Projects
![]()
No projects found
Investors
New
DAO Treasuries
DATs
Lend / Borrow APRs
Chains
Categories
Spaces
USDT IN TROUBLE? | FOMC AFTERMATH #CryptoTownHall
Recorded: June 15, 2023 Duration: 0:59:40Space Recording
Short Summary
The crypto market is experiencing a decline, with Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies facing downward pressure. Tether's dominance in Bitcoin trading volumes highlights a significant trend, while regulatory challenges are prompting companies like Abra to exit the U.S. market. The uncertainty surrounding U.S. crypto regulation continues to influence market dynamics.
Full Transcription
Yo, can you hear me?
I can hear you, sound good.
Alright, cool.
Yeah, yeah, man, you sound good.
So there's no echo, yeah, I'm using a new room today.
No, yeah, actually, it's probably the best you've ever sounded, to be quite honest.
Okay, bro, well, I'm not going to be able to use that room after this.
Hey, you really got me yesterday, bud.
Man, that was good, come on, that was fucking epic.
That was one of my favorites.
Loved every second of that.
I knew it was coming, and in my mind I was like, maybe I...
You put me in a, you backed me into a corner.
But it's a good, it's a good, it's, no, look, usually when I do it and people know that I'm about to crash, like they know I'm tricking them, they generally don't, yeah, but what they do is they just don't answer.
So, I'm not falling for it.
But this is your first, so, the thing is, but it's a really positive thing, do you know why?
Why is that?
It shows that I'm no longer scared of you, like our relationship has evolved to the next level.
Yeah, wait till you see what's arriving at your doorstep next year.
Bro, I'm not joining your space when you're hosting, that's for sure.
Ja, jeg vet ikke, jeg er ingen vengfald.
Jeg var legitimalt lukkende når det skjedde.
Du så min reaksjon i chatten, det var så bra.
Jeg var død.
For alle som lurer, så det jeg gjør ofte,
og gi tid for speakerene å samarbeide.
Dave, jeg har sendt deg en anvendelse,
jeg har sendt alle anvendelsene, for teamet å kjenne,
til alle speakerene, uten Rand,
for, jeg vet ikke, i dag,
la oss ha en dag med ingen Rand.
Nå, Rand gott en advi as well.
So, just to, yeah,
so what I do in my other spaces is,
just to start at the habit,
is that the way I end it is like
I ask one of the speakers,
okohos, I'm like,
hey, what are your thoughts on the space?
It's like,
I love when it's emotional as well like look man it's a really stressful space today it's very polarized what do you think and they give me like an emotional answer and I just end the space as soon as they start speaking.
It became one of the best one of my favorite parts of the space but I've never done in the crypto show or the finance show because you know I just think they're too serious.
But you know just because of Scott and he's chill so I changed my mind yesterday and then did it to Scott.
Yeah, but you didn't just do it.
You tried to do it, and then I didn't fall for it,
and then you gave everyone that explanation,
and then you literally asked me for my thoughts again,
and I was like, damn.
And I started talking.
Yeah.
Look, I love Ryan, I love Ryan. We got a message in the wrong group saying, are we on? I adore Ryan.
He's probably doing dishes or something.
Yeah, there's always going to be horses in the background.
But man, yesterday's, before we kick things off, yesterday's space was fucking epic. We made it.
Six hour space, just under six hours.
Ja, hvorfor så kort?
Hvorfor så kort?
Ja, jeg var skratt.
Det er fantastisk at du kan snakke så länge
og få så mange mening om en event som alle visste var omgående
og hva som skulle hende i den eventen.
Ja, jeg vet, jeg vet.
Alle visste det.
De fleste visste det.
Vi hatt noen på panelen, noen analyser forventet,
men noen trodde det skulle bli en kut eller en hik.
Men det var en veldig liten minoritet.
Men hva er din tenkning av markedet i dagens kryptomarket, at det ikke går bra?
Ja, jeg tror det er mye som går bra i kryptomarketet.
Det er svært å tilverka det bare til FOMC-møtet.
Jeg tror vi har mye større problemer enn om Jerome Powell sier skipp, paus eller pivot.
You know, but I did say yesterday often, you know, you see things go up right after the meeting and then it sets in and the market's usually wrong on the first reaction and goes the other way.
I think to some degree that's what's happening here.
I just think there's a lot of bad news for crypto right now.
It's sort of drifting down on low volume, but it's really not bothering me that much what Bitcoin's doing here.
Did it bother you?
Actually, what's your portfolio like, your Web3 portfolio?
Do you want me to describe it in song or?
Did I drop out? Is the space crashing? Hello, anyone there? Can anyone unmute and speak?
No, you're good, Mario.
Alright, alright, cool, cool. Because usually what happens when it goes quiet, it means the space is about to crash, unless the other person got a call, which Scott got a call. Scott, are you there?
Yeah, I think Scott got a call, or something like that.
Scott, alright. So, Ryan, I want to ask you that question, and I've sent you a call to invite, so if you can accept it in the next 30 minutes, it would be good, Ben. Can you hear me?
Yeah.
Ja, ja.
Ja, menn.
Så hva er ditt...
Jeg vet ikke om du gjør disjer,
men det ser ut til å være kvar.
med tanke på at Scott kommer tilbake,
hva er ditt portfølje som?
Og så klipper vi av showen.
Som jeg sa i dag, er jeg ca 30% i bitcoin, 10-15% i eth, resten altcoins.
Jeg bør nok ha mye mer bitcoin nå, men hvor jeg er nå er at jeg ikke har mye bitcoin.
Hvilke procent sier du er altcoins?
Kanskje, når vi sier altcoins, kaller du Ethan altcoin?
Nei, nei, nei, jeg snakker om start-ups. Altcoins.
Kanskje 50%.
Åh, respekt. Du har ball, man.
Og hva er det? Kanskje gi oss en kort overvisning?
Scott kommer opp, han har bare forlott internettet, så han kommer opp igjen.
Han kommer opp nå. Men gi oss en update.
Hva var din show om? Hva var responsen? Hva var tankene på markedet?
Ja, så, jeg mener, det første vi så på i dag, vi så på responsen til FOMC,
som jeg tror vi ikke skal snakke om i dag, for vi sa om det i Norsium i dag.
Men det første vi sa om i dag var USDT-depeg.
Nå, det er en slags depeg, men, du vet, hva tweetene kom ut og sa,
som vi alle må ta vare på, er at kanskje noen vet noe.
Nå, jeg tror ikke det er noe, men du vet, du tror ikke det er noe
innen det kommer ut, og så er det noe.
Og vi har tittat på måter til å beskytte ditt portfølje, eller til å beskytte deg selv om USDT faktisk depeggar.
Nå, jeg vil gi deg noen av de visse måtene du kan gjøre det.
Hvis du tror USDT vil depegge, kan du gå til Curve nå, og du kan selge ditt USDT for USDC.
Og på den måten, du er ut av USDT, og du holder USDC, og det vil koste deg,
nå vil det koste deg kanskje 0.2% på ditt portfølje.
Which is quite a good trade.
Like if you think that USDT is going to de-peg,
or that the DOJ is going to take action against USDT,
well, then just go and get your money into USDC.
That's the easiest way.
If you think, you know,
the next thing that you can do is you can just go buy Bitcoin.
Because what we know is that when stable coins de-peg,
People often run into Bitcoin.
It's happened the last few times stablecoins have de-pegged,
and it's also happened when USDC de-pegged.
People went into Bitcoin.
So that's a natural thing,
where people migrate into Bitcoin
when they have these de-pegs.
The other one is a little bit more technical,
and I'm not sure that it's something
that I want to talk about in spaces,
but you can go and listen to my show.
I'll say what you don't want to say.
There's a way to short USDC as well.
Is that what you want to say?
Correct.
Ja, så det er en måte å gjøre det.
Det du kan gjøre er å korte USDT mot USDC,
og du kan gjøre det på leverans.
Nå, din avsikt er veldig liten,
fordi din største fall er at USDT går opp på 0.2%
og depeggs, og repeggs.
Men din avsikt er at om USDT helt depeggs,
du har alle avsiktene.
så det betyr at du har en veldig, veldig, veldig, veldig liten risiko 0.2 % på denne tideren
og din tilbakekomst kan være din leverans i tider at nå vil jeg ikke snakke om det på denne
basen jeg har lagt den på min show, for det er ganske teknisk og om folk gjør det feil
du vet det er kostet av leverans og kostet av borgering og sånt som det er og jeg tror at for
folk som ikke vet exakt hva de gjør, jeg vil ikke faktisk åpne denne kålen av vermer
But let's say that for me, that is the best risk return trade on the market,
if USDT de-pigs.
Because your risk is 0.2%, your upside is all the way up.
Scott, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat, skat,
Scott, there's like a dozen entities on planet Earth that can redeem from Dell Tech, for what it's worth.
Nei, jeg forstår det, men jeg sier at det er kredere som gjør ting, det er kredere som gjør dette på individuelle utbyggelser.
Ok, men hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva, hva,
Where you're not able to redeem it anymore.
Assuming Tether doesn't do anything
in this nefarious.
Nobody can create or redeem
Tether without having an account
at Dell Tech.
And getting an account at Dell Tech is really hard.
And it's my understanding
that
there's something like
a dozen entities that can do it.
Which is like, it's a pretty impressive racket that they've created, where you got 80 yards in this thing, and there's, you know, a dozen doors in and out of it.
So, and Travis, what's the fear around doors?
Simon, jeg vil gi deg en spørsmål, og så får jeg deg en mikrofon, så kan jeg møte meg.
Hva er det du har forstått? Ryan har sagt om Deepak, og om hvordan man kan skylde seg,
men hvorfor har vi noen forstått om tether? Vi har ikke skrevet FUD her, eller Eyehold Tether,
Men var det noe behov nå, og jeg vet ikke om det er regering, hva kan regeringen gjøre?
Jeg vet faktisk ikke hva den siste 24 uren har vært.
Jeg vet faktisk ikke hva den siste runden av FUD er.
Jeg vet ikke om det er noe som er sammenlagt med Binance behov og den slags ting.
Jeg vet ikke.
Rann, Simon, Scott, do you guys know the latest short?
USDT went up massively as a percentage of that pool.
This is when you're getting really deep in the DeFi weeds,
but there's nothing there specifically, like from a regulatory standpoint, besides the normal FUD.
So now it's like a causality thing, where people look at that and they go,
like, whoever did that, do they know something that other people don't know, basically?
Right.
Ja, det er noe som er relativt til regulasjon, en regulatør krakk.
Ja, vi skal bare gå inn på det som faktisk skjedde.
for de som er litt mer teknisk her i publikum.
Jeg forløp om min bakgrunn, jeg har bare gått inn i bilen.
Det er en stabil kronisk utbyggelse.
kalt Curve. Curve er primærikt et sted der kredere går til å kredere i og ut av en stabil krona i en annen stabil krona.
Så, om du har USDC og du vil ha USDT, eller om du har DAI og du vil ha USDT, det du gjør er at du går til Curve
og du kreder dette på Curve. Ok, så Curve er en utbyggelse, det er en utbyggelse som er
spesifikt laget for å krede stabil krona. Det er der det sterke punktet er. Nå,
How Curve works is there are pools.
So there is a pool which has DAI, USDC and USDT.
So imagine like a bucket,
and inside this bucket there is DAI, USDC and USDT,
and they're all stablecoins.
And there is a ratio of those stablecoins.
So like, let's just say for argument's sake,
there is a third DAI, there is a third USDC,
and there is a third USDT.
Now, if traders want to dump their USDT,
They go to Curve, and they go to this bucket, this pool, and they dump their USDT, and they take, instead of USDT, they take DAI and USDC, because those are the other two tokens in the bucket.
Now, what it does is it causes an imbalance. All of a sudden, yesterday, there was 70%, or right now, actually, 70% USDT in this bucket, and only 15% DAI and 15% USDC.
Now what that means is, if you look at the curve pool,
that's the first indication that traders en masse
are actually trying to exit the stable coins.
So just imagine if there was 33% DAI,
33% USDC and 33% USDT in the pool,
and all of a sudden traders said we don't want our USDT
and they dumped their USDT and they took DAI and USDC,
all of a sudden the pool has 70% USDT,
and only 15% of the others.
Now, what that does,
is it causes traders to start panicking,
Why do people not want their USDT?
And that's what caused the DPIG.
Because then people said, hold on a second, maybe someone knows something,
and that's why they are dumping on Curve, which is the primary stablecoin exchange,
that's why they are dumping their USDT, and they're taking by an USDC in place of it.
And that is what caused the DPIG.
Now, the last two times that we saw this DPIG, the first one was when UST came,
was on an imbalance
sorry, UST, the Terra Luna stablecoin
there was an attack
and it got
had the same thing happened
and the last time we saw this was when
USDC depegged because of the
second valley collapse
and I came onto your show, you remember
and I said, I'm noticing this, this is a big problem
get into Bitcoin
and that was the beginning of a Bitcoin run
Og så når det begynner å hende,
de menneskene som ser disse poolene,
disse bucketene på kurven,
de kjøper veldig snabbt
når det er en forandring i behov av stablecoins.
Og så begynner de å begynne å spørre seg,
de begynner å si,
hva vet folk at vi ikke vet?
Er det en potensiell DOJ-attack
som kommer sammen?
Er det kanskje misslykker
og de ikke er backet?
Så det er det folk begynner å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begynne å begy
Well, look, they're not fleeing en masse, number one.
So, you know, the peg is still, just to give you an idea of the peg,
the peg is still 99 point, I'm driving now,
but when I left office it was 99.75 or 99.8.
Så DPEG er aldri så liten,
og bare høye frekvenser avbitræsere,
og folk som virkelig vet hvordan å spille avbitræsere,
kan kjøpe så lille inkrementer,
det er nummer ett.
Men det andre er,
kanskje jeg tror det er ingenting,
men kanskje jeg ikke vet noe.
Kanskje en eksempel,
og jeg vil ikke si at jeg vil ikke ha noe fatt om det,
men hva om en veldig selektiv person har kjøpt
har haft en leak på en DOJ-aktie,
som jeg tror er en skam, men jeg sa bare
Hva om det er så?
De skulle begynne å gå på det først.
Så ideen er å si at du må se på denne poolen,
fordi denne poolen er din første sted
til å se hvor de kunder
kunder ut av stabiliseringer,
og om en stabilisering kan depegge.
Ja, men Scott, det er din...
Ja, gå igjen, Alex.
Markeringskvalitet er totalt skit nå.
Så ofte disse relativt små bevegelser kan
Alexander, hva er denne bevegelsen i forra?
Jeg vet at den er så små, men små kan stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå stå
Rand hit the nail on the head here
where it's, this is
basic supply and demand, and if you have a
limited pool of assets
and everyone is trading one for
the other, the reasons
for trading that
may become self-fulfilling as they see other
folks doing the same. There's
going to be a relative
price imbalance between
Between USDT and USDC or DAI, which creates some of that DPAC.
This is different from UST, from Terra Luna, which...
The DPG was part of a larger structural issue where folks were fleeing the stablecoin or selling Luna,
and the broader market was dragging down Luna, which in turn caused this death spiral.
That's symptomatic of an algorithmic stablecoin, whereas Tether is presumably backed one-to-one,
as is USDC.
So, I think part of the
FUD is there's a lot of scar tissue
left in the markets from
folks seeing the death spiral
of Terra, and
thinking something similar might happen. I've seen
a couple tweets that were talking
about the tether
problem
company using profits
to buy Bitcoin
and likening that to the
Terra Luna Foundation guard
backing
backing UST with Bitcoin, which ultimately, when they had to sell it to defend the peg,
dragged the market down and it became self-fulfilling.
And those are two very different things, and I think folks who are drawing the similarities
are probably self-interested, looking to pick up a few points of...
Yeah, the deep peg, I'm just looking now, the deep peg is gone in Tether.
And by the way, Scott, I'd love you to do a market update right after we discuss Tether with Simon Gunney.
But is the deep peg gone now? Is it back to par?
I'm not looking at the screen right now, but I would assume so.
Yes, it was very temporary.
And this is nothing, you know, I mean, to Rand's point, people do rush into Bitcoin.
We saw that when there was this massive event with USDC and Silicon Valley Bank, right?
But USDC was trading at $0.90, $0.89, $0.87.
This is just a fractional, tiny, tiny thing.
So not the same.
But in all those cases, people did rush into Bitcoin, including myself.
So just to, I'm trying to get my internet functioning here at full capacity.
Yeah, so you've got a market update for us or not yet?
I do, I do.
So Bitcoin trading at 25,052, down 3.65% in 24 hours.
ETH at 16%.
46, down 5.48%, so still seeing a bit more impact on Ether and then some altcoins than we are on Bitcoin.
I'm looking for a market update, but the stock market flat.
It seems like at this time every single day the stock market is up or down by literally like 0.2 or 0.3%.
But we're definitely seeing a significant move down here from Bitcoin after FOMC.
We can debate till we're blue in the face why that's happening, but I think...
Hold on, hold on. Yesterday when we finished our stream, or when we were towards the end of our stream, the Nasdaq pretty much was up about 1% for the day, and Bitcoin out of nowhere took a $1000 candle.
That $1000 candle on Bitcoin coincided exactly with the curve pool becoming unbalanced or whatever else.
That's why we got a $1,000 drop in Bitcoin from $26,000 to $25,000. Everyone said it's Bitcoin responding to the FOMC. That can't be because the markets didn't respond to the FOMC. The markets were unchanged at 1%. It would be very strange if Bitcoin responded and that is exactly the time that the curve pool started to debalance.
Hva er dine tanker etter det, Ryan?
Er det folk som prøver å kjøpe mot Tether eller atakke Tether?
Nei, det var en slags kveld, eller noe kom ut noe, jeg har ikke sett det, men det var en slags kveld,
kanskje mot Tether, og Tether-kvelden gjorde Bitcoin å bli vendt, å bli vendt.
Hold on, isn't it?
So James, if you have FUD and Tether,
there's two things that will happen to Bitcoin.
One of them is people moving to Bitcoin as a store of value rather than stables,
and the other one is people moving out of crypto because of a potential stablecoin de-pegging.
If we do see an attack on Tether by regulators,
how would that impact the market?
Gunny, how do you expect that to impact the market?
Gunny, Dave, what do you think?
Hey, thanks for having me. Sorry about that.
I think a couple things. Number one, I'll answer the question,
and then I want to get back to the curve thing for a second.
But, and sorry if my connection's not great.
You're good, man, you're good.
As ran as.
Yeah, I think if there's an attack on the, you know what, regulators,
like, I think maybe some of that's priced in,
but also the market is super reflexive,
which I think somebody else just kind of mentioned,
that, you know, panic is,
I the same way that when things are very euphoric,
Euforia incites more euforia, causing prices to get kind of crazy and to the upside.
Same thing can happen very much to the downside.
So you normally would think things get priced in kind of ahead of pending news.
New information comes in the market.
You have somewhat weak hands in the market,
and these kind of liquidity vacuums, because liquidity is super fragmented in this space.
Yeah.
You get lower prices and you start to get more irrational prices.
I also think that, you know, just from kind of some of my circles, like just whispers that I've had,
there are a couple of large macro funds that maybe during 2020 and 2021 got into the market that weren't crypto native,
who are now getting out as well.
And, you know, these are people that are coming from traditional finance where,
You know, what may seem like a not so large amount of assets, but when you put them in crypto, they become pretty large.
I'm sorry, I just don't understand what you just said.
Are you saying that some of the traditional, some of the tradfight Wall Street guys are going out of crypto?
I, um...
I have heard that there are a couple of decently sized funds that are moving on.
Hold on, Scott, on our agenda there's a few articles or at least rumors,
I think they disclose it as well, of some of the big Wall Street guys coming into crypto
and kind of filling the void left by Binance and others.
We can discuss that later, but I think that's different.
But Gunny, really quick, yeah, you should jump in.
I just want to say that I had Steve McClurg from Valkyrie on YouTube this morning on my panel,
and I asked him straight up, I said,
listen, you know everybody in this industry in the United States,
is anybody crazy enough to continue building here?
And he said, and he said it was not hyperbole,
he said every single person I know who's operating in the United States
is either leaving or shutting down.
And he was talking about funds.
Yep.
So that aligns exactly with what Gunny's saying.
Like, if you're a mid-tier hedge fund, small,
I mean, Travis, you are one of those.
Maybe you can ring in.
You know, but he said basically everyone's out,
or just packing it in.
Yeah, I don't think, maybe it's not quite that binary.
Like, it's not everybody in, everybody out.
And I think maybe people that weren't in
are using this as an opportunity to start gaining exposure.
But the ones that, I mean...
It was somewhat shocking to me in 2021 how many funds got in when, you know, I mean maybe it's not so shocking, but when Bitcoin's at 3-4,000, it's total wood.
And then when it's at 40,000, it becomes interesting.
And so I think maybe some people, you know, got caught, some funds got caught, and they're maybe moving back to...
You know, to more familiar waters, more familiar territory.
Hey guys, before you jump in, I know that James is jumping in, and before you do, James, for a project, if you are a project that's building in the ecosystem, hit us up if you want to come on the show, or if you want to work with us.
So we're still incubating projects, we're still helping out projects, whether you're based in the US or in Venezuela, it doesn't matter to us.
And you can join the show as well as an advertiser, as an affiliate, as well.
Just hit us up, and there's an email in the pinned tweets, there's two pinned tweets, or you could just, if you don't want to email or it doesn't work for you, just put it in the comments or DM.
But James, I'll let you jump in on this particular point, for startups to be fleeing the US, and I'm going to go back to my question that I asked originally, is that any regulatory action on Tether, how would that impact the market?
Ja, så bare på å se på fundfløden, har vi sett 227 millioner av utfløden fra instofløden i år.
Så på en similær tråd til i fjor, hvor vi så mye utfløden.
Så vi vet at instøyene er åpne penger ut.
From a regional perspective, a lot of it, funnily enough, is Canada. We know that various funds in Canada were pulling seed capital.
That seems to be a bit of a theme this year, taking out seed capital.
From a regulatory impact perspective, I think it would be big. We track volumes on trusted exchanges and
I see that Tether now makes up around 80% of spot Bitcoin volumes and trusted exchanges.
So anything that happens to Tether would have a material impact on Bitcoin volumes.
Can someone give me some clarity?
Again, just treat me like an idiot.
What could happen to Tether?
What could regulators do?
And how would that impact the way we use Tether?
Can anyone just give me some clarity there?
Do you want me to take it, Mario?
Yeah, of course, Simon.
Cool.
Just wanted to add on a few points that were covered as I was listening in.
Sorry, I'm just a little bit excited.
We've been making a license application for two years,
and we just secured our retail securities license.
It's a two-year application, and just got a notice.
But yeah, sorry, back to Tether.
So Tether, the...
Først og fremst, jeg skulle være veldig surprensert om vi ikke hørte fra DOJ.
Og for å avslutne, jeg er en kjøpare,
jeg har ingen informasjon om insider i Bitfinex,
og også Circle, som gjør USDC.
Men DOJ-investigasjonen med Tether har vært en omgående ting.
Så vi har vant en avsnitt om hva utgående er
av certain områder de har vært kjøpare på.
De hadde en sættelse som var grunnen til
en allegation som de negat om å løpe i en bank
når de var på behov av å sikre bankning for Tether.
Det andre er at jeg ikke er så sikker på at det er akkurat at man må ha en account med Deltek.
Om man vil redine Tether må man gå til tether.io
I believe last time I checked, you have to do a minimum redemption of $100,000.
Very few actually do it. They tend to trade into something else.
And as far as I'm aware, I've never heard of a requirement to have an account on Dell Tech.
It may be Dell Tech that's actually making the transfer.
And maybe there's some issues if you're dealing with billions of dollars or hundreds or tens of millions from Dell.
en crypto-fremd bank eller en crypto-familie,
kanskje det kan skade noen problem med din bank.
Men jeg er ikke medfra av noen behov for å ha det.
Simplifiera litt mer, hva betyr det? Hva kan hende med tethering?
Jeg vet at vi ikke kan vissla, og du har ingen informasjon,
men hva er den beste eller dårligste skjema?
Vi har sett, jeg vil si vi har sett den dårligste skjema,
men det er mer negativt med Binance,
i tanke på det SEC er forstående av,
og vi har ikke sett noe av DOJ,
Men, vi får se hva som skjer på DOJ. Hva er det beste og dårligste skjemaet for Tether?
I stort sett, det stort problemet med Tether har alltid vært det problemet med banken.
De ble banken til krypto, til krypto-utbyggelser gjennom Tether.
Å holde den måten av penger er veldig vanskelig.
Da de gav bort banken i Taiwan, måtte de gjøre ting, men ulike andre banker fikk ikke støtte det.
And then at different stages, they've said that because certain things happened, where there was government seizures of funds using a merchant processor, they were under the peg, sorry, under-collateralized.
og da måtte de samla en samordning mellom en interkompaniat loan og sånt.
Men nå gjør de attestasjoner.
Jeg tror at det største problemet du kan se er attestasjoner versus audit.
Så om de vil gå inn i den hele historien av alt som har hattes,
og igjen, jeg vet ingenting fordi det ikke har vært en audit ute der,
For example, they were talking about, when people were saying, they've made announcements that they're doing Bitcoin mining, but that kind of rings sounds of something like Celsius or BlockFi or something in your mind.
Or when you hear that they're buying Bitcoin, it rings sounds of UST.
Men det er viktig å note at det er utrygg forløp.
Da USDC-sjålene depegde, var det 20 biljoner av volumen som kom til tætere.
Det var da intressetsgrader var på den større graden, den største graden.
De var i stedet til å kjøpe kraftfølgende bonde.
Da var det US-governmentet som substanserte de kjøp av bitcoin,
fordi de gjorde det med utrygg forløp.
They found a way of borrowing at 0% and receiving 5%.
So, Simon, if we do, again, in very simple terms, because I do want to go to the panel,
if we see a very heavy-handed crackdown, beyond just an attestation,
or a request for audit or attestation from Tether,
what would that look like for Tether? What would that look like for the market?
Like, it just...
For the average builder, for the average investor, what could happen?
Very briefly, because I know David's waiting.
I mean, two main things.
An accusation of some type of money laundering,
because the connection between people that were issuing Tether, like FTX,
all of these things may be their next announcement.
Or just a general massive crackdown on
If any US person holds a stablecoin, you need to ensure that they are not from the US,
and therefore you need to do on-chain KYC, which breaks the whole stablecoin model.
So if that happens, if we have a request that any US person cannot hold Tether,
then we see a lot of that money flowing into, because there's not many options left.
Well, Bitcoin is the option.
Yeah, but Bitcoin is not a stablecoin.
Yeah.
Ja, ja, så da skulle du gå for en USA-regulert stabil kone, det skulle være en unvendig proces, det skulle være en utstramning, men det viktigste er at det bråker alle stabil kone, for om du må gjøre on-chain KYC for å sikre at ingen i USA holder en stabil kone, så er ingen stabil kone immun til det.
Det er bankier, basicvis har du skrevet en bankkonto.
Dave?
Well, considering the Congress was very close to actually passing stablecoin rules and then
they kind of got yanked from one side, but the side they yanked isn't in control, seems
highly unlikely that they will try to ban stablecoins or, as my friend Mike McGlone
likes to call them, crypto dollars.
The more interesting thing here is we had a 30% drop across the altcoin universe, and
Where does that money go?
People selling and dumping out of altcoins,
what are they dumping it into?
The liquidity was mostly in Tether.
Så nå har du mange folk som holder tætt, og mange av dem får helt ut i markedet.
Så det er egentlig en spørsmål om å finne ut kvalitet, og mange folk i krypto,
og jeg har aldrig sagt det til noen på panelen, men i krypto er det mange av de lave og dumme som trader.
Mange som bare sier, eh, 10-20 basispointer, jeg har ingen rolle.
Når du ser på en dpeg på 0.2%, det er 20 basispointer. Det er mange som bare har ingen rolle.
for those sorts of money.
So to me, that's a nothing burger.
What is interesting is it's obvious that if in fact
an administration in the United States wanted to take out all of crypto,
the obvious attack vector is Tether.
I just tend not to believe that they have the power to do so at this point,
or the wherewithal, or that the courts or the Congress would let them do it.
But clearly, that's the attack vector.
Ok, så la meg gi deg noen nummer, Dave, og jeg har en spørsmål for deg før jeg ger mikrofonen til Scott.
I det statementet som kom ut 50 minutter tidigare på bitcoin.com, Stablecoin-markedet rekordar 2,4 biljoner dollar i redempjøn i 30 dager, som leder tokener som oppfatter supply-deklinj.
According to statistics, over the span of 30 days from May 15th to June 15th, more than 2.4 billion stablecoins were redeemed.
During this period, three of the leading stablecoins experienced a decline in their supplies, ranging from 4% to 19% compared to the previous months.
Do these numbers concern you at all, Dave?
No, they're exactly what I was saying. It almost had to be the case.
Because there was a massive sell-off of altcoins across the board over the last week, and that money has to go somewhere, and most people were taking it out of crypto.
Some put it back into Bitcoin, sure, but a lot just took it out. And if you take it out, what's going to happen? It's inconsistent with my narrative.
Og en annen ting du sa, Dave, er at du tror ikke at regulatørene har kraft eller kvalitet til å forbedre Tether.
Hva betyr det?
Det er politikk, ikke sant?
For start, det er ikke bare USA som er bekymret her.
Det er mange brukforskninger for Tether utenfor USA.
that are extremely important to people.
Many of them have relatives in the US, etc.
But at the end of the day,
everything that the regulators have been doing
is more or less indirect assaults or picking fights
that they can at least spin politically.
If you try to do a frontal assault on millions of accounts, at the end of the day, US elections are basically a million votes either way, is going to swing, actually it's hundreds of thousands of votes in swing states that will literally swing the next election.
Jeg tror ikke at demokraterne som er antikrypto de dag, for grunnverk som fort er utenom meg, men det er en annen samtale.
Jeg kan ikke forstå at de ville gjøre det. Direkt assault er ikke ideen. Ideen er å vinn narrative-kriget, og det er det de har vært nødt til.
Scott, tror du direkte assault er mulig?
Anything is possible, but I don't think the SEC right now has the resources to go after Tether
after they're already in battle here with Coinbase, Binance.
And of course with Ripple.
Now, if you're talking about DOJ, I guess that's another conversation.
But to me, you can't worry about things that you have no evidence are happening,
and that's just a complete narrative.
Actually, I want to ask David Young about this from Coinbase.
I mean, what are you guys seeing on the home front on Coinbase?
Are there any concerns about Tether?
Obviously, you work with Circle and USDC.
Is there anything that's concerning you guys or your relationship with Tether
or using it on the platform?
So, yeah, as you mentioned, you know, we are our strategic partnerships with Circle, but I will say that more broadly, you know, of course, there's...
There's always this debate about whether we can rely on the attestations still waiting for an audit report.
I've heard conspiracy theories from people suggesting that there are reasons beyond their connection to commercial paper,
which they've said now that they've sold off commercial paper, for example, or their loan book and things like that.
There may be other reasons why they haven't produced a fully audited report, but if you take the attestation at face value, I mean, their capital ratio right now is at 3.1% as of end of Q1 2023, which is, first of all, an improvement from the 1.5% they had at the end of Q4 2022, but...
That is better as a capital ratio than most banks.
They're in a fairly decent position,
which I think, for me at least,
doesn't sound as if there are confidence issues surrounding this
outside of what we've seen today in terms of the three pool,
which I think were very specific circumstances
related to Curve and related to what we're seeing
in terms of that position moving over to Aavec.
Og en fraksional del av tether transaksjoner på daglig eller ukelig basis.
Det er veldig, veldig smalt, så jeg tror at det er folk som blir spukt av det
og tror at noen vet noe mer enn de vet.
Men David, til ditt punkt, det er interessant.
Dette platformet, kompagene, Binance inkludert, og Tether, har
veidt massivt bankrunn, uten å brekke en svett.
Right. And I mean, Paolo Arduino, who I was trying to get on, I'm actually speaking to him at one from Tether. I mean, he tweeted today, we're ready for any amount of withdrawals and redemptions. Come at us. Right. So that doesn't seem to be any fear on their part.
I think that's legit. You know, I do think that, you know, we did this exercise a few months back where we were just trying to measure out what the size of potential tether shorts were in terms of how much you could borrow and how much you could actually put against it.
And it was on the order of, you know, not unsubstantial, but it was like on the order of like maybe five to ten billion dollars compared to what they say they have in cash, which was, you know, somewhere around like 40 billion.
Like they have the ability theoretically to like redeem that like three, four times over and still be OK if you know what they say in the at the stations is true.
And I think there's an interesting argument here for a lot of these platforms, but focusing specifically on Tether.
They've also not only survived these massive bank runs, but they've survived this fear, uncertainty and doubt for as long as I've been in crypto and can remember.
And I think that there's a pretty clear argument to be made that maybe in the past,
They were not necessarily fully backed or backed by the assets that people would want them to be.
But with this much of a spotlight on them over this amount of time, they've obviously become compliant and now are more than ready to weather any storm.
I mean, that's how I personally view it, but I would love your thoughts.
I think that's what we've seen.
If you listen to, say, the case at the New York Attorney General, for example, it's not saying that they aren't backed.
today, it was saying that in a very specific moment in time, they may have not been backed.
And, you know, I am obviously not in a position to judge the credence of that one way or the other,
but even based on the language that you see coming from that case,
it doesn't sound as if they're calling them, like calling into question what's happening there.
You know, so we were talking earlier about what's going on with DOJ. I think that
you know, it's hard to speculate
what's going on, why did they shift departments,
you know, like, and they're
trying to call them out on
their specific relationship with these banks
and whether they gave them
misinformation in some way, shape, or form.
And, you know, like, it
sounds like they're still struggling
to actually find the right
way to actually
bring a case against them.
I'm kind of with you, Scott.
Until I see the actual evidence,
I refrain from judgment.
We've heard about it since the beginning of time.
Alexander, I see you have your hand up.
I think Scott hit on this earlier exactly right, which is DOJ haven't seen any evidence.
Could there be something in the works? Maybe.
The SEC, though, is not going to go after Tether, at least in my opinion.
I work in D.C. in crypto policy and regulatory policy.
And the reason is that they can only pick so many well-resourced bytes at any given time.
Right now, their Binance and Coinbase bytes are those.
And Ripple.
Yeah.
And Ripple, yeah.
And there's a reason that USDC and Circle didn't show up in the Coinbase suit,
and to me that's because they just don't want to open up other vectors against other well-resourced opponents.
Whereas if you look at the Binance suit, Paxos and BUSD figures pretty prominently.
So if they were to go out, the SEC, if they were to go after a stablecoin issuer, it's going to be Paxos.
I don't see them going after Tether anytime soon.
At least until they get some precedential case law at their back.
Why would they go after Paxos, do you think, necessarily?
I always thought that was interesting that the government went towards Paxos to basically shut down BUSD,
but had nothing to say about Paxos' other stablecoin, USDP.
That's a good question. I mean, the argument has been that, so taking a step back, the SEC, specifically Chair Gensler, have been pretty methodical about trying to
take crypto things and stick them into existing regulatory buckets.
So with the exchanges, it's, hey, let's put these into securities exchange frameworks
and everyone needs to come into compliance.
With stablecoins, every time Gensler has appeared before Congress,
he said, well, they look like money market funds to me and should be regulated as such.
If his view is that all stablecoins, to some extent, are money market funds and should be regulated as them, then the question just becomes, who are you going to go after in order to effectuate that view?
And to me, the lowest hanging fruit is Paxos and Bidens.
BUSD, because there's no love lost between Binance and I would say Capitol Hill and the broader public in the US.
Whereas if you're going after Circle and Coinbase, who at least in D.C. are seen as honest brokers, it becomes a little bit more politically difficult.
Right.
I mean, you're in D.C., obviously. We've seen a lot of legislation floated about stablecoins over the past year and even before,
and most of it seems to have disappeared into the ether.
Obviously, that was a fundamental part of the Loomis-Gillibrand bill,
which they are saying is coming back leaner and meaner in the coming months.
And obviously, some ideas from even McHenry and others, I mean...
It seems like stablecoins are more likely to be legislated on than anything else in crypto, and that that might then delay any regulatory action against any of these. I mean, what do you think about that?
Correct. It should. The...
The regulators are basically supposed to take a backseat to Congress
when Congress is moving on something.
And the presidential working group report basically said as much.
They said Congress should take the lead on stablecoin legislation,
and there's plenty of folks in Congress on both sides of the aisle
who have been somewhat upset that the SEC hasn't seemed to have been listening.
So yesterday, Jeremy Allaire, the CEO of Circle,
testified before Congress on the latest...
uh the latest stablecoin bill uh draft from mchenry uh that bill is going to get marked
up by the house financial services committee in early july um it will pass out of the house
because uh republicans control the house and mchenry has a tight relationship
with uh speaker of the house kevin mccarthy the question is does it make it through the senate
stable coins are the one issue where the administration actually seems to
se behov for
comprehensive legislation.
Their views on crypto market structure
are a little...
less generous.
So look, I actually think that there's a decent chance
that stablecoin legislation passes into law
by the end of the year.
It's not a sure thing by any means,
but Congress could act on it relatively quickly.
Where would you put the likelihood?
Is that like a coin flip to you?
Or like more likely than not?
Or like how would you...
I would say probably 40-45%.
Yeah.
Whereas I would put market structure legislation around 20%.
It really depends over the next couple of weeks
whether Democrats decide to hop on to McHenry's bill or not,
because the more Democrat votes there are on that thing coming out of the House,
the more likely the Senate's going to have to stand up and take notice.
If there's no Dem votes, then the Senate doesn't have to do anything.
Yeah.
Hey Mario, I just want to share something that's a bit of
breaking news or announcement today, and obviously
Bill Barheit, the CEO of Abra, has been
one of the most guests here
and a close friend of the show. This just came
out. Abra is announcing a significant
restructuring of its operations that will
take place over the coming days.
Effective June 15th, today.
Abra is ceasing its retail business in
the United States. Existing Abra
trade clients will receive notice of the timeline
for the withdrawal of their digital assets from Abra
trade. Abra previously announced the
wind down of the Abra Earn program in the U.S.
Abra Borrow will cease offering new loans to U.S. consumers.
Abra Boost will cease offering services to U.S. customers,
and existing users will receive separate notice of the wind down process
for their existing deposits to take place in the coming weeks.
Så, til vår narrativ, Gunny, som vi har snakket om før,
og alle av oss, folk som går ut i USA,
Abra var den siste mannen som stod når det kom til
denne modelen av krav og forhold som var.
Jeg reiste ut til Bill, han sa han er i forhold med klienter nå,
og sa Abra vil være bra,
bare en annen bullet til headen av US-investorer
som blir skrudd av regulatører.
Simon, du kan gå fram, om du har en takk.
Ja, klart.
Så, som du sa, Abra var nesten den siste personen som stod der
der du kan ta en kollateraliserad lov,
og Abra har rett til å investere i den kollaterale
og prøve å generere utgift.
Så det har blitt en problematisk modell,
men Abra har overlevet all stormen,
og jeg er en kjøpare i Abra også.
Simon, I think it would be easier for you to make a list of us of companies you're not a shareholder in.
I know.
Disclosure is important when you run a regulated securities business, I have to say.
And I think it's a decent thing to do anyway.
Men ja, det er en interessant model, fordi
så om du vil å rehypothekere, så er det det banken gjør, det er mye stress-test, du kan ikke gå ut og investere i krasse risikosåre
du har all den typen av ting, men
om en investerende med høj nivå er å deposere kollaterale, og så borrar de mot det, men Abra har rett til å investere det penget
There's no current disclosure requirement around that,
so they're probably taking the opinion that they can do that as a Form D accredited investor,
so only a high net worth investor would be able to borrow against collateral.
I think they were already only dealing with accredited investors at this point.
This was the announcement that they're taking away the retail business,
so you can't borrow and you can't have an earned product.
så de offisiellt gjør en avsnitt, men de sier at det ikke fungerer.
Men interessant, jeg tror fortfarande at det er viktig
om du borger, og at kollateralen blir brukt,
så du gjør finansielle beslutninger.
Jeg tror fortfarande at det er viktig å vite hvilken risikofil
en kompani tar med disse fondene, så du kan managere på en grad.
Det er derfor kollateralen blir brukt, tror jeg.
does need some security law disclosure, but then they're doing it based upon lending licenses,
which is a completely different regime, because that's why banks have the ability to leverage up,
because they have stress testing on what you do with those funds.
And we saw two similar platforms halt withdrawals in South Korea yesterday.
Ja, det var en stor skjøkopp. Det blir interessant å se hva ekvivalentet av kapte 11 ser ut i Sydkorea, for det var veldig store numre.
Ja, det var hele lendingstiden.
Jeg vet ikke, jeg er ingen ekspert på Sydkoreansk likvidasjon, men min antagelse er at det går direkte til likvidasjon i disse modeller, i stedet for likvidasjon.
I stort sett dragen oss trug det vi har vært trug med Voyager og Celsius i fjor.
og vi bruker det Mishinsky-metodet, men vi lar det å gjøre under kvart,
og alle spender ditt mål.
Håper de ikke gjør det i resten av verden.
Ran, hva sa du?
The South Korean one wasn't as big as everyone thought, because on their website they said they had 8 billion dollars worth of altcoins, but that's because when you translate the website from Korean to English, it doesn't change the number, but it changes the currency.
Det var Kanskese 1.
Det var korean 1 eller noe som koreansk krona heter.
Korean 1.
Korean 1.
Det var 8 biljon korean w, som egentlig ikke er så stor i altcoins.
Det er noe som vi kan gjøre en kalkulation, men når du uttrykker denne webseiten fra koreansk til engelsk,
I thought it was a huge story. We thought 8 billion dollars of altcoins were now locked up in Korea, but it actually was. It was a tiny number.
Yeah, I think size is a huge part of the narrative, but I think the narrative still is the key here, which is that even a year later we're seeing the same thing.
They do have a billion dollars worth of Bitcoin.
They've got 21,000 Bitcoins.
They do have a billion dollars worth of Bitcoin.
Yeah, but I thought people were saying
that that's the total amount of Bitcoin
that has passed.
That's like the cumulative aggregate volume
or something like that.
TVU, which is...
Det er totalt valut som har gått gjennom systemet deres, ja.
Ja, det er en entreprenørnummer.
Det er en entreprenørnummer når du ikke blir forstått av regulatører
til å si hva som er fair, klart og ikke misledig.
Selcius har faktisk annonsert,
jeg så det i nyheteret i dag,
at de som var en del av deres prosess
skulle selge alle deres altcoins til bitcoin og ethereum,
som ser ut til å være en veldig viktig historie her.
Ja, jeg har beklagt dem å gjøre det i åt måneder tidig, da dominansen av bitcoin var på nivå.
De varte på bitcoindominansen var på nivå til å selge alt altcoin for bitcoin under.
Hva er den selsjøs balansen av altcoin x bitcoin under?
De har ca 100 000 bitcoin, de har kun ca 20 000, så det er mye mer.
Jeg er mer bekymrad om at de kjøper alt de altcoinene for bitcoin, hvor mange altcoin kommer til å gå på markedet?
Ja, jeg tror det var ca 70% eth og bitcoin, jeg borde sjekke numrene igjen, men det kommer en stor kram.
Of altcoins into Bitcoin and Ethereum, right?
So it depends on how you look at it.
Yeah, but I'm saying big dump of those altcoins,
but that should actually be, if it's going into Bitcoin and Ethereum,
it's effectively buying Bitcoin and Ethereum.
Gunny, go ahead.
I'm curious, and maybe somebody here knows this from Celsius or whatnot,
but what are the tax implications to the retail account holders in a liquidation event?
Ja, jeg vil ikke gi taxavis, men basicament krediter som har over 100 000 krav, de kan gjøre det på en veldig tax-effektiv måte, men også fordi kronene var betalt som egenverden av Celsius.
They have their own, they were a UK company and a US company, so it's ultra complicated.
There's an HMRC claim, an IRS claim, and they're making the trade, but they also were treating it as an illegal bank, so there's a nuance there.
som er veldig komplikaterade.
Det var en låne-negotiasjon på den tiden
som kan lede til at folk får all deres kollaterale,
skaper en taxabla event, får en triple whammy.
Så taxasiden er en ultra-disaster i disse situasjoner.
Det krever egentlig noen legale interpretasjon
fordi de var opererende illegalt
og det beror på hvordan du interpreterer
hva den faktiske relasjonen var.
Ja, og som en update for andre i handel med Chapter 11 Bankruptcies i Gunny, så vil jeg la deg gå.
Voyager Saga ser ut til å bli merkelig til å bli beslutt,
men ikke i den måten som en Voyager kreditor vil.
Men i fjellet var det en høring, og juden gjorde det klart,
for den tredje tidsdagen, for den første tråd til å gå til kustomer,
som var omkring 35,76%.
Så det kan hende i kommande uke eller to uke, som blir den første av de som blir besluttad,
Så jeg tror det er god nyde i at det begynner å se noen beslutninger,
men dårlig nyde i amountene og den presen av det vi vil se i fremtiden.
Gå igjen Gunny.
no i'm good that was my question back to the uh back to the panel yeah also bringing it back to
this there's um in the voyager case i think they're selling 36 of the coins that the sec deems
securities as well right jesus yeah so you've got the voyager coins and then you've got the celsius coins
I Celsius planen vil de tae alt i bitcoin, og staket i ETH.
Kurset for å fyrte opp en validator,
fordi ETH var dekommet av byggen,
så Celsius tog alle våre Ethereum,
de tok det ut av Lido,
og nå tar de det ut på beacon-chainet,
så det er ca. en 48-dager kurs for å fyrte opp en validator på ETH,
Celsius køk det fra en 25 dag kø til en 44 dag kø, fordi det er så mye eth som de vil lukke på bekenkåren.
Ja, så Scott, jeg tror vi bør stoppe, vi kan holde det kort i dag etter å ha gjort en marathon i dag.
Men bare for publikum, før jeg gir Scott den siste ordet.
Guys, guys, guys, guys, guys, før du går, siste kommentar, jeg har en liste av Celsius kønner.
Så, Cardano, jeg ser på den 7. mars, jeg ser på de May Coins, så det er 100 miljoner Cardano, det er Polkadot, det er 1,8 miljoner Polkadot, 3,3 miljoner Chainlink, 197.000 Litecoin, de har noen FTT, de har 106.000 RDA.
Er du ser på det vi har, eller det vi har?
Det du har, tror jeg.
Ja, fint. Er det Coin Report, ja?
Matix er den største største posisjonen, tror jeg.
Jeg har 150 000 Solana, XLM, en liten bit av EOS.
Jeg vil tweet ut den som de har tatt på min e-konto.
Cool.
Jeg forstår at det blir ATC, men jeg tror at de vil hente ut.
Ok, alle. Det var en god kort spesie i dag.
Gå med med en projekt, om du er investerende i portføljer eller projekt i publikum.
Go to the pinned tweets, I'll pin it on my profile as well, Randy should do the same, so I can see it when they enter space.
And there's an email there, you can email us, or you can comment in the tweet, or you can DM us, but best is to email us please.
Otherwise Scott, final words, and I promise I won't end it this time, I promise you, you have my word.
Final words, I've traumatized you. Final words before we wrap up.
Nei.
I was actually genuinely serious.
Alright guys, so final words. Markets are not good.
The lack of clarity.
I think a lot of our spaces over the next few months will just be trying to piece together
how regulation will look like in the US over the next few months
and what response we'll see from the East, from Russia, from China,
especially with what's happening in Hong Kong.
And yeah, I know that Scott and Ryan are bullish.
I'm pretty bullish as well.
I'm not sure about the rest of the panel,
but we'll see you again tomorrow, same time,
at 10.15 ET.
Thanks a lot, everyone.
