Bitcoin es el mejor fondo de cobertura que ha existido

[0:00] You don't find
[0:01] Bitcoin, Bitcoin
[0:02] finds you. You don't
[0:03] find Bitcoin
[0:04] until you personally or
[0:05] your business is
[0:06] so
[0:07] devastated that you can't
[0:08] get out of
[0:10] the hole, and you're looking for somewhere to
[0:11] invest your money while
[0:12] you plan your next
[0:13] move. In his case,
[0:14] Bitcoin rose,
[0:15] allowing him
[0:16] to implement his
[0:17] strategy, but that's
[0:18] why most people
[0:19] consider it a
[0:20] scam. In my
[0:21] opinion,
[0:21] What's going on,
[0:22] guys? Today's
[0:24] conversation with Jordi
[0:24] Visser is wonderful. We're
[0:25] talking about the
[0:26] AI ​​stock crash, what
[0:27] happened to Ken
[0:28] Griffin,
[0:29] Leopold, and
[0:29] their entire portfolio.
[0:30] Then we move on
[0:31] to the events in Korea and
[0:32] Japan, and
[0:33] all the liquidations that
[0:34] took place there. We're
[0:35] talking about Kevin
[0:36] Warsh, the Federal
[0:36] Reserve, and
[0:37] all the
[0:38] interest rate decisions. And,
[0:39] of course, we're talking
[0:40] about cryptocurrency,
[0:40] Bitcoin, Ethereum, and
[0:41] more.
[0:42] Today's conversation
[0:43] with Jordi Visser is
[0:44] full of ideas that I
[0:45] think you will find
[0:45] very valuable. So here's
[0:47] my last conversation with
[0:48] Jordy. Okay,
[0:49] Geordie, it's been a
[0:50] busy week, we have a lot to
[0:51] talk about.
[0:52] Let's start by selling off
[0:53] shares of AI, er,
[0:54] Leopold, and Situational
[0:56] Awareness. It looks like they are
[0:57] forced to sell off
[0:59] their entire portfolio.
[1:00] Um, you've been through
[1:01] a few of these meltdowns.
[1:03] What are your conclusions
[1:04] based on what
[1:05] has happened over the last
[1:06] week or
[1:07] so?
[1:09] Well, I think there are, um,
[1:11] two parts to this. And yes, I,
[1:13] I was in Brazil, uh,
[1:16] in 1997, 1998, and
[1:18] early '99. And I was,
[1:22] uh, I was part of the
[1:24] liquidation of LTCM. I was
[1:26] part of the real
[1:28] liquidation, meaning I
[1:29] came back to the US in
[1:31] early 99 and headed the
[1:32] S&P portfolio. And later
[1:39] , in 2007, uh, I
[1:40] managed
[1:41] a macro portfolio
[1:42] during the quantum
[1:43] crash, which
[1:44] was actually the
[1:45] GARP crash, during the
[1:46] great financial
[1:48] crisis, but very
[1:49] early on. And I would
[1:52] even add Archegos or
[1:54] whatever the
[1:56] project was called that exploded in
[1:58] 2021. I've been
[2:00] through a bunch of
[2:01] situations like this, and here's the
[2:03] most important thing, and I don't
[2:04] think I've seen it in the
[2:05] news the way
[2:06] it's
[2:07] described. So one
[2:11] interesting thing about
[2:12] leverage in the
[2:13] hedge fund world
[2:14] is that
[2:15] when you eventually
[2:16] get to the bottom,
[2:17] meaning when you
[2:18] have such a
[2:19] significant drawdown, you
[2:20] have to find
[2:21] buyers for your
[2:22] portfolio or it has to be
[2:24] liquidated. And this
[2:26] happened in all three
[2:28] scenarios. And once
[2:29] that starts
[2:30] happening, where you
[2:31] either have to
[2:32] call people, or
[2:33] your prime brokers
[2:34] know everything, and they
[2:35] call others themselves --
[2:36] which is usually what
[2:37] happens, because prime
[2:38] brokers in
[2:39] investment banks
[2:40] are their lenders -- and
[2:41] once they
[2:42] get involved, everyone
[2:43] starts to see
[2:44] the portfolio, assess
[2:45] their own risks,
[2:46] understand where they are
[2:47] vulnerable, and start
[2:48] hedging. So, I
[2:50] want to make sure
[2:51] people understand: In
[2:53] my opinion, this was a
[2:54] market purge. But
[2:56] that doesn't mean we
[2:57] won't see
[2:57] further
[2:58] volatility. However,
[3:00] the situation
[3:02] he went through is when
[3:03] you start losing
[3:04] money mostly for the
[3:05] reasons I
[3:06] mentioned: the slowdown in
[3:08] AI development in
[3:09] the middle of the cycle, when
[3:10] everything becomes too
[3:11] crowded and everyone is in the
[3:12] same position. And
[3:14] especially when you're
[3:15] dealing with someone who has
[3:17] achieved such fame,
[3:18] making huge amounts of
[3:19] money, and you see their
[3:20] positions in 13F reports, and they've
[3:23] never been through this before and they believe
[3:24] in
[3:25] fundamentals—but the
[3:26] stock prices are constantly
[3:27] deviating from the
[3:28] fundamentals. We saw
[3:30] this last year during
[3:31] Liberation Day. The
[3:32] stock market can
[3:33] fall 20%, with
[3:34] nothing changing in the economy,
[3:35] nothing changing in earnings
[3:36] , and it can
[3:38] recover just as quickly. So for
[3:39] me, AI trading
[3:41] started to become overgrown with
[3:42] narratives that
[3:43] Anthropic was in trouble. Or that
[3:45] hyperscalers are in a
[3:46] difficult position.
[3:47] That we will never
[3:48] receive income. Open
[3:49] source. All this appeared
[3:51] every week. It was something
[3:52] new that we had to
[3:53] talk about. Although in fact,
[3:54] during
[3:55] July we
[3:56] observed a
[3:57] record contraction of
[3:58] factors. This
[3:59] crippled Leopold
[4:00] to the point where he
[4:01] had to leave
[4:03] his briefcase. What
[4:06] we don't know for sure is
[4:07] when
[4:08] Citadel found out about this?
[4:11] When did Millennium find out about this
[4:13] ? I mention this
[4:14] because these are the names that
[4:16] appeared in the press. And
[4:17] as soon as they see
[4:18] the situation, they
[4:19] understand that they also
[4:20] have something to do with it
[4:21] . So, the
[4:23] four-day movement
[4:24] began on Friday
[4:25] last week and
[4:26] continued this week, with the
[4:27] final part
[4:28] falling two hours
[4:29] after the Fed decision.
[4:35] To me, it was a
[4:36] huge number of
[4:37] people who not only
[4:38] liquidated his
[4:39] portfolio, but also
[4:40] made sure that they were
[4:41] reducing their own
[4:42] risks
[4:42] by using his
[4:44] positions to come out of
[4:45] this situation in a
[4:46] better position.
[4:49] So for anyone
[4:50] watching this and asking, "
[4:51] Well, what's going on?"
[4:53] "These are markets, and as I
[4:54] said, one of
[4:55] my themes is more
[4:56] bubbles, more
[4:58] parabolas, and more
[4:59] steep crashes." We
[5:01] just went through a "
[5:02] minibubble" that
[5:03] could be seen
[5:04] through a parabola, and
[5:05] now we have a
[5:06] rapid collapse.
[5:08] Remember, no matter how
[5:09] fast markets rise
[5:10] during a bubble—it
[5:12] feels like you're
[5:13] climbing a flight of stairs
[5:14] and then falling into an
[5:16] elevator shaft on the way
[5:17] down, and I think that's exactly what
[5:18] happened
[5:19] this month. Do
[5:21] you think
[5:23] Citadel knew it was in trouble, and
[5:24] was this story about the
[5:25] unexpected
[5:27] Fed rate hike a potentially
[5:28] intentional way
[5:30] to put it in a
[5:31] difficult position, or is it
[5:32] just the internet
[5:33] putting on a
[5:34] tinfoil hat and
[5:35] trying to come up with a
[5:36] cool story?
[5:39] We will never
[5:40] know. Hmm, that
[5:42] helped matters.
[5:47] You know, I made
[5:48] a video in the middle of the week
[5:49] where I broke down, first of all,
[5:51] the damage that occurred
[5:52] before these four days.
[5:56] Therefore,
[5:57] Leopold's losses were not
[5:58] caused by
[5:59] Ken Griffin
[6:00] contacting him, or by
[6:01] him contacting
[6:02] these institutions himself or through
[6:04] prime brokers. Um,
[6:06] the losses were
[6:07] because
[6:08] a correction was about to happen, and markets don't
[6:09] just move up.
[6:12] I think he got caught up
[6:13] in the trap of the
[6:14] losses
[6:15] piling up so
[6:16] quickly and so many
[6:17] people making
[6:18] the same bets that
[6:19] it got to the point where
[6:20] he had to
[6:21] find something
[6:22] or he might go
[6:23] bankrupt. And I
[6:26] think whether it was the
[6:27] earnings reports
[6:29] or the fear that
[6:30] the Fed would raise rates.
[6:32] I'll say this: a lot of
[6:33] the press wrote that Citadel
[6:34] made a statement
[6:35] that they would raise
[6:36] rates. There were other
[6:37] people who thought
[6:38] they would get a raise.
[6:39] The probability was
[6:40] close to 40%. Um, so
[6:42] it's not like they
[6:43] caused it, and I don't
[6:44] think we'll
[6:45] ever know if that's the
[6:46] case. But I really
[6:47] think that when you have
[6:48] someone who is suffering and
[6:50] heading towards
[6:50] disaster, it seems like
[6:52] they were able to come out of
[6:53] it with significant
[6:54] gains in a year and
[6:55] were able to clean up their
[6:56] portfolio; however,
[6:57] the reality is that
[6:58] we will never
[6:59] know the answer
[7:00] to your question.
[7:04] When you look at
[7:05] his results, there are
[7:06] rumors right now
[7:07] that he was up
[7:09] 400%, and through June
[7:10] he had about
[7:12] $25 billion in a
[7:13] hedge fund that he
[7:14] started two or three years
[7:16] ago. Um, this is
[7:18] objectively one of the, um
[7:19] , wildest runs
[7:21] that I think
[7:22] anyone has had while
[7:23] starting a hedge fund
[7:25] in the last few
[7:26] decades. A drop
[7:27] of 80%, 70%, you know, whatever
[7:29] that number
[7:30] actually is, still
[7:31] means there
[7:32] could be
[7:34] about $10 billion left in the fund
[7:35] . So if you
[7:36] were a potential
[7:37] investor or
[7:38] maybe someone who was
[7:39] evaluating whether
[7:40] or not to work there, does
[7:41] that put him in a
[7:42] negative light and
[7:44] people say, “Hey,
[7:45] you know, he’s a failed
[7:46] hedge fund manager. "
[7:47] Everyone will just run away."
[7:48] Or people will say, “
[7:49] Look, now
[7:50] we have a guy who is
[7:51] obviously skilled; "
[7:52] He's ambitious, he
[7:53] just got a great
[7:54] reminder to
[7:55] reduce risk, so
[7:56] maybe now is the
[7:56] most attractive time
[7:57] , and he can, you know,
[7:58] show really
[7:59] good results."
[8:02] I, I, I think, um, that
[8:03] this whole conversation is, uh
[8:05] ...I've learned over the years
[8:08] that people
[8:09] can raise
[8:10] capital: if you
[8:11] show profits,
[8:13] people will give you money
[8:14] . Um, of that 10 billion
[8:15] , I mean,
[8:16] it was reported that
[8:18] about 5 billion of
[8:19] that—that's a private
[8:20] position in Anthropic. Um,
[8:22] so I, I don't know
[8:23] how much money he
[8:24] raised. I don't know what
[8:25] happened there. I'm
[8:26] sure he still
[8:28] took the money.
[8:29] I think it's very difficult to
[8:30] recover from a
[8:31] scenario where you're 25
[8:32] years old and you're talking
[8:33] about just
[8:34] having a learning
[8:36] experience, which
[8:37] was reported in the
[8:38] letter he
[8:39] sent. Um, I think it would be
[8:43] very difficult for big investors to
[8:44] give him money, um,
[8:45] for that. I'm sure there
[8:46] were people who also
[8:48] used his
[8:49] knowledge, uh, to
[8:50] figure out what to
[8:51] invest in. So, I...
[8:52] this is another thing, and I don't
[8:54] know how much we've
[8:55] talked about this, but
[8:56] you know, the
[8:57] market structure is changing, and...
[9:03] You and I met
[9:04] around the combination of AI
[9:05] and crypto. I
[9:08] like
[9:09] spending my time on
[9:10] AI. I will repeat over and over again
[9:12] for anyone who wants to
[9:14] go to my YouTube and
[9:15] watch that the demand
[9:16] for computing
[9:17] power will continue
[9:18] to exceed
[9:19] supply for a long time to come. And along the
[9:21] way, unfortunately,
[9:23] we will see much of what we
[9:24] saw this
[9:25] year. So, let's
[9:26] go back and
[9:27] summarize. At
[9:28] the beginning of the year, we
[9:29] saw a crash in
[9:30] software stocks
[9:31] . It
[9:32] has spread to other
[9:33] sectors. Everyone
[9:34] was worried that the
[9:35] ultimate value of
[9:36] companies could not be
[9:37] estimated 3 years in
[9:38] advance. This is a fact.
[9:41] Hedge fund leverage
[9:43] was at a record high at the start of the year
[9:44] , and
[9:46] Goldman Sachs
[9:47] said in a report that it was the
[9:48] largest increase in
[9:49] gross risk
[9:51] they had seen in
[9:52] any five-month
[9:52] period in history.
[9:54] If all of this is true, and
[9:56] I believe it is,
[9:57] hedge
[9:58] fund leverage has been increasing at a
[9:59] time when terminal
[10:01] value, or
[10:02] the ability to value
[10:03] a company in 3 years, is
[10:04] falling. I think what
[10:06] we saw with Leopold and
[10:08] what we will see across the
[10:09] market is
[10:10] structural change. AI
[10:11] agents are becoming increasingly
[10:12] active in
[10:13] decision-making.
[10:14] More
[10:15] optimized
[10:16] portfolios are emerging because
[10:17] it's so easy to do
[10:18] . Robinhood just released
[10:20] another agent
[10:21] tool this
[10:22] week that allows
[10:24] people to
[10:25] instantly receive
[10:26] technical indicators
[10:27] from AI agents while sitting at home. The game
[10:30] is accelerating, and therefore
[10:31] , innovation is changing
[10:32] . We are
[10:33] going through a
[10:34] period where everything
[10:36] is accelerating dramatically, and what used to
[10:37] take 30
[10:39] years now takes 3
[10:40] years. This means that
[10:41] for all financial
[10:42] markets, but especially
[10:43] for hedge funds that
[10:44] borrow money,
[10:45] typically have
[10:46] quarterly
[10:47] liquidity, and
[10:48] make
[10:49] large
[10:50] leveraged investments,
[10:51] they wouldn't be able to
[10:52] get out of them quickly
[10:53] even if they wanted to,
[10:54] and positions are becoming
[10:55] more crowded
[10:56] than ever, which is why we've
[10:57] seen the biggest
[10:58] momentum reversal in
[10:59] history. The
[11:01] market structure is changing, and I
[11:02] don't think
[11:03] leverage will ever
[11:04] return to its
[11:05] former highs.
[11:06] So, just as I've
[11:07] said
[11:08] many times, which has been
[11:10] true this year, the
[11:13] S&P 500's earnings growth is
[11:14] over 20%. The S&P is not on
[11:15] track to grow
[11:17] by more than 20% per year. We have
[11:18] already seen the compression of
[11:19] multipliers. I
[11:20] think we'll see the same thing with
[11:23] leverage. So, I
[11:24] believe that for
[11:25] public stocks and
[11:26] hedge funds, a
[11:27] scenario will emerge in which
[11:28] rapid crashes
[11:29] will occur more
[11:30] frequently. We will see
[11:32] more events
[11:33] like Leopold. This will force
[11:34] people and prime
[11:35] brokers to not provide
[11:36] as much
[11:37] leverage as before. So
[11:39] not only will indices face
[11:40] compression of
[11:41] multiples, you
[11:42] will also see more and
[11:43] more of these
[11:43] extreme
[11:44] cases within
[11:45] hedge funds.
[11:46] Let's talk
[11:47] about Korea and Japan. I'll
[11:48] read you some
[11:49] statistics.
[11:50] So, the
[11:52] South Korean stock market fell
[11:53] by 45% in about 40
[11:54] days and wiped out
[11:55] $2 trillion in
[11:56] market
[11:57] capitalization. Then
[11:58] in South Korea,
[11:59] about 1.2 million leveraged
[12:00] retail trading
[12:02] accounts
[12:03] received margin calls
[12:06] as of
[12:07] mid-July. And
[12:09] then if you
[12:09] look at Japan, you
[12:11] 'll see that
[12:12] about $200 billion
[12:13] was
[12:14] lost in the
[12:15] Japanese stock
[12:16] market in one day
[12:17] when it fell, you know,
[12:19] almost 3%. And so
[12:20] when I see this, my
[12:23] first impression is, "
[12:24] Hey, we live in an
[12:25] interconnected
[12:26] world, and if the United States
[12:27] is, you know,
[12:28] struggling, then other
[12:29] markets are obviously struggling too."
[12:31] But when I read
[12:32] the statistics about
[12:33] South Korea and
[12:35] leveraged retail accounts
[12:36] , it seems like
[12:37] something very
[12:38] unique to that
[12:39] region, as opposed
[12:40] to the United
[12:41] States. How do you
[12:42] assess the impact that,
[12:43] you know, Asian
[12:44] markets can have on the
[12:45] US?
[12:48] Well, first of all, uh,
[12:50] Korea has grown 56% since
[12:51] the beginning of the year. So, just
[12:55] like Leopold, uh,
[12:59] which had a huge
[13:00] slump and
[13:01] needed help,
[13:02] according to the data
[13:03] we have, it's still
[13:05] up 80%
[13:06] year-to-date, I believe,
[13:07] from what I
[13:08] saw today. Uh, the
[13:10] Korean market, you
[13:11] just mentioned the size of
[13:13] the correction, but their
[13:14] market is up 56%
[13:15] year-to-date. The S&P 500
[13:17] has risen about 8% since
[13:19] the beginning of the year. I, I
[13:22] just think that, uh,
[13:23] AI allows people,
[13:24] because of the speed, to
[13:25] get into things, into
[13:27] trends, because
[13:28] fundamentally, I
[13:29] mean, where
[13:30] Samsung, SK Hynix, Micron are trading
[13:32] , I mean,
[13:33] they're trading at
[13:34] multiples
[13:36] that mean that
[13:37] people are already betting on the
[13:38] end of this cycle at
[13:40] some point, because these are
[13:41] cyclical companies. And
[13:43] so I think people
[13:44] bought them because they
[13:45] had a
[13:46] mathematical
[13:47] rationale behind it. Uh,
[13:49] again, for
[13:50] anyone watching this who
[13:52] has more of a
[13:52] traditional
[13:53] financial
[13:54] mentality rather than a
[13:55] Bitcoin mentality,
[13:56] I think the market
[13:58] is going through, uh,
[13:59] within the next 5
[14:00] years, AI is going to destroy all
[14:02] public companies. And
[14:04] when I say "destroy,"
[14:05] it will destroy
[14:06] confidence in the
[14:08] future growth of all companies, and that's why the
[14:09] multiples
[14:10] have to go down. It's
[14:11] not that
[14:12] companies
[14:13] will go bankrupt, it's that
[14:14] you won't be able
[14:15] to know if your company will survive
[14:17] because it will be
[14:18] eaten by AI-native
[14:19] startups that have
[14:20] much higher margins in
[14:21] their business and
[14:22] are able to compete in everything
[14:24] you do.
[14:26] This will take time
[14:27] . Physical constraints
[14:30] allow Micron, Samsung,
[14:31] and SK Hynix to have
[14:33] shortages again, which is why the
[14:34] Korean market was
[14:36] there. But I really
[14:38] think the mentality
[14:39] around margins is very
[14:40] different in the
[14:41] Korean market
[14:42] compared to the
[14:43] US market. But remember
[14:46] also that the US market
[14:48] has experienced a
[14:49] long-term
[14:50] bull market, where the
[14:51] S&P has returned
[14:53] over 15% annually since 2007,
[14:55] while the rest of the world
[14:56] has seen stocks
[14:57] generally outperform
[14:59] their 2007 performance
[15:00] in just the last 3
[15:02] years. That's
[15:06] the difference, Anthony: people
[15:09] got a taste of a
[15:09] bull market for the first time in a long time. In
[15:11] the US, people were
[15:12] involved in this, they don't
[15:13] need leverage as much
[15:14] because the household net worth
[15:15] in the
[15:16] country is
[15:17] over $180 trillion
[15:18] . dollars.
[15:20] Now, when talking about
[15:21] leverage, people
[15:22] may think about it
[15:23] a little differently, but
[15:24] the big hyperscalers
[15:26] use their
[15:27] free cash
[15:28] flow. They take on
[15:29] certain debts.
[15:31] They don't necessarily
[15:32] speculate on
[15:33] daily stock prices,
[15:34] but they do
[15:35] bet heavily on
[15:36] getting a return on their
[15:38] capital investments
[15:39] . Dor Cash published a
[15:40] great piece
[15:41] this week,
[15:42] which I know you have
[15:43] some thoughts on. What was
[15:45] your conclusion from his
[15:46] article?
[15:47] I will be working through his article
[15:48] in detail
[15:49] over the weekend. I
[15:53] think it's great,
[15:54] it's a bit
[15:55] controversial in one
[15:56] aspect where it says
[15:58] that winners
[15:59] really
[15:59] concentrate, and that
[16:01] argument can be
[16:02] applied to
[16:03] Anthropic and OpenAI as well as
[16:04] hyperscalers. I don't
[16:09] think that
[16:09] will happen, but his
[16:11] argument does
[16:12] point out a fact that
[16:13] contradicts what
[16:14] people are saying, and I
[16:15] agree with that. So
[16:20] his argument
[16:21] was that
[16:22] Anthropic and OpenAI
[16:23] will actually control
[16:25] a lot more of
[16:25] AI than people
[16:27] realize, because
[16:28] they will be the only ones
[16:29] who can own
[16:30] the computing
[16:31] power and
[16:32] provide it to others, and the
[16:33] most valuable things
[16:34] will require a
[16:35] token-per-
[16:37] watt rate. And this is exactly what
[16:40] becomes truly
[16:41] effective. If we
[16:43] never get to the
[16:44] point, or if it
[16:45] takes too
[16:46] long for the supply of
[16:48] computing
[16:49] power to
[16:49] match the demand,
[16:51] we will have a problem. The
[16:53] analogy I
[16:54] use over
[16:55] the weekend is how
[16:58] people's attitudes toward buying a car change
[16:59] when gas costs a
[17:01] dollar versus $10 a
[17:02] gallon. So at a price of a
[17:03] dollar per gallon, it's
[17:05] not difficult for people to buy "
[17:06] fuel-hungry" cars.
[17:08] They are cheaper than more
[17:09] expensive models. But
[17:10] if a gallon costs
[17:12] $10, and an economical
[17:13] car that gets 40 miles
[17:15] per gallon versus
[17:16] 10 miles per gallon costs 50%
[17:18] more, then more
[17:19] people will choose that
[17:21] car because it makes more
[17:22] sense. And that's exactly how it will be
[17:24] . The
[17:25] company I want to
[17:27] give as an example
[17:28] is Disney. How much
[17:29] computing
[17:30] power is available
[17:32] ? Let's assume there is
[17:33] only a limited
[17:34] amount of
[17:34] computing
[17:35] resources that Anthropic
[17:37] can offer to
[17:38] all the companies in the world.
[17:39] And let's assume,
[17:41] for simplicity, that this is a
[17:42] specific number. And
[17:43] they have
[17:45] 100
[17:46] gigawatts of computing power. And
[17:48] Disney comes along and says, "I want all
[17:49] this power, and I'm
[17:50] willing to pay you a
[17:51] trillion dollars for
[17:53] it." And everyone else is
[17:54] willing to pay
[17:55] only one hundred billion
[17:56] dollars. And Anthropic
[17:57] says, "Okay, you
[17:58] get these
[17:59] powers, and
[18:00] no one else gets them." The
[18:02] reason Disney would
[18:03] want to do this is
[18:04] because
[18:05] video is the
[18:06] most
[18:07] token-intensive scenario. So
[18:09] let's say they
[18:10] want to make a
[18:10] movie that
[18:12] costs $
[18:14] 50 million instead of $3 billion. But they
[18:15] can go and sell
[18:17] it at prices that
[18:18] will bring in income. So
[18:19] , they are willing to pay
[18:20] more for their
[18:21] token revenues because they
[18:23] have
[18:23] distribution channels. Here's
[18:27] his
[18:28] argument: since
[18:29] the supply of
[18:30] computing
[18:31] power is almost
[18:32] zero and the capabilities
[18:33] are growing every day, people
[18:34] will need it.
[18:37] Now the argument on the
[18:38] other side of
[18:39] why hyperscalers are
[18:40] in danger and all that
[18:41] is the fact that people
[18:42] believe that you
[18:43] can never
[18:44] get those profits.
[18:46] But if you can
[18:47] sell something at a
[18:48] certain price, because
[18:49] there is no deflation. If
[18:52] Disney can sell
[18:53] movie tickets for
[18:54] $20 a seat and no
[18:55] one else can
[18:57] offer a lower
[18:58] price, then now they have it
[18:59] . Well, that's why
[19:01] Micron is now having
[19:02] profits at levels
[19:03] we've never
[19:04] seen in living memory, because there's a
[19:05] shortage of it. The
[19:09] computing
[19:10] power shortage is a
[19:11] reality, and I don't
[19:12] care what anyone says
[19:13] about CDS on
[19:14] hyperscalers, we
[19:15] just looked at Amazon,
[19:16] Microsoft, and Google, and
[19:18] their combined contract backlog
[19:21] is approaching $2
[19:22] trillion. If you
[19:24] add Oracle, you
[19:25] get over 2
[19:26] trillion. And they all
[19:28] said the same thing
[19:28] during their
[19:29] calls, which I'm
[19:30] going to break down.
[19:31] We have orders that
[19:32] match our
[19:34] capital expenditures
[19:35] . So, they didn't
[19:35] cut capital
[19:36] spending. They
[19:38] have generally increased capital
[19:39] expenditures. Overall,
[19:40] assuming this was
[19:41] consistent with all
[19:42] price changes. I just
[19:43] think that when you
[19:44] read
[19:45] Dwarkesh's article, he makes a
[19:46] very controversial
[19:47] conclusion, which
[19:48] Gavin
[19:49] Baker also supported, which is that if
[19:50] the amount of
[19:51] computing
[19:52] power is limited
[19:53] , then the company that can
[19:54] provide the most
[19:55] efficient models, which
[19:56] are Anthropic and OpenAI,
[19:57] will get the big
[19:58] orders from everyone,
[19:59] because they were also
[20:01] smart enough
[20:02] to secure the
[20:03] available computing
[20:04] resources. This
[20:05] contradicts the story
[20:06] of open
[20:06] source. This
[20:07] contradicts everything. And
[20:09] I believe this will
[20:10] be reflected in the
[20:11] ARR figures for
[20:12] Anthropic and OpenAI until
[20:13] the situation
[20:14] changes. And I don't know
[20:15] when the supply of
[20:16] computing
[20:17] power
[20:18] will catch up with
[20:19] demand, because demand is only
[20:20] growing.
[20:23] So, let's assume
[20:24] he's right about this.
[20:28] Then you look at
[20:29] Microsoft, xAI or SpaceX.
[20:34] Look at Meta, Google.
[20:37] I mean, these people
[20:38] have enormous
[20:39] access to
[20:39] computing
[20:40] power. Why do
[20:41] some of them
[20:42] open their
[20:43] capabilities to others?
[20:44] Do they simply not
[20:45] need as much as they have
[20:46] already
[20:47] built? And also, does
[20:48] this mean that if
[20:49] they have more
[20:51] access to computing
[20:52] than Anthropic or OpenAI, then
[20:53] don't OpenAI
[20:55] and Anthropic find themselves at a
[20:56] disadvantage compared
[20:57] to these giants who
[20:59] might catch up?
[21:01] Well, let's
[21:02] look at the
[21:02] difference between those who
[21:04] provide their
[21:04] computing
[21:05] power and those who
[21:06] absorb it. OpenAI
[21:08] and Anthropic do not provide
[21:09] computing
[21:10] power. They are the ones who
[21:11] absorb them.
[21:12] They are the ones who eat
[21:14] everything. xAI or SpaceX
[21:15] offer
[21:16] computing
[21:16] resources because they
[21:18] don't need them right
[21:19] now. Eventually, they'll
[21:20] need them for
[21:21] humanoid
[21:22] robots, full
[21:23] autopilot, and everything else
[21:24] he's
[21:25] going to have. On
[21:26] the other hand, Meta
[21:27] is concerned about
[21:28] personal agents
[21:30] , and they are interested in the
[21:31] fact that the demand for the
[21:32] agents they will
[21:33] need is
[21:34] much higher. Sam
[21:35] Altman interviewed
[21:36] Patrick O'Shaughnessy on the
[21:37] Invest Like the Best podcast.
[21:39] He was again specifically
[21:40] talking about what I
[21:41] show in my videos
[21:42] every weekend, which is that
[21:43] we're still in
[21:45] , I mean, we're
[21:46] not even out of the
[21:47] first out in the
[21:47] first inning on
[21:49] agentic needs for
[21:50] inference. All we've been
[21:51] doing so far are
[21:52] agents for
[21:52] programming.
[21:55] We haven't gotten to personal agents yet. Until
[21:58] people can
[21:59] talk to an icon,
[22:00] their phone, or something
[22:01] else with an AI model that
[22:03] can respond
[22:04] like Siri and do the things
[22:05] we want
[22:06] it to do. Siri is
[22:10] not working yet. Alexa is
[22:11] not working yet. If you
[22:13] 're in a place with
[22:14] poor coverage, you
[22:16] can't really
[22:17] use OpenAI
[22:18] on your phone to make
[22:19] it work.
[22:21] It should be on the
[22:22] phone itself. And this
[22:23] means that hardware
[22:24] needs memory. We're
[22:25] in a situation
[22:26] where, again, I can't
[22:28] say it loud enough to
[22:29] people: we simply
[22:30] don't have the hardware
[22:31] and
[22:32] capabilities to
[22:32] provide AI with everything it
[22:33] needs. So,
[22:34] demand is growing. Of course
[22:36] , there are ways in which
[22:39] supply can catch up with
[22:40] demand. But that's not even
[22:42] close to what's
[22:43] happening now.
[22:45] So there will be consequences
[22:46] for algorithmic
[22:47] efficiency. Sam
[22:48] Altman talks
[22:49] about all this in an interview
[22:51] with Patrick O'Shaughnessy,
[22:52] where he literally says
[22:53] : "We underestimated
[22:54] the size of the offer." And
[22:57] it's OpenAI, which
[22:58] has probably been the most aggressive
[23:00] consumer in this
[23:01] space. And if they
[23:03] underestimated, then
[23:04] think about Anthropic.
[23:05] Anthropic underestimated this to a
[23:06] large extent. Dario
[23:08] Modi
[23:09] warned everyone last year about
[23:10] return on
[23:11] investment (ROIC),
[23:11] saying you're making a
[23:12] huge bet. He
[23:13] was betting that OpenAI had
[23:15] gone crazy. Now
[23:16] do you know what
[23:17] Dario is thinking? Oh my god, I
[23:18] wish I had
[23:19] more. Luckily for
[23:23] him, SpaceX and Meta
[23:24] built so
[23:25] much that in
[23:26] SpaceX's case, they not only
[23:28] sold the capacity to
[23:29] Anthropic, but also to Google. Google is a
[23:33] large cloud
[23:34] provider that
[23:35] lacks its own
[23:36] capacity. And their
[23:37] Gemini—they never
[23:38] created a large
[23:39] model. And this despite the fact that
[23:40] they were one of the
[23:41] leaders in this industry.
[23:42] So, everyone underestimated
[23:43] the amount of
[23:44] computing
[23:45] power needed. And this is
[23:47] happening at a time when
[23:48] every
[23:49] investor who is
[23:50] worried and
[23:51] emails me
[23:52] is saying that we
[23:53] have built too much,
[23:54] that we are not making
[23:55] profits, while
[23:56] all the smart people
[23:57] involved in development
[23:59] and seeing the demand
[24:00] are saying that they are not keeping up with
[24:01] it.
[24:03] Today's episode
[24:04] was produced with the
[24:05] support of Figure Markets.
[24:06] So, folks, who wants a
[24:08] piece of the
[24:09] $160,000? Our
[24:10] partner Figure
[24:11] is running a campaign where
[24:12] they
[24:12] give back to
[24:13] their community. From
[24:14] July 27 to August 27,
[24:15] during the month,
[24:16] any users who have
[24:17] never taken a loan from them
[24:19] against
[24:20] cryptocurrency can
[24:21] participate. You
[24:21] can check out
[24:22] the link in my
[24:23] profile for
[24:23] more
[24:24] information. If you
[24:25] believe in Bitcoin for the
[24:26] long
[24:26] term, like I do,
[24:27] the worst thing you can
[24:27] do is sell
[24:28] it during a drop
[24:29] just to
[24:29] get
[24:30] liquidity. That's why
[24:31] you should pay
[24:32] attention to Figure.
[24:33] Figure currently offers
[24:35] cryptocurrency-backed loans at 8.91%
[24:36] APR with an
[24:37] LTV ratio of 50%.
[24:38] So you can
[24:39] access
[24:40] capital without
[24:40] paying taxes or
[24:41] losing your
[24:42] Bitcoin investment.
[24:43] Figure is already the largest
[24:44] non-bank
[24:45] mortgage lender
[24:46] in the United States, having
[24:47] provided
[24:48] over $22 billion to homeowners
[24:49] . They have been
[24:50] helping people
[24:51] leverage the
[24:52] equity in their
[24:52] homes for years without having to
[24:53] sell them. And now
[24:54] they are allowing
[24:55] Bitcoin owners
[24:56] to do the same.
[24:57] Safety is important here. Figure
[24:59] uses
[24:59] decentralized MPC
[25:00] storage, which
[25:01] means: your Bitcoin
[25:02] remains in a
[25:03] separate wallet. It is
[25:04] not subject
[25:05] to rehypothecation, is not
[25:05] combined with other
[25:06] assets, and is not
[25:07] stored on the
[25:08] exchange's balance sheet. They
[25:09] also implemented
[25:10] liquidation protection
[25:10] to
[25:11] help
[25:12] borrowers
[25:13] avoid forced
[25:14] asset sales and
[25:15] margin calls during
[25:16] sharp market
[25:17] declines. And if you're
[25:18] accumulating satoshis
[25:19] but want to
[25:20] make a profit,
[25:21] Democratize Prime allows
[25:22] private investors
[25:23] to earn up to 9% per annum
[25:24] with hourly
[25:25] payouts,
[25:25] backed by
[25:26] real assets,
[25:27] not token inflation.
[25:29] Hold your
[25:29] Bitcoin, get
[25:30] liquidity, and
[25:31] put your capital
[25:32] to work.
[25:32] Check out Figure at
[25:34] my link
[25:35] below or go
[25:37] to figuremarkets.co/pomp.
[25:39] It's...it's because Elon
[25:40] seems to be too
[25:41] good at
[25:41] building, you know,
[25:43] and computing
[25:44] power. He is
[25:45] very good at building
[25:46] energy
[25:46] capacities. That's why
[25:48] he was able to build
[25:49] more than he
[25:50] needed, while
[25:51] others may have
[25:52] misjudged
[25:53] their needs; but
[25:54] also, you know, if you
[25:55] pitted Elon
[25:56] against Google and said "
[25:58] let's go," you both
[25:59] had to build,
[26:00] say, 100 megawatts,
[26:01] who would do it
[26:02] faster? I think
[26:03] Elon is superior to
[26:04] almost anyone in the
[26:05] world.
[26:06] Well, that's one of those
[26:07] things, if there's any
[26:08] takeaway from this week
[26:09] that people should
[26:10] make, it's to
[26:11] go back and
[26:12] read
[26:13] Leopold's article on
[26:14] situational
[26:15] awareness in 2027.
[26:17] He was accurate in his
[26:18] predictions about
[26:19] where we would end up. He
[26:20] said that AGI
[26:21] would appear by 2027,
[26:23] and the government would begin to become more
[26:23] actively involved
[26:25] in the company. All these
[26:26] things are really
[26:27] happening. Even
[26:28] more—they
[26:29] happen a little
[26:30] faster than he
[26:31] expected. I think
[26:32] all of this is evidenced by
[26:34] XAI's excess capacity,
[26:36] Meta's excess resources, Sam
[26:37] Altman's words about
[26:38] underestimating
[26:39] the situation, and
[26:41] Dario Amodei's
[26:41] attempts to find
[26:43] computing
[26:44] power elsewhere. The
[26:46] smartest people
[26:48] involved in AI
[26:49] underestimated one thing.
[26:52] And this is the human factor.
[26:54] The danger of what
[26:55] happened with Dario
[26:56] Amodei: if
[26:57] you go back and
[26:58] listen to his
[26:59] arguments last
[27:00] year about what
[27:01] Sam was doing, he
[27:02] was saying that we weren't seeing
[27:03] implementation at the
[27:05] pace we
[27:05] were hoping for. And it
[27:07] was related to
[27:08] people and
[27:08] businesses. What
[27:10] surprised everyone was how
[27:11] businesses
[27:12] accelerated the pace. The
[27:14] reason this is
[27:15] important to everyone, and it has
[27:17] a lot to do with
[27:18] what
[27:19] will happen over the
[27:20] next 12 months
[27:21] with crypto assets,
[27:23] is that everyone
[27:24] underestimates how
[27:25] quickly the world of agents is
[27:26] bringing people together.
[27:29] The agent movement
[27:30] is happening quickly.
[27:33] People can't
[27:34] comprehend what it means
[27:35] when AI agents
[27:36] do everything. This is what
[27:38] happens
[27:39] inside
[27:40] enterprises with
[27:41] workflows:
[27:42] agents figure out
[27:43] how to do it. When we
[27:45] get to the point
[27:46] where you
[27:46] use
[27:47] Leopold and say, "
[27:49] Hey, if you wanted to
[27:50] compare something to
[27:51] Leopold and you
[27:52] had to find
[27:53] the fastest or the
[27:54] best hedge fund
[27:55] from the beginning, then
[27:56] maybe Bitcoin is the
[27:57] best hedge fund in
[27:58] history." His
[28:00] profitability
[28:00] looks like
[28:01] Leopold's. We have
[28:02] corrections. Leopold
[28:04] lost what? 70, 80% of your
[28:06] profits? Well,
[28:07] Bitcoin
[28:09] lost 70, 80% of
[28:10] its gains at the very beginning, but it
[28:11] continued to grow
[28:13] . Why did you have
[28:14] trouble
[28:14] getting all those
[28:15] famous people and
[28:16] investors you
[28:17] mentioned over the
[28:18] last
[28:18] decade to
[28:19] invest in
[28:19] Bitcoin, and why did they
[28:20] kick you out of their
[28:21] offices? All these
[28:22] stories you have
[28:23] happened because
[28:24] they knew better.
[28:25] Such profits do not
[28:26] happen. In the
[28:28] hedge fund world, if you
[28:28] come in and you're
[28:29] Leopold, and you
[28:30] show up, "I
[28:30] make this much
[28:31] money." Okay, great.
[28:33] I'll give you a bunch of money.
[28:34] We saw this
[28:35] happen with Melvin Capital. We've
[28:36] seen how it happened
[28:37] to everything. This is about
[28:38] your past
[28:39] performance, which is not an
[28:40] indicator of future
[28:41] earnings. What
[28:42] AI agents will look like
[28:43] : They won't
[28:44] look at this and
[28:45] say, "I don't
[28:46] believe in Bitcoin." They
[28:47] will look at
[28:48] the profits and say, "
[28:49] Okay, let me
[28:50] factor that in." "
[28:51] Let me
[28:51] assume this is a
[28:52] new asset." "I won't
[28:54] give him all my
[28:56] money, but I will give him 5%,
[28:58] 10%, 15%, 20%." And those people
[29:00] who have 0%, once
[29:01] agents start
[29:02] making decisions for
[29:03] them, will see the same thing
[29:04] we saw with the
[29:05] implementation here—
[29:06] cryptocurrency adoption will
[29:07] skyrocket as AI
[29:08] agents become more
[29:09] involved in
[29:10] transactions and
[29:11] investments.
[29:13] Kevin Warsh, he
[29:14] stole the show by doing nothing
[29:15] . Um, I think
[29:17] everyone was lecturing, talking a lot
[29:18] about Citadel,
[29:19] saying, "Yes, there's going to be a
[29:20] surprise
[29:20] rate hike."
[29:22] Um, I think with
[29:22] the cooling of
[29:23] inflation, there are just a
[29:24] lot of
[29:25] variables here. So they
[29:25] decided to simply
[29:26] postpone solving the
[29:27] problem until later. Do
[29:28] you agree or disagree
[29:29] with their decision?
[29:32] Well, I agree with their
[29:33] decision. Um, I
[29:34] actually
[29:35] like what
[29:36] Kevin Warsh is doing. Hmm,
[29:38] I think
[29:39] using old
[29:40] academic models
[29:42] will be a problem. This is
[29:43] one of the reasons why the
[29:46] hedge fund leverage situation
[29:47] will decline. There's a
[29:48] reason why I'm
[29:49] going to show you some
[29:50] charts that
[29:51] demonstrate
[29:52] how much the
[29:53] stock market has changed structurally
[29:54] . For those of you
[29:56] concerned about
[29:57] factor risk, I'll
[29:58] look at a lot of
[29:59] charts of
[30:00] factor volatility,
[30:01] S&P volatility,
[30:02] Nasdaq volatility,
[30:03] comparing them all, as
[30:04] well as the volatility of
[30:06] individual stocks
[30:07] compared to the
[30:07] volatility of
[30:08] indices. The market
[30:10] is changing, and it is
[30:11] changing because of
[30:12] artificial intelligence.
[30:13] Kevin Warsh says the
[30:14] Fed needs to change
[30:15] because of AI. If you're
[30:19] using data
[30:20] from the previous 3 months
[30:21] in a world where
[30:23] every month is now
[30:23] equivalent to 3 or 30
[30:25] months, if everything
[30:26] runs 10 times
[30:27] faster than before, how
[30:28] can you
[30:29] use
[30:30] yesterday's
[30:31] inflation data to
[30:32] make decisions,
[30:33] except on a
[30:34] psychological level of
[30:35] interaction with people?
[30:38] Well, in the case of
[30:39] market reaction, we
[30:40] got a steeper
[30:40] yield curve
[30:42] where he effectively
[30:43] said, "Well, we did
[30:43] n't really
[30:44] have to
[30:45] do anything because you
[30:46] guys wanted
[30:47] the boost and the market
[30:48] did it for us." 10-
[30:49] year rates have increased, 2-
[30:51] year rates have increased.
[30:52] So, essentially, the market has
[30:53] already done it for us,
[30:54] while inflation has eased a bit
[30:55] . So we have
[30:57] time to wait for
[30:57] inflation to clear up
[30:58] and see where it
[30:59] ends up. I think
[31:00] this new lack of
[31:02] pre-
[31:02] meeting forecasts has led
[31:04] people
[31:05] to estimate a
[31:06] 40% chance of a hike,
[31:07] whereas in the past,
[31:09] an article would have to be published
[31:10] in advance for that. I believe
[31:11] this will add more
[31:12] volatility to the
[31:13] system and more
[31:14] uncertainty, so
[31:15] this brings us back to the
[31:16] point about
[31:17] leverage. If the Fed also
[31:18] contributed to
[31:19] leverage in the system through
[31:20] quantitative
[31:21] easing, meaning
[31:22] when assets fell
[31:23] they increased
[31:24] their balance sheet, then it
[31:25] wants to reduce its
[31:26] balance sheet. Well, that means
[31:27] he wants the Fed to have
[31:29] less
[31:30] leverage. All of this leads to the same
[31:32] conclusion: there
[31:34] will be less
[31:34] leverage in the system. And with the
[31:37] advent of tokenization
[31:38] , which I believe
[31:39] both he and Bessant were talking about,
[31:40] tokenization
[31:42] will free up the money
[31:43] supply in a way that
[31:44] will allow the Fed to
[31:45] simultaneously reduce
[31:47] leverage. What I
[31:49] believe will happen is
[31:50] this: AI agents
[31:52] and tokenization will
[31:53] allow us
[31:54] to monetize dormant
[31:55] assets that are just
[31:56] sitting idle but
[31:57] have value,
[31:58] turning them into
[32:00] daily liquidity
[32:01] and transactions through
[32:02] fractional ownership. And
[32:03] I think when that
[32:04] happens, the
[32:05] Federal
[32:06] Reserve will be
[32:06] needed less, and I
[32:07] think he and
[32:08] Bessent both
[32:09] believe in that, as do people
[32:10] who believe in
[32:10] cryptocurrency and
[32:11] Bitcoin.
[32:11] Do you think it's a
[32:13] good idea for this side
[32:14] to reduce
[32:14] leverage?
[32:15] Yes, I, well, I think
[32:17] it will happen, and I
[32:18] believe so. I think this will
[32:19] help solve
[32:20] the problem of
[32:21] wealth distribution. So, I, I
[32:22] think the K-shaped
[32:23] economy
[32:23] formed because of
[32:24] the use of
[32:26] balance sheet leverage. I think
[32:27] after the great
[32:27] financial crisis, to
[32:28] avoid the great
[32:29] depression, they
[32:30] had to
[32:30] use their
[32:31] balance sheet every time there
[32:32] was a problem.
[32:33] We have a
[32:33] financialized
[32:34] stock market, but
[32:35] right now it doesn't seem like we
[32:36] need these
[32:37] tools the way we
[32:38] did in the past.
[32:39] First, the
[32:40] leverage is not that great,
[32:41] and what increases as
[32:42] CDS widens
[32:43] is on the best
[32:44] balance sheets in the world—
[32:45] hyperscalers. That's
[32:46] why I'm not worried about
[32:48] them. Their CDS should be
[32:49] rising because
[32:50] the markets are clearly
[32:51] having difficulty
[32:52] providing
[32:53] the short-term
[32:54] capital that is
[32:55] coming into the market. I
[32:56] think people need to
[32:58] realize one thing:
[32:59] SpaceX is entering the market
[33:00] . In addition, there are many
[33:01] lock-in periods for
[33:02] stocks that
[33:03] are ending and
[33:03] will affect the market.
[33:04] You have Anthropic, you have OpenAI,
[33:05] they're all raising
[33:07] capital
[33:07] expenditure for these things
[33:09] . We are entering the market
[33:10] with large volumes.
[33:11] Google raised
[33:12] $80 billion.
[33:13] This has never
[33:14] happened before.
[33:15] It takes time for
[33:16] that amount of capital to be
[33:17] absorbed into the market, and
[33:18] I think that's what we've
[33:19] been seeing in AI
[33:20] while all this has been
[33:20] happening. So, I
[33:22] think the Fed's balance sheet
[33:23] will help the K-shaped
[33:24] economy. I think you have to
[33:25] look at
[33:26] it the way
[33:27] Kevin Warsh looks at it. He is not
[33:27] saying that he is going to
[33:28] reduce the balance sheet
[33:29] next year. He
[33:31] says that if
[33:31] possible, he wants
[33:32] these figures
[33:33] to decline, but that
[33:34] will also happen
[33:35] in parallel with
[33:36] rate cuts.
[33:37] So, I think when
[33:38] he's confident about
[33:40] inflation and when the
[33:41] labor market gets
[33:42] soft enough, you'll
[33:43] see a
[33:44] rate cut coupled with
[33:45] a little bit of
[33:46] balance sheet reduction.
[33:49] When we look at
[33:51] what impact this will
[33:52] have on the stock
[33:53] market, on Bitcoin, on
[33:54] gold, on many
[33:55] other assets. Is this something
[33:58] investors
[33:59] should be excited about? Or is
[34:00] it a situation where,
[34:01] if you want to
[34:02] help average
[34:03] citizens, Wall Street
[34:04] suffers. If you
[34:05] want to help Wall
[34:06] Street,
[34:07] ordinary citizens suffer.
[34:08] So again, I'll go back
[34:09] to what I
[34:11] said. I think that
[34:12] over the next 5
[34:13] years, the most important
[34:14] driving force will be
[34:15] artificial intelligence. So
[34:17] let's assume
[34:18] everyone starts with the
[34:19] same number. And
[34:21] let's just accept as a
[34:22] fact that the total
[34:23] net worth
[34:24] of households on
[34:25] planet Earth
[34:26] is about
[34:27] $700 trillion, and the
[34:28] total value of
[34:30] crypto assets is
[34:30] about $3 trillion.
[34:33] We've all heard it, and that's how
[34:34] I evaluate
[34:35] cryptocurrency. I
[34:37] believe that over time the
[34:38] total cost will
[34:39] either remain the
[34:40] same overall.
[34:42] Let's say 703 trillion.
[34:45] 700 trillion in
[34:46] non-crypto assets, 3
[34:47] trillion in
[34:47] cryptocurrency.
[34:48] Let's say 5
[34:50] years later it's still 703
[34:51] trillion. I believe that there
[34:54] will be a
[34:55] redistribution of funds.
[34:57] Some of them will go into
[34:58] cryptocurrency in this
[34:59] context. And the main
[35:01] point is that I
[35:03] believe: small businesses
[35:04] will benefit from AI. So
[35:06] let's assume that
[35:07] the winners in the
[35:08] stock market,
[35:09] the companies that
[35:09] make profits,
[35:11] are all AI-oriented
[35:12] businesses. Well, AI-
[35:15] focused businesses
[35:17] are getting bigger, but
[35:18] a lot of them are like
[35:20] my business, like Cursor, like
[35:21] Anthropic, like OpenAI, which is to say, they are
[35:22] AI-focused
[35:23] companies with very few
[35:25] employees. They
[35:28] own a large
[35:29] portion of their
[35:30] business—perhaps not
[35:31] in the case of OpenAI and
[35:32] Anthropic, but most
[35:33] private companies
[35:34] have founders
[35:35] who own a
[35:36] significant portion of the
[35:37] business. And let's assume
[35:38] that it reaches only
[35:39] $100 million in
[35:40] capitalization.
[35:41] Previously, such a
[35:42] business needed to
[35:43] grow to 5
[35:44] billion, but I don't
[35:45] think that will be the case in the
[35:46] future. And the founders
[35:47] will own 75
[35:48] percent. So in
[35:50] a decade,
[35:50] cryptocurrency could
[35:51] reach, say, a hundred
[35:52] trillion dollars.
[35:54] The rest of the world's assets would
[35:55] still be $603
[35:57] trillion, and the
[35:58] total would be about the
[36:00] same. There will be a
[36:02] transition, and within
[36:03] that 600 trillion, I
[36:05] think the public
[36:06] stock markets
[36:07] will essentially remain
[36:08] unchanged, and private
[36:09] companies will grow in
[36:10] their valuation. And you
[36:13] will be able to
[36:14] access them through
[36:15] tokenized ETFs that
[36:16] will give you
[36:17] any asset in the world, and this is what the
[36:20] future will look like. As someone
[36:22] who managed ETFs at Morgan
[36:23] Stanley in the late 90s or
[36:25] early 2000s, I can
[36:27] say: in 2000,
[36:29] no one believed in ETFs. Now
[36:31] it is a universally recognized
[36:32] thing that dominates the
[36:33] market. Tokenization
[36:35] is a huge change in the
[36:36] structure of the market. AI
[36:37] agents are a huge
[36:38] change, and it's all coming soon
[36:40] . This is
[36:40] certainty. It's
[36:42] not even a question of "whether
[36:43] ". It's not even a
[36:44] question of "when" anymore. It's
[36:45] happening, and it's
[36:46] happening right
[36:47] now.
[36:47] Based on all
[36:48] your experience
[36:49] watching
[36:50] different
[36:51] technology trends
[36:52] or asset types
[36:53] go from
[36:54] unpopular or
[36:55] contrarian to
[36:55] mainstream and
[36:57] popular.
[36:58] Let's say you're 25
[36:59] years old and just
[37:00] starting your career. What
[37:03] would you do to
[37:04] benefit from
[37:05] this trend? Whether
[37:07] you were starting a
[37:08] business or looking for a
[37:10] job, how would you
[37:11] position yourself, given
[37:12] past
[37:13] experience, to
[37:14] use the
[37:15] tokenization trend as a
[37:16] tailwind?
[37:19] Well, ETFs, changes in
[37:20] products or
[37:21] structures, in my
[37:22] opinion, did not affect the
[37:23] overall situation. It
[37:25] hurt business, it
[37:26] hurt mutual
[37:27] funds
[37:28] . This obviously changed the
[37:29] structure of
[37:30] share ownership, meaning BlackRock
[37:32] was the big
[37:32] winner, but it
[37:33] cannot be said that
[37:34] their performance
[37:35] skyrocketed.
[37:38] I think the way to
[37:39] make money since
[37:40] ETFs came out
[37:41] has been through innovation
[37:42] and seeing which
[37:43] companies become
[37:44] dominant. You are
[37:46] actually
[37:47] betting on where the
[37:48] “moats” (
[37:49] competitive advantages
[37:50] ) will be. Warren Buffett
[37:51] made money
[37:52] investing in such "
[37:53] moats." The "Magic Seven
[37:56] " has the following
[37:56] competitive advantages
[37:58] . Now their
[37:59] stock prices have not changed in the
[38:00] last year for
[38:01] hyperscalers. We
[38:03] are seeing a
[38:03] compression of
[38:04] multipliers.
[38:05] But right now I'm trying to
[38:06] invest in
[38:07] deficit because I
[38:08] believe we're
[38:09] at that
[38:10] phase of innovation where
[38:11] we can't actually
[38:12] produce the
[38:13] energy we need.
[38:15] So we're converting
[38:17] , as David
[38:18] Friedberg said on the podcast
[38:19] last weekend,
[38:20] we're converting
[38:21] molecules into bits, and I
[38:22] want to be involved in the
[38:23] molecular side
[38:25] right now. And that's why I
[38:26] focus my attention on the
[38:28] deficit. So the shortage is
[38:29] not just about
[38:30] Bitcoin. The deficit is
[38:32] Micron. The deficit is GE
[38:35] Vernova. The deficit is all
[38:37] that is needed to
[38:38] create
[38:38] computing
[38:39] power that
[38:40] will still
[38:41] drive
[38:42] revenue growth. Their
[38:43] multipliers
[38:44] can be compressed, and that's something
[38:45] people need to
[38:46] understand. Even if
[38:51] you're making money,
[38:52] I believe in compressing
[38:53] multipliers
[38:54] because even for
[38:56] companies
[38:56] based on
[38:57] scarcity, in 3 years
[38:58] , when humanoids
[38:59] become a reality,
[39:00] they will make
[39:01] every
[39:02] physical business cheaper—from
[39:03] building structures
[39:04] to manufacturing
[39:05] semiconductors,
[39:06] including all
[39:07] intelligence at that
[39:08] level. I believe that
[39:13] all businesses and ideas are
[39:14] subject to change, which
[39:16] means you should
[39:17] choose the one that
[39:18] will suffer the least.
[39:19] And this is exactly what I want to
[39:20] convey to people.
[39:22] If you don't believe in
[39:23] Bitcoin, you should
[39:24] go back and
[39:26] listen to
[39:27] Michael Saylor's
[39:28] 2021 interview about the reasons for
[39:30] this. Why did he
[39:31] do it? He did this
[39:33] because of two forces that were
[39:34] harming him.
[39:36] The first was
[39:37] competitive
[39:38] innovation. His
[39:40] business
[39:41] had a billion dollars on its balance sheet,
[39:42] but it couldn't
[39:43] compete with
[39:44] Microsoft's scale, and the
[39:45] competition was
[39:46] unequal. And this
[39:47] happened
[39:48] after the emergence of the "Big
[39:49] Seven" tech giants.
[39:50] He talks about it all the time
[39:51] . So,
[39:52] first, he lost
[39:53] because of innovation.
[39:54] Number two. Now he was
[39:56] losing because of the
[39:58] government's currency devaluation. They
[39:59] lowered the rates to
[40:00] zero. So, he had a
[40:01] successful business with a
[40:02] billion dollars on the
[40:03] balance sheet, but
[40:04] making money was
[40:05] extremely difficult. Therefore, he
[40:08] made the decision
[40:09] to invest in something that
[40:10] could be protected
[40:12] from depreciation. I
[40:13] think Bitcoin's role
[40:14] here lies in the very
[40:15] phrase
[40:16] it keeps
[40:17] repeating. You don't
[40:18] find Bitcoin,
[40:19] Bitcoin finds
[40:20] you. You don't find
[40:22] Bitcoin until you
[40:23] personally or your
[40:24] business find yourself in
[40:25] such a deep crisis
[40:27] that you're looking for somewhere to
[40:28] invest your money while
[40:29] you consider an
[40:30] exit plan. In his
[40:32] case, Bitcoin rose
[40:33] in value and allowed
[40:34] him to do what
[40:35] he did with MicroStrategy,
[40:36] but that's why
[40:37] most people
[40:38] consider it a scam.
[40:41] In my opinion, in 5
[40:42] years, almost every
[40:43] business will be in a
[40:45] MicroStrategy situation, where they
[40:46] will have to
[40:47] compete with
[40:48] currency depreciation
[40:49] and
[40:49] competitive pressure, but these
[40:51] will be AI-
[40:51] driven businesses,
[40:52] which will number in the hundreds of
[40:54] millions, if not
[40:55] billions, because
[40:56] one person with an AI
[40:57] agent can
[40:58] create 100 companies.
[41:04] The problem is that
[41:05] the scale of competition
[41:06] is becoming overwhelming, and the
[41:07] question arises: where should
[41:08] people store
[41:09] value so that my
[41:10] money
[41:11] is worth more in 3 years than it is
[41:13] today? It gets harder and
[41:15] harder every
[41:17] year.
[41:18] Besides Bitcoin, what else
[41:19] falls into
[41:21] this category for you?
[41:23] I...again, I don't
[41:24] know what might
[41:25] cost more
[41:26] in 3 years. In my
[41:28] opinion, in terms of a
[41:29] store of value,
[41:31] I would probably choose
[41:32] gold, because,
[41:33] despite the fact that Bitcoin
[41:34] is also a
[41:35] store of value.
[41:37] I think the hardest thing
[41:38] for people will be
[41:40] when the deflationary
[41:41] pressure of AI reaches the level that
[41:42] we all believe
[41:44] —I know you and I
[41:45] believe that will
[41:45] happen. At some
[41:48] point, deflationary
[41:49] pressures will destroy all
[41:50] businesses and assets, because
[41:51] there is no point in
[41:52] assets being worth
[41:54] that much if everything
[41:55] is moving towards
[41:55] free.
[41:58] And this is the problem that
[41:59] arises. I think
[42:01] Bitcoin right now,
[42:03] given its size
[42:04] relative to that 700
[42:05] trillion, is more of
[42:06] an insurance against
[42:07] what I'm talking about, rather than
[42:08] something that people
[42:10] necessarily have to
[42:11] believe. At some
[42:13] point,
[42:13] diversification,
[42:14] even at 5%,
[42:15] means you're saying,
[42:16] "I want to have
[42:17] diversification into
[42:18] real estate, into
[42:19] private equity, into
[42:20] private credit, into
[42:21] public stocks."
[42:22] Among all these different
[42:23] things, I believe
[42:24] cryptocurrency should
[42:25] occupy 5%, and after 3
[42:26] years I'm not sure
[42:27] if Ethereum is safe in that
[42:28] . I'm not sure
[42:30] if Solana is safe in this
[42:31] . I'm not sure
[42:32] about Sui. I'm not
[42:33] sure about BitTensor.
[42:34] I don't know, because
[42:35] AI ideas will come
[42:36] faster and faster.
[42:37] So I want to have something
[42:39] that is not built on
[42:40] ideas. And on
[42:41] people's belief that
[42:42] it is a means of
[42:43] preserving value.
[42:44] This applies to gold
[42:45] and this applies to
[42:46] Bitcoin.
[42:48] You talked
[42:49] about Ethereum before, and it seems to be
[42:50] outperforming
[42:51] Bitcoin. What's
[42:53] going on there?
[42:57] Again, this is
[42:58] a big part of
[42:59] why I add
[43:02] crypto-related videos to YouTube at least twice a month. And
[43:06] the reason is that I
[43:07] believe in the growth of
[43:08] the ecosystem, despite all
[43:10] the fears and
[43:10] concerns about the
[43:11] Clarity Act. Despite
[43:14] everything that happens, the
[43:16] ecosystem of my
[43:17] 40-name index
[43:18] is based on the energy
[43:19] that reigns within
[43:21] it. And this brings us back
[43:23] to AI agents. This
[43:24] brings us back to
[43:25] the volumes and number of
[43:26] transactions. I
[43:27] like to look for
[43:28] all sorts of signals
[43:29] that, you know,
[43:30] create a mosaic of what's
[43:32] going on.
[43:33] Part of this is
[43:34] Ethereum's advantage over
[43:35] Bitcoin. This
[43:36] indicates that
[43:37] the ecosystem, network
[43:38] effects, are starting to
[43:38] work. Part of
[43:40] this is the performance of
[43:41] my 40-name basket,
[43:42] which is currently
[43:42] outperforming Bitcoin.
[43:44] So, it's not just
[43:45] Ethereum, it's eight
[43:45] verticals or
[43:46] sectors within the
[43:48] crypto with equal weight
[43:49] that outperform
[43:50] Bitcoin. Stripe is actively
[43:52] trying
[43:52] to acquire companies
[43:54] related to
[43:54] transactions and
[43:55] high volumes.
[43:58] So for me, this is a
[43:59] signal that despite all the
[44:01] pessimism, AI is finally
[44:02] starting to move
[44:03] to the agent level.
[44:06] This should match the Meta.
[44:09] This should match Siri.
[44:11] This should match Alexa
[44:13] . That is, once
[44:13] consumer agents
[44:14] become a reality,
[44:16] explosive growth in
[44:17] volumes and transactions
[44:18] should skyrocket.
[44:20] And this is where
[44:21] financial
[44:21] safeguards are important. So, for
[44:24] me, Ethereum is an asset that
[44:26] most people in
[44:27] traditional finance
[44:28] who have a lot of
[44:30] money already know about. And that's why it's
[44:33] the safest among
[44:34] Solana, Sui, or anything
[44:36] else when it comes
[44:37] to the big money that
[44:38] will move assets—which is
[44:41] $700 trillion. So, they
[44:43] chose Bitcoin. This is a means of
[44:44] preserving value.
[44:45] But on the
[44:46] energy side
[44:46] , I think
[44:47] stablecoins
[44:47] will be used all over the
[44:48] world. And I
[44:49] believe their
[44:49] spread will grow
[44:50] . I think consumer
[44:51] agents are already on the way
[44:52] . I believe Ethereum
[44:53] will benefit the most from this
[44:54] .
[44:56] When you mentioned BitTensor, it
[44:58] seems like this is the
[44:59] project where
[45:00] AI and
[45:01] crypto intersect the most. Did you take
[45:03] the time to do this?
[45:04] Not enough. One of the
[45:06] things I do to
[45:07] be prepared, and the
[45:08] reason I
[45:09] keep talking about
[45:10] September or early
[45:11] October, is that
[45:12] I have to be able to
[45:13] answer
[45:14] questions like that. I'll
[45:17] never be
[45:18] someone who
[45:19] dives deep into all the
[45:20] minutiae, but I
[45:21] need to understand how
[45:22] all these AI-agent
[45:23] pieces of crypto
[45:24] fit together. How do they
[45:27] fit into what is about to
[45:28] happen. I
[45:30] spent a certain
[45:31] amount of time, but
[45:32] not enough to
[45:33] start conversations about it
[45:34] , because I
[45:35] spend a lot of time
[45:36] studying
[45:38] topics in depth. I mean, we're not
[45:40] likely to discuss
[45:41] this this week, and I don't
[45:42] know if you saw it,
[45:44] but Ezra Klein
[45:45] interviewed Kevin
[45:46] Rudd, the former
[45:47] prime minister of
[45:48] Australia. Kevin Rudd is now
[45:52] world-renowned for
[45:53] his knowledge of
[45:54] Xi Jinping. And
[45:57] because China and
[45:58] their
[45:59] open source agenda are so
[46:01] important to
[46:01] investors, I
[46:03] know China well. I
[46:04] traveled there for a
[46:05] month a year. So, for
[46:06] one
[46:08] month every year from 2007 to 2012,
[46:10] I was in China. And I was able to
[46:12] understand this
[46:12] culture. I was able to
[46:13] understand everything from the
[46:15] perspective of ordinary
[46:16] citizens. And you
[46:16] really start
[46:17] to realize that
[46:18] most of what you
[46:19] hear in the Western media
[46:20] is not true, and you
[46:21] want to understand
[46:22] more. Well, Kevin
[46:23] Rudd
[46:25] really
[46:25] went into detail
[46:26] about their plan for
[46:27] AI and how they
[46:28] look at things in this interview with Ezra Klein.
[46:29] Much of this
[46:30] concerns the K-
[46:31] shaped economy of the
[46:32] Western world. In
[46:33] many ways, this
[46:34] affects their views
[46:35] on Lenin and Marx. And
[46:37] we see that they
[46:38] believe that
[46:39] socialism
[46:40] will grow here precisely
[46:41] because of the K-shaped
[46:42] economy. So he
[46:43] talked a lot about that
[46:44] and how it
[46:45] fits into the
[46:45] bigger picture. And
[46:46] the reason I
[46:47] mention this in response
[46:48] to your question about
[46:49] BitTensor is because
[46:50] I have to research the
[46:50] topic before
[46:51] talking about it. I am
[46:52] very good at connecting
[46:53] different facts together
[46:54] . Hmm, things I knew in the
[46:56] past suddenly
[46:56] come to mind.
[46:58] And in the case of this
[46:59] China story,
[47:00] listening to
[47:01] Ezra Klein's interview with Kevin
[47:02] Rudd, I got a better
[47:03] understanding of the plan that
[47:04] China has and what it
[47:05] means for what
[47:06] David Friedberg
[47:07] was talking about on the
[47:08] All-In podcast about "molecules into
[47:09] bits" and how China
[47:10] essentially already owns the
[47:11] manufacturing. They
[47:12] own it. Well,
[47:14] it's all part of
[47:15] their
[47:15] long-term
[47:16] plan. But to hear it
[47:17] presented as
[47:18] something that's best for
[47:19] their economy and
[47:20] for their
[47:21] own situation, which
[47:22] sounds like, "How do we
[47:23] make sure
[47:24] we don't have a
[47:25] big problem here?"
[47:26] even though
[47:27] college graduates are having a
[47:28] hard time finding jobs,
[47:30] entrepreneurs are having a hard time
[47:31] making money, and the
[47:32] housing market isn't
[47:33] growing. Hearing
[47:34] him talk about this in
[47:35] the context of AI was
[47:36] very important. So once
[47:37] I do the
[47:38] same for BitTensor and
[47:39] listen to 10 “Kevin
[47:40] Rudds” give
[47:42] me their thoughts on
[47:43] this business and its
[47:44] place, I’ll be better
[47:45] prepared to respond.
[47:46] Today's episode
[47:47] is
[47:48] supported by Arch Public. Arch
[47:49] Public has just expanded
[47:50] its agent trading
[47:51] platform beyond
[47:52] cryptocurrencies, so
[47:53] pay attention, this is an
[47:54] important point.
[47:55] Now they are
[47:55] automating
[47:56] strategies for stocks,
[47:57] commodities,
[47:58] and ETFs, and I think it will be
[47:59] huge. You
[48:00] can automatically
[48:01] lock in profits
[48:02] when one market
[48:02] reaches new
[48:03] all-time
[48:03] highs and
[48:04] redirect that
[48:05] capital to other markets
[48:06] that offer
[48:06] more opportunities.
[48:07] Whether
[48:09] you're redirecting capital into AI stocks,
[48:10] gold, investing in the S
[48:11] &P 500, or accumulating
[48:12] Bitcoin, Arch Public
[48:13] adds real
[48:13] discipline and
[48:14] automation to your
[48:15] investment
[48:16] strategy. In addition,
[48:17] they launched a
[48:17] powerful new
[48:18] tool for
[48:18] tax optimization
[48:19] through loss-making
[48:20] assets. Since
[48:21] crypto is highly
[48:21] volatile and is
[48:22] not subject to the
[48:23] “
[48:23] sham sales” rule, Arch
[48:24] Public can
[48:24] offset
[48:25] profits with losses without
[48:26] jeopardizing
[48:27] your long-term
[48:28] positions. This is exactly what
[48:29] every
[48:30] serious investor does.
[48:31] Institutional-level automation
[48:32] that works with all
[48:33] major
[48:34] asset classes.
[48:35] No more emotional
[48:36] trading, no more
[48:36] missed tax
[48:37] opportunities, just
[48:38] smarter,
[48:39] automatic
[48:39] execution of your
[48:40] favorite strategies.
[48:41] Go to archpublic.com
[48:43] right now.
[48:44] Contact their
[48:44] team, arrange
[48:45] a meeting,
[48:46] set up
[48:47] your account if desired, and you
[48:48] will discover what
[48:48] automated
[48:49] trading can
[48:49] do for you.
[48:50] archpublic.com
[48:52] Um, this is actually a
[48:53] question of
[48:54] combining facts.
[48:55] One thing I've been thinking about, and I
[48:57] guess I'll ask
[48:58] you and
[48:59] the audience this question, and
[49:00] next week we
[49:01] can come back
[49:02] and discuss our
[49:04] findings. But I
[49:06] was watching, I don't know if
[49:08] you've seen these videos
[49:09] about migrants in
[49:10] Spain. There are, in fact,
[49:12] thousands, tens of thousands of
[49:14] people arriving
[49:15] on shore. I'm no expert
[49:18] on Spain or its
[49:19] politics, but it's a
[49:20] pretty stunning
[49:21] sight to see
[49:23] . And it made
[49:27] me think about
[49:29] how immigration to the
[49:30] United States
[49:31] used to happen
[49:32] on ships, when
[49:33] people arrived and
[49:34] could only bring with
[49:35] them what they
[49:36] could carry. These,
[49:38] you know, were
[49:39] assets that you
[49:40] could take with
[49:42] you. There were stories
[49:44] about people getting
[49:46] on trains and having
[49:47] their
[49:49] gold confiscated at the stations, and all sorts of
[49:50] things like that, right?
[49:54] But now that money
[49:56] is going digital, a
[49:57] whole different
[49:58] question arises: what can you
[49:59] take with you? But
[50:01] also the other way around: what
[50:02] can you send
[50:03] back? We know that
[50:05] remittances are
[50:06] huge, as funds
[50:07] leave the
[50:07] United States
[50:09] or other countries and
[50:10] return to
[50:11] where
[50:12] immigrants came from. So I do
[50:13] n't yet have a
[50:14] strong opinion on
[50:15] how important
[50:17] some migration
[50:18] patterns are and everything
[50:19] we see, and which
[50:20] many, like me
[50:21] , look at through a
[50:23] political prism. But
[50:26] in fact,
[50:27] surprisingly, the digitalization of
[50:28] financial channels
[50:29] and the opening of markets are
[50:30] facilitating participation that
[50:32] was not there before.
[50:34] You know, before you would have to
[50:36] have
[50:37] physical dollars or
[50:38] currency, gold—things
[50:39] that just don't
[50:40] exist anymore. It seems like this is
[50:43] part of the history of
[50:44] the crypto industry,
[50:46] part of the history of
[50:47] digital paths, etc.
[50:50] It's not just
[50:51] tokenization and the
[50:52] question of who will win
[50:54] : NYSE or Nasdaq, right? It's
[50:55] much more
[50:56] like real
[50:57] people on the ground
[50:58] using these
[50:59] tools in ways that
[51:00] people in America
[51:01] may not yet fully
[51:02] understand.
[51:05] Yes, you missed
[51:06] one thing, and again
[51:07] , I only say this
[51:09] because I spend so
[51:10] much time on this
[51:11] connection. So everything you
[51:14] said is true. Um
[51:16] , thanks to digital
[51:17] currency, thanks to
[51:18] the ability to easily
[51:19] transfer funds,
[51:20] to cross
[51:21] borders, they
[51:22] will, by definition,
[51:24] disappear. Um,
[51:25] the capitalist,
[51:26] financial framework
[51:27] is changing. But
[51:29] the part that is
[51:30] different is if
[51:31] you figure out why
[51:32] people leave the
[51:33] country and go somewhere else
[51:34] . Let's
[51:35] put aside depreciation
[51:36] , because now you have
[51:37] the opportunity to hide
[51:38] your money in something
[51:39] that doesn't depreciate.
[51:40] So if you want to
[51:41] stay in
[51:42] Argentina and the currency
[51:43] devalues ​​by 50% per year,
[51:44] you just transfer
[51:45] the money into stablecoins,
[51:46] dollar stablecoins
[51:47] , and you're fine.
[51:48] I couldn't
[51:49] do that while I was in
[51:50] Brazil. You
[51:50] had to go to the
[51:51] black market to
[51:52] do it. So we have already
[51:53] solved this issue to some extent.
[51:54] Another thing: if you
[51:56] wanted to hire
[51:57] educated people and
[51:58] run a business, get an
[51:59] education—that was the
[52:00] reason people
[52:01] came to
[52:02] America. You wanted to
[52:03] get an education here, and
[52:05] then you stayed here.
[52:06] You have a large
[52:07] workforce that is educated.
[52:08] If you were from
[52:09] Brazil, there simply
[52:10] weren't enough
[52:11] educated people there to
[52:12] build a business in the
[52:13] same way. And here's
[52:14] what's changed with the advent of
[52:15] AI combined with
[52:16] crypto: you
[52:17] can now build a
[52:18] business without a single
[52:19] employee. You have
[52:21] the cloud, you have the platforms,
[52:22] so you can
[52:23] sell your
[52:24] product globally,
[52:25] anywhere, and
[52:26] get paid in
[52:27] stablecoins. You
[52:28] pay the local
[52:29] tax, Stripe does
[52:30] all this work for you.
[52:32] Everything has become easier
[52:33] so you can live
[52:34] anywhere and run a
[52:35] business. You don't
[52:36] have to
[52:37] go to
[52:38] school in a certain place to develop
[52:39] . You can
[52:39] use AI
[52:41] to learn anything you
[52:42] want. You can
[52:43] hire AI agents
[52:45] so that we don't have to
[52:46] look for smart,
[52:47] intelligent... Here's what
[52:48] we're getting at: for
[52:49] me, boundaries are
[52:49] breaking down, and the person
[52:50] I
[52:51] mentioned to you, my good
[52:52] friend Marko Papic,
[52:53] he wrote an article
[52:54] about the metaverse back in
[52:55] 2021. It
[52:56] coincided with the peak of
[52:57] the crypt and the peak of
[52:58] the metaverse, but
[52:59] much of what he
[53:01] wrote there as a
[53:02] geomacro-expert
[53:03] was 100% true, because
[53:04] then you start
[53:05] to wonder: if
[53:06] the metaverse exists, do
[53:08] n't all
[53:09] borders disappear over time? And
[53:11] so I really think
[53:12] you're missing out on some of
[53:13] that. You will never
[53:14] lose the nationalism of
[53:15] people who love
[53:16] their country and the place
[53:17] where they were born,
[53:18] but it changes the
[53:19] fact that over time, I
[53:20] think, fewer
[53:20] people
[53:21] will need to
[53:22] leave anything behind. They can
[53:23] do anything they
[53:24] want
[53:25] financially or
[53:25] transactionally
[53:27] from anywhere, and
[53:28] traveling will be
[53:29] easier because you
[53:30] can still virtually
[53:31] go anywhere.
[53:33] So, this whole thing with
[53:33] borders and
[53:34] countries is going to become more
[53:35] fragmented, and
[53:36] people's views on it
[53:38] are going to change over time.
[53:39] And the metaverse thing is
[53:40] always so
[53:41] funny to me. Um, I've never
[53:43] been a big
[53:43] fan of what
[53:45] I call, let's say, the
[53:46] video game
[53:47] metaverse. Like
[53:48] we're all going to
[53:50] have avatars and,
[53:50] you know, all that other stuff.
[53:52] Me, I just never thought that would be the future for some
[53:53] reason
[53:55] . But what
[53:56] I was talking about earlier is that you
[53:57] and I are
[53:58] currently stuck in a
[53:59] metaverse. Isn't that right
[54:01] ? We communicate in
[54:03] such a way that
[54:04] we can travel
[54:05] to a meeting via the
[54:06] Internet, and we don't
[54:07] have to be
[54:08] together. We can
[54:10] do it in real
[54:12] time and then we
[54:12] can go live and
[54:15] people all over the world can watch us,
[54:16] or we can record it
[54:17] and post it to,
[54:18] you know, watch
[54:19] later. So I think the
[54:20] concept, maybe
[54:21] to your point about
[54:23] the metaverse or this
[54:24] kind of digital
[54:25] world, has definitely
[54:26] been realized. I would
[54:27] n't even argue that
[54:28] it would
[54:29] happen. It has already
[54:30] happened. It's, you know,
[54:31] Zoom, Twitter and all those things.
[54:34] At the same time, I don't know
[54:35] how much of it is about,
[54:36] you know, cartoon
[54:38] avatars and all that
[54:39] . I think maybe
[54:40] people have become a little
[54:41] more skeptical about
[54:42] this, and probably
[54:43] rightly so.
[54:45] Anyone who has a child the
[54:46] same age as my
[54:48] son, which is 21,
[54:51] has gone through two
[54:52] phenomena. One is the
[54:53] crypto side
[54:55] during COVID, when it
[54:56] just
[54:57] skyrocketed. But before
[54:59] that—Fortnite. And Fortnite was a
[55:01] real
[55:02] meta-universal
[55:03] thing. You play a
[55:04] video game and it
[55:05] grew rapidly from scratch
[55:06] , I mean it
[55:07] was the fastest
[55:08] growing
[55:09] video game in history. And
[55:12] we've all had that
[55:13] experience where we heard
[55:14] our son or daughter
[55:15] playing that game in
[55:16] the room, screaming,
[55:17] talking to
[55:18] friends online, and
[55:19] playing at the same time on
[55:20] headphones. Like, it's
[55:23] already happened. It used to be
[55:24] , you know, I was
[55:26] running around playing
[55:27] fort outside.
[55:28] My mom used to say, "
[55:29] Get out of the house, run
[55:30] in the backyard."
[55:31] This happened
[55:32] virtually. Regarding
[55:34] crypto, my son
[55:35] actively traded at the
[55:36] age of 13, made a lot of
[55:37] money and
[55:38] lost a lot. The same thing
[55:40] Leopold did at 25.
[55:42] He's barely older than
[55:43] my son. My son has already
[55:44] been through what
[55:45] Leopold did:
[55:46] risks,
[55:48] leverage, crypto, and
[55:49] the ups and downs. But there
[55:50] was something else that I
[55:52] already mentioned.
[55:54] The Philippines has gone
[55:55] through economic
[55:56] changes thanks to Axie Infinity
[55:57] . If any of you have
[55:59] never read about
[56:00] Axie Infinity, find
[56:01] the documentary on YouTube.
[56:03] I know there are plenty of them. There is
[56:04] one for 30 minutes. This
[56:07] affected the entire
[56:08] Philippine economy.
[56:10] So, this is another form of
[56:12] metaverse. It's a
[56:13] combination of games and
[56:15] economics. It was
[56:16] like a game of chance.
[56:17] It was about a video game.
[56:19] Like Fortnite, but with pay-per-
[56:20] play, and it affected the
[56:22] economy. My son
[56:24] played this one day
[56:25] and said he would never
[56:26] win because they were too
[56:28] cool. This is the world
[56:30] I am sure we are
[56:31] heading towards. The only
[56:33] reason it has
[56:34] n't happened yet is that crypto
[56:35] and the ideas are still
[56:36] relevant.
[56:38] The entrepreneurs who
[56:39] invented it are still here.
[56:42] It will happen. When I
[56:46] hear about Candy Digital and
[56:47] understand, as a
[56:48] sports fan, that memories
[56:49] of a game, being
[56:51] at a match, that dunk
[56:52] have value. You
[56:56] already have the OG painting that I
[56:59] saw in your office.
[57:02] That moment in time, I will
[57:03] never forget. I will
[57:05] never forget where I
[57:06] was, standing under the
[57:07] basket, and who was with
[57:09] me. I will never
[57:10] forget this, even
[57:11] if I never see them again
[57:12] . So people
[57:13] need to realize that the
[57:14] world you're
[57:15] describing, this
[57:16] virtual world,
[57:17] virtual money—
[57:19] all of this is happening.
[57:22] And the world's money, this 700
[57:23] trillion, belongs
[57:25] mostly to baby
[57:26] boomers and people
[57:27] over 60. When
[57:31] the demographics change
[57:32] , young people like my son or
[57:33] Leopold will believe in
[57:34] this, I don't even know how to
[57:36] say it,
[57:36] desperate approach.
[57:38] Entertainment comes
[57:39] through living
[57:40] life, the ups and
[57:41] downs, virtual
[57:42] travel, and so on.
[57:44] It's a different world, and I
[57:45] think it
[57:45] will remain that way for a
[57:47] long time.
[57:47] I like it. I
[57:49] mean, why not live like that
[57:50] instead of being
[57:52] bored,
[57:52] you know?
[57:53] That's why I'm in Maine
[57:55] , buddy.
[57:57] OK. What
[57:58] will you talk about in
[57:59] your video this
[58:00] week for those who
[58:01] go to YouTube and just
[58:02] type "Jordi Visser" into the search box
[58:03] ? Be sure to
[58:04] watch the video
[58:05] he uploads on Sunday
[58:06] morning. But what
[58:07] exactly will you
[58:07] be talking about
[58:08] this week?
[58:08] So, I'll sort out the
[58:10] Leopold situation. I'll
[58:16] go into detail about the
[58:17] changing factors, the
[58:18] changing
[58:19] market structure, and, you know,
[58:20] given my
[58:21] subscribers and the people
[58:22] who are constantly collaborating with me
[58:24] , I
[58:25] had to make
[58:26] four additional
[58:27] videos this month in
[58:28] addition to the four
[58:29] that I'm already preparing for
[58:30] subscribers, because in
[58:31] such months it gets very
[58:33] nervous and you're more
[58:34] likely to make
[58:35] emotional decisions. I
[58:41] will explain why I believe the
[58:42] bottom has
[58:42] already
[58:43] been reached for AI trading and why
[58:44] people should pay
[58:45] attention to it. I'll show you
[58:47] how I created a report
[58:48] called "
[58:48] Debris Analysis" to
[58:49] go through all the
[58:50] details and figure out
[58:51] which assets are currently
[58:52] technically not
[58:54] failing. They
[58:55] rebooted, and
[58:56] as my father used to say,
[58:57] if in May the odds
[58:58] of AI trading success
[58:59] were one to two and you
[59:00] barely made a
[59:01] profit for the
[59:02] next six
[59:03] months, now you'll
[59:04] be amazed that
[59:05] after the correction
[59:06] that's still
[59:07] happening
[59:07] within the "bull"
[59:08] market—we're still above the
[59:09] moving averages—
[59:10] the odds of much of anything are
[59:11] now back to
[59:13] three to one. So,
[59:14] last week or
[59:15] two weeks ago I
[59:16] mentioned that I bought
[59:17] Micron. Well, I
[59:18] had the opportunity
[59:19] to buy a little cheaper,
[59:20] and as I said, these
[59:21] were only small
[59:22] purchases. Now I
[59:23] feel more confident
[59:24] buying on dips
[59:25] rather than just buying on
[59:26] rises. I don't think
[59:28] we'll soar
[59:29] to the top quickly. I think
[59:31] we're in for more
[59:32] liquidations, especially
[59:33] in the first week of
[59:34] August, but I really
[59:36] think the
[59:37] Leopold situation has caused
[59:38] a lot of
[59:39] selling pressure. So I'll break it down
[59:41] , share my
[59:42] experiences, and we'll
[59:43] discuss everything this
[59:44] weekend.
[59:45] Perfectly. Okay,
[59:46] Geordie. Thank you very much.
[59:47] Let's talk
[59:48] next week.
[59:48] Thank you, friend. All the
[59:50] best.