
[99:04] It's another thing I learned from my
[99:05] dad.
[99:06] You know, he used to take me to boxing
[99:07] when I dropped out of college.
[99:09] And uh there would be this drill where
[99:12] you just throw punches at the punching
[99:14] bag until you couldn't punch anymore.
[99:17] But the the point of the drill and the
[99:19] lesson to learn is you can go much
[99:22] harder and much further than you think.
[99:24] Just keep going. Being tired doesn't
[99:27] mean that you stop. So, that's what we
[99:30] do. Okay, I got a little bit of time for
[99:33] questions. Obviously, this episode's
[99:34] long, um because I want to go play
[99:37] sports with my friends. That's the
[99:39] reality of the situation.
[99:41] >> [sighs and gasps]
[99:42] >> Uh okay, let me pull up Dylan's, but
[99:45] obviously that was a intense episode.
[99:48] So,
[99:50] I don't want to leave you guys hanging.
[99:56] Okay.
[99:59] Oops.
[100:04] Let's see here.
[100:07] Uh
[100:07] >> [sighs]
[100:10] >> Uh question uh for Jack, if the US
[100:14] is the number one producer of oil, why
[100:17] is our oil reserves not replenished
[100:19] right now?
[100:20] Um it's a good question. Uh
[100:24] we don't necessarily from First of all,
[100:26] I'm not an oil expert. I'm not going to
[100:28] pretend like I am. I can maybe follow up
[100:30] next week and take a look into it, but
[100:33] from my understanding, we don't
[100:35] necessarily produce oil in the form that
[100:38] uh we consume it. Uh so, refining the
[100:42] actual oil uh is a separate piece of
[100:45] work. Uh and to my knowledge, we aren't
[100:49] necessarily in the business of refined
[100:52] oil.
[100:53] Uh but, I will follow up on that. I
[100:55] don't necessarily know, but I what I do
[100:57] know is whatever it is is not good
[100:58] enough, and we're actively depleting our
[101:02] reserves and now unsanctioning people
[101:04] just to get more oil supply online.
[101:07] Uh hey Jack, Doomberg has a tin foil hat
[101:10] thesis that hyped IPOs like SpaceX are
[101:13] put in place to increase capital gains
[101:14] taxes, making retail believe it's worth
[101:16] trillions. Thoughts? Yeah, totally. I
[101:19] mean, as we talked about, it's totally
[101:21] possible. The problem with a lot of
[101:22] these tin foils is you just will never
[101:25] be proven right or wrong. So, they're
[101:27] good for entertainment value, but the
[101:28] reality of the situation is I try and
[101:30] stick to base level math and focus on
[101:32] Bitcoin, cuz the coolest thing about
[101:34] Bitcoin is we're actually contributing
[101:36] to the future of the world. We don't
[101:37] necessarily have much of a say in the
[101:40] world we inherited. Obviously, I wasn't
[101:42] alive you know, 33 years ago, but we do
[101:45] get a say in the future world and
[101:47] especially the world that my kids will
[101:49] inherit. And so, that's what I like
[101:51] focusing my time on those type things.
[101:53] Uh so, I avoid most of the tin uh what
[101:56] is it called?
[101:58] Tin foil? Yeah, tin foil hat.
[102:00] Um but anyway, just to explain your
[102:02] questions for the audience, the idea is
[102:05] again, if you want to increase taxes tax
[102:08] revenue. So, how does the US generate
[102:10] revenue to pay for those expenses we
[102:11] talked about earlier? Well, taxes. And
[102:14] so,
[102:15] uh
[102:16] yeah, it
[102:17] one way to increase taxes is to have the
[102:19] stock market keep going up because then
[102:21] people sell those stocks and
[102:24] uh they pay capital gains on that. And
[102:26] so, if you have a bunch of, you know,
[102:28] many, many trillions of dollars worth of
[102:29] IPOs and a lot of people get really
[102:31] rich, they sell that, they convert that
[102:33] into houses, new businesses, new
[102:34] investments.
[102:35] But the question is, you know, if these
[102:37] things are so inflated, are there
[102:38] buyers? And I talked about this before,
[102:41] you know, the the problem with the AI
[102:42] companies is they're getting crazy
[102:45] multiples and crazy valuations, which is
[102:47] fine if they can grow into them. But the
[102:49] only way to really grow in them into
[102:51] them is probably some level of
[102:53] disruption in the labor market at least
[102:55] anytime soon. People are saying people
[102:57] can keep their jobs and the AI companies
[102:59] can still grow a lot. That's true, but
[103:01] not anytime soon. That level of growth,
[103:04] which is like new, fundamentally new
[103:06] growth, is probably going to take a
[103:08] little bit.
[103:09] And so, the quickest way for these
[103:11] companies to grow is to just take
[103:13] everybody's jobs. If you take
[103:15] everybody's jobs, then the bank balance
[103:17] sheets collapse and are functionally
[103:19] insolvent because banks have given
[103:21] everyone a mortgage, credit card, car
[103:23] note. And if people don't have income,
[103:25] they can't pay for their expenses and
[103:28] everything falls apart that way and you
[103:29] have to print the money. Now, the other
[103:31] way is if all of these big companies
[103:33] that have raised trillions of dollars to
[103:35] build all this [ __ ] out um actually
[103:37] aren't as valuable as they're marketed,
[103:39] which is fine. Like, what if SpaceX is
[103:41] not a $2 trillion company, it's actually
[103:43] a $500 billion company or a $400 billion
[103:45] company, whatever. I mean, who cares?
[103:48] Well, all the people that invested so
[103:51] much money uh at a higher valuation and
[103:53] then all of a sudden these stocks fall,
[103:55] tax revenue falls, uh the AI bubble
[103:58] pops, GDP slows down because a lot of
[104:00] the GDP growth is all of the AI
[104:02] build-out and then they have to print
[104:03] the money the other way. So, I kind of
[104:05] view those as contradictory. Like, if
[104:08] all these companies are worth all this
[104:09] money, then unemployment is probably
[104:12] going to continue to go through some
[104:14] turbulence and delinquencies on things
[104:16] like mortgage and credit cards are
[104:18] probably going to spike. Uh and if
[104:20] that's not the case, then these AI
[104:22] companies actually aren't as valuable as
[104:24] marketed. SpaceX is going to fall below
[104:26] its IPO price, which it already has. And
[104:29] the AI bubble might pop. Either way,
[104:31] they have to print the money unless, as
[104:33] we reviewed before, they're okay with
[104:35] tax receipts and revenue falling
[104:37] dramatically and basically the American
[104:40] empire collapsing because they can't
[104:42] afford their base-level payments of
[104:46] entitlements, military, and interest.
[104:49] Uh Jack, are you familiar with Simon
[104:51] Dixon? If so, what do you think about
[104:53] his point of view on the
[104:54] military-industrial complex,
[104:55] financial-industrial complex, and
[104:57] tech-industrial complex? I do know
[104:58] Simon. He's one of the Bitcoiners that
[105:01] actually has been around longer than I
[105:02] have. Um good guy. He has some
[105:05] conspiracy theories about me, which I
[105:07] don't necessarily appreciate, but I get
[105:09] it, man. Um
[105:10] >> [sighs]
[105:11] >> I get it. I I uh don't spend probably
[105:14] enough time listening to his podcast
[105:16] episodes, so I don't know if I can opine
[105:18] on uh his specific thesis. I've seen
[105:21] it's all recommended in my YouTube
[105:22] algorithm, so I've got them bookmarked.
[105:24] I'll try and give them a listen and give
[105:25] you guys an honest opinion.
[105:27] But I do know Simon and he recommends
[105:29] Bitcoin and cold storage as do I and so
[105:33] you know, obviously I'm a fan of that.
[105:35] Uh
[105:36] curious if the new Bitcoin law in
[105:38] Illinois affects strike. If it does, I
[105:40] have a lot Does if it does have a large
[105:42] impact, will strike and Jack follow the
[105:43] Bears and move to Indiana? Yeah, kind of
[105:45] covered this already. It doesn't look
[105:46] like the law in Illinois is actually
[105:48] going to pass. They're going to revoke
[105:50] it. So false alarm. But yeah,
[105:54] I would have sued and if we would have
[105:55] lost, I would have left for sure. Just I
[105:57] mean, you know, without property rights,
[105:59] what are we talking about? It's
[106:01] ridiculous. Super dystopian ridiculous.
[106:03] The fact that this was even a thing that
[106:04] someone snuck in there is I mean, it's
[106:07] disgusting. It's super shameful.
[106:09] Uh Dylan, question. Do you think that
[106:10] Bitcoiners will choose to live together?
[106:13] Could allow for city/state laws to be
[106:15] pro-Bitcoin. Yeah, I mean, I think
[106:17] that's kind of what you're seeing in El
[106:18] Salvador. A lot of Bitcoiners have
[106:20] gotten citizenship there, bought real
[106:21] estate there,
[106:23] built There are people in El Salvador
[106:24] literally building cities there. And so,
[106:27] you know, capital formation Capital
[106:29] usually forms where it's treated best.
[106:32] So
[106:33] the more favorable, whether it's a
[106:35] certain state or a country or a
[106:38] hemisphere, the more favorable they are
[106:40] to Bitcoin, capital will form there and
[106:42] you'll attract investment and growth.
[106:45] So we'll see. But yeah, I mean, I think
[106:47] you're kind of seeing a little bit of
[106:49] that in El Salvador. Now obviously El
[106:50] Salvador is a smaller country. It's a
[106:51] smaller scale, but still. I mean, GDP
[106:53] growth, real estate market booming,
[106:56] crime lessened, there's there's a lot of
[107:00] positives that have come out of El
[107:01] Salvador since they
[107:03] invited Bitcoiners to come in.
[107:06] Uh
[107:07] what will onboard the next 100 million
[107:08] users faster? A better Bitcoin product
[107:10] or embedding Bitcoin into existing
[107:12] distribution networks such as
[107:13] supermarket payroll systems, loyalty
[107:15] programs and commerce?
[107:17] Yeah, I've talked about this. I'm, you
[107:19] know, I think the commerce and the
[107:20] payment stuff is going to take a little
[107:22] bit of time just because the network
[107:25] effects were I mean
[107:27] I'll put it to you this way.
[107:29] Uh what do I think is more of a pain
[107:31] point people are trying to solve in
[107:32] their day-to-day lives? Um getting an
[107:34] alternative to Apple Pay or finding a
[107:37] way to avoid inflation and have a
[107:39] savings that they can afford a house and
[107:42] afford to have their kids and stuff.
[107:44] Obviously, it's the latter. Debasement,
[107:46] inflation, that's in fact affecting
[107:47] everybody. That's a real problem. That's
[107:49] a Main Street problem. And people are
[107:51] investing in stocks, investing in gold,
[107:53] investing in Bitcoin. They're trying to
[107:54] find a way to survive the money printer.
[107:57] Um now, conversely, people that have a
[108:01] Amex or a Chase Sapphire card and Apple
[108:03] Pay, they don't have any problems with
[108:05] payments. And these cards are actually
[108:07] paying them to use them. So, they're
[108:08] getting free flights, free Napa Valley
[108:10] wine, access to airport lounges.
[108:13] And so, getting them to switch over to
[108:15] the Lightning Network or to Bitcoin is
[108:17] much more difficult than someone says,
[108:20] "Hey, you've been saving in dollars.
[108:22] Your dollars have been getting debased.
[108:23] You should save in Bitcoin." So, I think
[108:26] one's a much easier sell. So, I think
[108:27] the more they print money, the more
[108:29] Bitcoin will grow in adoption. I kind of
[108:31] talked about that. They print the money,
[108:32] the dollar goes down, Bitcoin goes up. I
[108:34] think payments will just be a longer
[108:36] tail growth story. It'll happen. It's
[108:38] just going to take a little bit longer
[108:40] is my opinion. Uh so, low time
[108:44] preference. I got all the time in the
[108:46] world. Strike will keep building for it.
[108:47] But yeah.
[108:49] Uh curious if {slash} how the new
[108:51] Bitcoin Oh, no. Whoops. Sorry. I
[108:53] repeated that. Okay, Strike questions.
[108:55] Jack, any chance we get a letter of
[108:58] credit for a line of credit? Something
[109:00] to show proof of funds when making
[109:01] offers on properties. Uh we're happy to
[109:04] help with that. Reach out to
[109:05] private@strike.me and we can help you
[109:07] with that. No problem.
[109:08] Uh Dylan, hey Jack, love your work and
[109:11] Strike. I thought you had mentioned
[109:12] lower minimums in Connecticut, but I'm
[109:14] not seeing that on my end. thanks.
[109:16] Uh
[109:18] Okay, we Manuela wrote here oh, thanks
[109:21] for the support. Oh, in in May we
[109:23] dropped the term loans in Connecticut
[109:25] from $51,000 minimum to $10,000 minimum.
[109:29] Line of credit is still high um and
[109:31] we're working with the regulators to get
[109:32] it lowered. So, maybe you're talking
[109:33] about the line of credit. But, for term
[109:36] loans it did drop from 51 to 10K. And
[109:39] as I say, we just keep chipping away
[109:41] with regulators. It just there's no such
[109:43] thing as a global Bitcoin license,
[109:45] unfortunately. So, just one at a time,
[109:48] state by state, country by country,
[109:50] region by region, feature by feature.
[109:52] You know, we Strike does really well as
[109:55] a business. We're able to finance all
[109:57] these licenses and continue to just chip
[109:59] away. It's a low time preference way to
[110:01] do it. One one feature at a time, one
[110:03] license at a time, one lower minimum at
[110:04] a time. So, appreciate the patience and
[110:07] the term loans did come down.
[110:09] Uh question for Jack, Strike lending
[110:12] when in Hawaii? Uh we are working on
[110:14] Hawaii. Uh Manuela, the president of the
[110:16] company,
[110:17] um my right hand, she also leads all of
[110:20] our product stuff. Uh she wrote she
[110:22] writes here in my notes that she thinks
[110:24] it's a couple months away. So, call it a
[110:27] next quarter thing.
[110:29] Um
[110:31] >> [sighs]
[110:31] >> Okay, and lastly Dylan throws in these
[110:34] other questions. Uh Dylan, can you have
[110:36] Jack give us a non-Bitcoin book list?
[110:38] I'm not a big reader, uh to be honest.
[110:41] Uh but I do like audiobooks. So,
[110:44] non-Bitcoin,
[110:46] my biggest recommendation would be The
[110:49] End Times by Peter Turchin. I talk about
[110:52] it all the time. But, this book is crazy
[110:55] because this guy's not a Bitcoiner.
[110:57] He's a
[111:00] scientist. He uses math to look back at
[111:03] history and make sense of trends and
[111:07] basically tries to predict the future.
[111:09] It's crazy it's a crazy very niche
[111:11] version of science.
[111:14] And he looked back at history and used
[111:17] math
[111:18] to basically predict that the United
[111:20] States and the West would have a really
[111:22] turbulent 2020s and that something weird
[111:24] happened in America in 1970s. And
[111:27] obviously as a Bitcoiner, I'm like,
[111:28] "This That's when they severed the
[111:30] relationship with gold. It's all about
[111:32] the money." Um but the book The End
[111:35] Times by Peter Turchin is a really,
[111:38] really smooth audiobook to take some
[111:41] graceful walks on the beach and listen
[111:43] to cuz it's an entirely new and unique
[111:46] perspective that arrives at a very
[111:48] similar conclusion as Bitcoiners that
[111:50] something's off and the West uh like
[111:54] things like um quality of life, the
[111:57] relationships between elites and, you
[111:59] know, anyway, that would be my book, The
[112:02] End Times by Peter Turchin. And it's
[112:03] really interesting cuz it's not just
[112:04] like a tin foil conspiracy. He goes
[112:07] through the booms and busts of empires.
[112:09] So, like the fall of the Roman Empire,
[112:11] there's a lot of Chinese empires that
[112:13] have risen and fallen over the centuries
[112:16] and he goes through each and he applies
[112:18] the same math and the same logic to each
[112:20] and he basically comes up with a general
[112:22] formula of
[112:23] okay, what to look for when an empire is
[112:26] killing it and booming and when they're
[112:28] on the decline and you're about to enter
[112:30] some type of fourth turning. And he he
[112:33] basically looks back at history in the
[112:35] book. You go through all of these
[112:36] empires that rose and then ended up
[112:39] falling. And then he takes that and he
[112:41] applies it to the United States and and
[112:43] he comes to this conclusion that
[112:45] something weird happened in the 1970s.
[112:47] That's when quality of life, real wages
[112:50] started to decline. And then he makes a
[112:53] prediction that in the 2020s,
[112:56] um you'll start to get some type of
[112:57] fourth turning, which so far halfway
[113:00] through seems to be the case. So,
[113:02] that would be my recommendation. And the
[113:04] very last question.
[113:07] Hey Dylan, uh question for Jack. How
[113:09] will the Bulls compete in the East again
[113:11] or East against Tatum uh and Giannis?
[113:15] >> [sighs and gasps]
[113:16] >> Uh yeah, no, we won't compete.
[113:18] We won't compete.
[113:20] The Bulls we we need new ownership. We
[113:22] need to be sold.
[113:24] Um
[113:29] So, that's my answer. Depressing way to
[113:32] end it. The Bulls stank. We need new
[113:34] ownership.
[113:35] Hopefully one day, as I've told you
[113:37] guys, Bitcoin can go to the moon.
[113:40] Strike can continue to kick ass and
[113:43] maybe a bunch of Bitcoiners we can rally
[113:45] some coins together and we can take over
[113:47] the Chicago Bulls. That's my dream.
[113:50] But uh
[113:50] we'll see.
[113:56] Um okay.
[113:58] Cool. Well,
[114:00] much love, guys. Hopefully helpful. Um I
[114:02] got my answers to the Bitcoin Treasury
[114:04] questions.
[114:06] I'm over it.
[114:08] Uh
[114:09] for those of you that do support me, I
[114:10] really do genuinely appreciate it.
[114:12] Obviously,
[114:13] you know, I try and not let this stuff
[114:15] get to me, but I'm human and it's not
[114:19] very fun, to be honest. So, those of you
[114:21] that do support me, I really appreciate
[114:24] it. Happy Father's Day to my dad. And
[114:26] yeah, those of you that don't like me,
[114:29] I don't know.
[114:31] What can I do?
[114:32] Only so much. Okay, much love. See you.