So I posted an ex that morning. I didn't see the article until someone pointed it out to me. We've talked about it before, but I really did a lot of it on my video last weekend. So rather than turn this into some like the banks are all going to go to zero thing, the software companies went through their SaaSpocalypse. So number one thing, it's a play on the SaaSpocalypse thing. SaaS got hurt for two reasons or two stories behind it. One is the recognition from people that AI was going to disrupt seed-based SaaS software. Not all of software. Cyber's done well. Bitcoin miners have done well. They're in there as well. Microsoft's been fine. But the reality was AI hurt these companies despite the fact that they continue to print, for the most part, record earnings. And that was a sign, if you remember in that first quarter, one of the most important signals for everyone to think about when it comes to sectors. is that because of exponential innovation and AI continuing to increase progress at some point it will be a negative for almost every single industry and especially legacy industries and i just want to make sure because i tried to i tried to show that in the x post and i'll use some of that here i believe the banks now are going to go through a problem which is they're going to come under multiple compression over the course of the next year because of two factors one is the rise of AI agents which means consumers are going from let's say lazy individual small businesses have their money in banks that pay them zero yield that's really good for the banks when the banks can take your deposits of which there's a lot pay you zero take that money invested in treasuries yielding four percent short term not like SVB did long term but short term uh you can Get a spread on this. So we saw the article from Torsten Slack with an agentic bank run. So he was going a different angle, but that's part of it. And I don't want to say that there's going to be a run because that's what's going to happen. What I want to say is that agents are not going to make mistakes. They are going to search for the cheapest way to do thing. And that means that as agents control more of the money decisions, banks are going to be in trouble. The second thing is that the guardrails are going to apply pressure as well. And this is where crypto fits in. So when you have the users, the consumers, no longer being humans, but being digital agents, and at the same time you have financial guardrails, which are being in the system more, where there's same-day settlement, which means stablecoins, which means tokenization, we're headed towards that. Settlement, long-term settlement is a good thing for banks, for Visa, for MasterCard. The longer it takes for somebody gets that float, somebody gets the chance to invest that money for a day, for three days, and if it's instant settlement, it's not the same. So this was really a belief that... banks will still make money um but the spread the edge that they had their multiples over the future are going to be hit by terminal value again so it's not a like doom and gloom thing i kind of played with the sas apocalypse to create bankpocalypse but that is what in my opinion is certainly going to happen with the rise of consumer agents is there a positive to this like the consumer wins in this scenario Yeah, the consumer wins. The people who invest in the financial guardrails are going to see more traffic. So if you invest in crypto and it's a small asset class, you'll do well. The only place I see getting hurt is the middlemen. And so labor versus capital has been an issue. The consumers, we have a K-shaped economy. Anything that is going to make it more powerful to bring inflation down, at least on the service side. is going to be positive in the long run. So your question, everyone should be thinking about it. What's the positive side? Well, the positive side is if we can reduce the fees, you'd be shocked at how much money the banks take purely on a spread basis from everyone.
Bitcoin miners have done well.