I love Bitcoin. I don't love that. I don't do business for the sake of business. I didn't go
to business school. I'm not a Silicon Valley guy. I love Bitcoin. If what the company became
and the direction the board wants to take it in was initially the decision made at founding,
I would have never started it and I would have never been a part of it. Once you stay the course
and you see the other side, you realize like things that you mistake for punishments are really just
gifts. The world had to teach me a lot if I wanted to become the man that I am now.
And how else would I have acquired what I needed to acquire if it wasn't then and if it wasn't that?
I want to build what I believe in. I want to build for people that believe in the things that I do.
I want to build for Bitcoiners. I want to build a company that I want to work for.
I want to build products that I would actually use.
ready to go man nice how you doing i'm good i'm good i'm good things have changed a bit since uh
last time we recorded yeah you just made the announcement at the conference um everything
like when i saw the news that you were leaving 21 i was very surprised i was actually odell's house
i was the first one awake that morning he walked in i was like holy shit jack's left 21
on. Tell the story. What happened? So the company that I co-founded and wanted to build and the
company 21 was becoming were no longer the same. And I felt it was the right thing to do for a lot
of reasons to exit the business. So I stepped down as a CEO and 21 still goes on. It's still
business. It's still listed on the New York Stock Exchange and nothing about the company has changed
except for who leads it, which is obviously a big change.
And yeah, I mean, listen, it was disappointing.
I own the fact that I started a thing
and set expectations for said thing and I didn't achieve it.
And that part is very disappointing and it sucks,
but I also know it's the right thing to do,
which we can get into.
And I feel good about the decision that I made.
And I also wrote an essay that hilariously, I wasn't allowed to publish it because I was still a public company officer.
So I published it only recently after I publicly stepped down.
But part of that essay is centered around this idea of what punishments are not gifts, which I think is very bear market-esque of Bitcoin.
Bitcoin to me is the money of integrity and humility.
And through the seasons that Bitcoin experiences, I've experienced seasons as well.
and this is my latest winter.
And although it's been painful
and I own all of the unfortunate outcomes as the CEO,
I think there are many gifts embedded in this
and I feel good.
And obviously it doesn't change how I think about Bitcoin,
but I'm happy to tell you,
now I can say whatever I want.
So I'm happy to tell you anything you want.
Obviously, I don't want to talk on behalf of a company
that I am no longer employed by and work on,
so even if I was allowed to do that
just the man I am
I would not do that
it's their company
and those guys are still my friends
and I still think they can go on and crush it
but anything about the founding
and any of the stories
like ask me whatever you want
it's funny because you're saying
you weren't able to release that article
because you're still the CEO of public company
when me and Odell were talking about it on the podcast
which was really awkward by the way
because we're essentially talking about you
who's a friend of both of ours
while you're not there
it's kind of a hard thing to broach
I'd much rather have the harder conversation with you directly.
Sure.
But one of the things I said is the thing that I'm most excited about
in a selfish way is that I feel like Jack's back.
I feel like this is Jack on Shackle again.
I feel like I'm back.
Which is awesome.
So let's go through,
where did the divergences between your vision for the company
and the board's vision for the company start?
What were the problems that you encountered?
So I think when we founded it,
and we as Tether and I,
And Tether means really Giancarlo and Paolo.
Paolo, everybody knows the CEO.
Giancarlo is the founder of Tether.
And this probably shouldn't become a Tether podcast,
but people say Brock Pierce co-founded Tether.
And there's like some vague truths to that,
but like the actual founder of the stable coin
and the actual founder of Tether
and the chairman of the business is Giancarlo.
And so Giancarlo and Paolo and I,
And the rest of the Tether team is great.
But I would say those are the core conversations
of creating this thing and what it would look like,
what it would be called.
I branded 21.
I came up with the name.
I registered the ticker.
All of that stuff.
That was the group.
And that group, and we still do,
share this unified vision of,
well, on one side of a spectrum,
you have a Coinbase or a Robinhood.
These are classic FinTechs that have customers and they have products and they produce cash flow right The cost to run the business is less than the revenue that they produce They have profit
and that gets investors excited. The business is worth a lot. The business is growing.
However, their conviction in Bitcoin is either small or non-existent. They don't hold a lot of
Bitcoin on the balance sheet, if at all, relative to other assets, their focus and how they ship
products, where they focus their lobbying attention in Washington, DC, everything about the company.
Like, I think Coinbase, I don't think it's false to say that they care more about Ethereum than Bitcoin, historically.
So that's one side, is you've got good businesses with cash flow and growth, like historically what an investor would look for.
You value these businesses on discounted cash flow or some future.
Okay, the other side of the spectrum are what became treasury companies, which I would say the opposite.
These are businesses that don't have customers, don't have cash flow, don't have products at all, purposefully so, but do have conviction in Bitcoin.
That is what they sell.
They sell like, not only do I believe in Bitcoin, I believe so much I'm going to lever myself to believe in it.
And I want to be the biggest believer in it.
And when you buy this equity, it means you believe in it more than anybody else.
And these are like two polar opposing things.
and Tether and I, and specifically Giancarlo Paolo and I had come from, I mean, we've all been in
Bitcoin for a very long time. And so we've been through the like, when Silk Road went bust,
when Moncox went down, when Coinbase was a Bitcoin company and became a shitcoin company.
And then Binance was going to be the Bitcoin company for the world. Then FTX was going to be
the Bitcoin company for the world. And then Giancarlo created Tether and Tether was after
he created Bifinex. He didn't create Bifinex, but we had experienced the industry for a long time.
where we're like, surely we can create something that lives in this synergetic middle where we've
been able to create cash generating businesses, businesses that have been successful, meaning we
produce more profits than we have costs, but we believe in Bitcoin and we believe Bitcoin is the
innovation. It should be the sole focus. And I've gotten there through Strike. They've gotten there
through their businesses. And that was the vision. Can we create a public equity that was both?
and I think eventually how we got there and how we were going to achieve that changed
like for example I'll say this like if what the company became and the direction the board wants
to take it in was initially the decision made at founding I would have never started it and I would
have never been a part of it and you know some other things that the public probably doesn't
And I was like, you know, Strike being a part of 21 was never part of the initial discussion.
In fact, I'll never forget sitting in one of what I would consider like the founding meetings and saying like,
I just got to a point where I was lucky enough and worked hard enough to have a thing that works in Strike.
And like, I don't consider myself one of these like serial entrepreneurs.
Like, I don't want to do this again.
Like, I did.
You've done it.
Yeah.
I don't build companies because I love it.
And I love sleeping on your friend's couch
and drawing on the chalkboard.
I don't love that.
I love Bitcoin.
I don't love that.
I don't do business for the sake of business.
I didn't go to business school.
I'm not a Silicon Valley guy.
I love Bitcoin.
And I love promoting Bitcoin.
And so I had a very blunt conversation of like,
I have this other thing.
And they were like, you should be the CEO of both.
And we'll support that.
And so eventually, obviously, that changed.
and why that changed. The market evolved. When we started it, Bitcoin was in the middle and
becoming of a bull run. By the time we listed on the New York Stock Exchange, strategy had changed
the definition of MNAV. Treasury companies were distressed. Bitcoin is falling off a cliff. So
things change. Markets change. I mean, SoftBank was on the board. SoftBank stepped down from the
board. The board changed. And so things changed. But that's okay. That's okay. These guys,
are great guys. They're real Bitcoiners. And at the end of the day, 21 was never mine,
which is very unfortunate because I think I set expectations in a way that I need to own.
I laid out my vision, what I wanted us to do. And ultimately, I wasn't able to see that through,
which I feel awful about and I own. But I had no governing control to do what I wanted to do.
it was ultimately up to the board. And one day the board and I started to diverge a bit
on how we were going to achieve the initial vision based on
the world changing. And it doesn't make anyone a villain, I guess, if that makes sense.
I genuinely mean that. It is unfortunate, but 21 has what it needs to be successful.
I mean, what did we achieve? We built the second largest treasury,
which there's some fud around that of like, we never actually bought Bitcoin.
It was all contributed by Tether.
That's not true.
We bought almost a billion and a half dollars worth of Bitcoin And we listed in the public capital markets which Not easy to do No I remember having a conversation with my fiance I was like I mean I really I mean
this stuff is hard, man. I feel like I let people down and I own that. And I was talking
to her about it and she didn't know uh adam backs uh by name and the company he was trying to start
but she was like hey you guys actually stacked a bunch of bitcoin and listed it in the public
markets and the 21 board has what they need to be a successful company like you know at least
you know the transaction didn't get canceled and i'm not you know adam knows i love him i'm not in
any way discrediting or speaking. I don't know what happened there. But yeah, I mean,
we did a thing. And at some point, I wasn't the right guy to lead it, unfortunately.
If you hold Bitcoin long enough, there's going to come a time when you need some dollars.
It might be a tax bill, a business expense, life getting in the way. But whatever it is,
it might come at a time when you don't want to sell your Bitcoin. That's where Ledin comes in.
Ledin lets you borrow against your Bitcoin instead with tiered rates that go as low as 9.25%.
So you don't have to sell your stack if you don't want to.
Ledin have operated through every market cycle since 2018 and have originated over $11 billion
in loans.
But the important part for me is the way Ledin handles these loans.
Your collateral is held in custody and never lent out to generate interest.
And Ledin's more than just loans.
Tether Gold is now live alongside your Bitcoin with instant trading across 10 pairs.
And later this year, you'll be able to borrow against gold in the same way that you do with
Bitcoin.
Ledin really is an awesome company.
I've used them multiple times.
the applications have taken you less than 15 minutes and you have the dollars in your account
within hours. If you want to check out Ledin, go to ledn.io and use the code WBD for 0.25% off your
first loan. That's ledn.io and use the code WBD. You wouldn't reuse a Bitcoin address, so why does
your phone broadcast the same identifier for life? Every SIM has a static ID and carriers, ad networks
and bad actors all use it to track you. The big carriers have been caught selling that data over
and over again cape is america's privacy first mobile carrier their identifier rotation feature
changes your id every 24 hours so you look like a different subscriber every single day
and sim swaps are off the table your number can't move without a 24 word phrase that only you hold
there's also no name at sign up no social security number and there's no profile to build on you
if you're a bitcoiner in america i honestly don't know why you'd use any other network
You can head over to cape.co forward slash WBD and use the code WBD for 33% off your first six months.
That's C-A-P-E dot co forward slash WBD.
If you own a Bitcoin ETF, especially if it's GBTC, you need to listen up.
Spot Bitcoin ETFs provide price exposure to Bitcoin, not direct ownership.
You can't withdraw it, you can't self-custody it, and they charge you a management fee every year to hold it.
Well, Swan recently announced Swan Real Bitcoin Exchange and it's ready to use right now.
RBX is a structured in-kind exchange that converts your spot Bitcoin ETF shares into real on-chain Bitcoin.
It does that without selling on the open market and is designed to support a tax-efficient outcome.
So for example, if you hold GBTC, you're paying 1.5% a year in management fees for Bitcoin price exposure.
But by swapping GBTC for real Bitcoin with RBX, you can drop that figure as low as 0% by just holding it in self-custody.
This is designed in a way that maintains your cost basis
and in a manner that supports the deferral of capital gains tax.
So if you own a Bitcoin ETF, especially if it's GBTC,
you need to talk to Swan Private about RBX today.
Head over to swan.com forward slash WBD
and book in a call with one of their team.
That's swan.com forward slash WBD.
It's funny you say the thing about Strike merging with 21
was never part of the plan at the start.
Because you said that to me when we first did the show
after I took over the podcast,
it was just after you'd announced the launch of 21.
And you said that, and I believed you.
And then when you made the announcement
that they were going to merge, I was like,
oh, was I being naive because you were the CEO
of a public company, like there's things you just can't say.
But that really was never part of the plan originally.
Yeah, it was never part.
In fact, what I would consider like the founding meeting,
and that's the thing, I've known these guys
for a very long time and obviously still do,
but there was one specific time we all met up.
And yeah, I made the point.
I was like, you know, the strike thing to me,
I don't, and we can talk about this,
I don't need to be like the biggest or the bestest
or own the most Bitcoins, you know, obviously.
This isn't an ego race with Michael Saylor.
It's something about Saylor.
It's, and this is what I talk about in the essay.
Bitcoin is the great humbler.
It is the death of ego.
It is the money of humility and integrity.
And when I think about like the Mount Rushmore for me
is like Satoshi Nakamoto That is the greatest display of build something great for the sake of what it represents
and what it can do, not for what it can make you and what it brings you. And so I try and embody
that level of integrity and honesty.
And so, yeah, I am okay with just being a Bitcoiner
and orange-pilling people and building.
I like building my company that I build products
that I want to use.
I build a business that I would want to work for.
And I'm okay with that.
I don't need more than that.
And I had that conversation.
And the result was like, well, there's many people
that run two businesses and we have plenty of ways to support your ability to do that. And so like,
I just made it known, a known thing, but yeah, it was not, it was not part of it. And obviously
at some point that changed. And I would say that the, I mean, listen, investors in the market was
pushing that on the board saying like, you know, the market wants to see Jack's efforts consolidate
into a public equity. People want to buy Bitcoin. They want to buy Jack. They wanted to buy Tether
and having these things kind of spread apart and what's what. And when Jack makes a product
announcement, is he talking about the thing that I just invested in or is he talking about another
thing? And so to be clear, I'm not implying there was some like sneaky plan. I think things evolved
and then the board and specifically Tether
thought that that was a good idea
and they wrote that blog post
and then the Bitcoin conference was me
opining on the blog post
and sharing where the visions overlapped
but I was obviously, I was very careful
and like if we could make it work
at the time, there was a lot that wasn't figured out
and obviously the world now knows
that we couldn't figure it out
we couldn't make everybody happy
and yeah, that's why, I mean
above all else
uh i'm not a i i again i i own the outcomes i got i have one of the reasons uh i wasn't i wouldn't
say dubious about doing the show but um i don't want people to perceive my words as like asking
for sympathy or asking for acceptance or being like okay now i understand your side of the story
so like i forgive you so i'm asking for like i i deserve to be held accountable for decisions i
made that i in hindsight would have made differently and for outcomes or rather lack of
outcomes so i i would say you know i'm not i'm not trying to justify anything it is what it is
um but i i hold myself to i'm not i'm not afraid to be wrong i'm not afraid to be wrong i'm not
afraid to fail in public. I'm not afraid to prioritize integrity and truth and principles
over money and fame. And I think it's important. And I think it was important for me to learn that
through experience and like be tested to the fire. Because you say things like some things aren't for
sale, right? Or like, you know, principles over everything or like this is what it means to be a
Bitcoiner. And then you're offered like an unlimited amount of money and Wall Street and stuff.
And it's like, you know, are you who you say you are? And I mean, that experience was invaluable
as well for me. So I don't think you should think of this as like, it doesn't come across as asking
for forgiveness, but people love you. Like people want to know what the story was and what happened.
I think it's important that you do tell your side of the story and let people judge it however they
Totally. I just am sensitive to, like, you know, we have a culture internally at strike.
So this is something that I've enforced on myself and people in my life and that work with me for
years, which is I don't believe in pointing fingers and delegating blame. And what I tell
my employees is, say, if you come to me and I say, hey, what's going on? Why did X, Y, and Z happen?
And you come to me and you say, well, it was that guy.
I tell everyone, don't do that.
Because what you just told me is that guy determines the outcomes.
That guy determines fate.
That guy is truly responsible.
So then I'm going to ask, why are you here?
You must not be that important.
And this gets into a deeper philosophical idea of like,
to be sovereign is to own your destiny.
to point at somebody else or to say,
well, you know, if the Bitcoin price didn't go down
or if only the board did this
or if only timing was differently,
then by proxy, I'm saying the outcomes of my life,
my success, my future, my contributions,
the relationships I hold with the public market
or with Bitcoiners or with my customers
isn't truly up to me.
I feel like that's a very weak position to hold.
And so I only come from it from a stance of,
I own my outcomes.
The buck stops here.
My high school coach had a very lasting impression on me,
high school basketball.
And he said, you know, a great leader gives credit when we win.
When we win, it's all about the players
and the plays you guys made
and the hustle you showed on defense.
It's when we lose, it's my fault.
And that's ownership.
That's integrity.
That's leadership.
And so that's what I mean.
You know, I think it's really important to say, like, hand up.
Like, I tried a thing.
I did it in public.
And it didn't go the way I wanted.
And I know that impacts people.
And I know people are going to want an explanation.
And I know people are going to want me to own it and say sorry.
And I do.
I do not point fingers.
I do not cast blame.
I never have.
I never will.
I don't believe in that.
So is that part of the problem in strike? Like you're the dictator essentially, right? Like
whatever you say goes. And then with 21, you're working under a board and it doesn't like, you
can say the book stops with you, but does it actually like, do you have enough control to do
what you want to do? Yeah, no 20, I mean, 21 and strike are not apples to apples comparisons.
Cause yeah, uh, 21, I could, I could not make decisions on my own and you know, to an extent,
right like i named the thing but if the board disagreed with my name then yeah i wouldn't have
been able so there was no unequivocal whatever jack the direction jack needs to take and so that's
you know why we would have a very clear vision and very clear steps that we wanted to take but
we seemingly couldn't get it done and couldn't get execution across the line and that's because
at the end of the day, there was a disagreement. And I mean, obviously, I won't go too much into
the whole SoftBank chapter, but obviously there was disagreement there too at some point.
And so at the top, you need to have unified vision. People need to be working in lockstep.
And that's ultimately too, when I realized like, if this isn't something that I set out to build
and want to build and believe in building,
then I shouldn't lead it.
And I don't even have the fiber
and the bones in my body to do that.
So yeah, with Strike,
I mean, I am the founder, the CEO, the chairman,
all of the useless titles that are casted,
like I'm all of them.
When I want to do something, we do it.
When I want to stop doing something, we don't.
And if you're not okay with that,
then you're fired. And that's how it goes. Bitcoin is very decentralized. Strike is not.
And that's why Strike, I think, ships at an incredible pace, achieves what it can,
is very unified in what it's here to do, what its plans are, when it needs critical decisions,
like we know how to make them. So yeah, it's just very different, very different companies.
From your public comments, I was getting the impression, and tell me if this is wrong,
because it could totally be wrong.
But I was getting the impression
that you were not very into the sort of
more pure play Bitcoin treasury company
for lack of a better word.
And that like the idea of just issuing
perpetual preferred equity
wasn't going to be something
that maybe you wanted to do.
Was that part of this sort of disagreement
with the direction of the company
that caused this?
Because I understand the drive
to want to do something like that
when you sat on so much Bitcoin
and like I know Stretch and Sator
have been having a tough time,
but I'm sure they're going to be successful products.
So I mentioned earlier, I don't know when we hit record, but I think I'd mentioned earlier,
I don't want to talk on behalf of 21.
Yeah.
One, because I probably am not allowed to.
I know I'm no longer interested in asking lawyers because I don't have to.
But I know I'm probably not allowed to.
But the other is because I shouldn't.
I don't run.
So what has the day in the life of working at 21 today?
What decisions did they make?
What's their roadmap?
I wasn't there.
And so that's just being a dick.
If I were to sit here and try and convince you, it's not my business, it's not my responsibility,
and there are great people there.
And like I said, these are my friends, and I believe in them.
Just because we have a disagreement on, you can look at an opportunity and arrive at different
ways to attack it and build toward it.
It doesn't make someone a bad person.
And so I feel as a man, I should respect their right to build their thing.
Because at the end of the day, it clearly was not my thing.
It's their thing.
and they should build it. So I'm not going to speak on what they're going to do. I don't know.
Maybe they changed all of their minds again today and I have no idea. I do think though,
I finally get to say that the questions that I had for Michael Saylor and the related industry
that felt they were, you know, needed to answer the questions I was asking had nothing to do with
me being the CEO of 21 like at all I still have those questions In fact I think in hindsight they were good questions because the definitions have changed And STRC did dislocate from 100 And that doesn make these products bad
It doesn't make Michael bad,
but it makes my questions were reasonable.
And yeah, no, you're accurate in saying
I still don't totally understand a lot of that space.
And I'd be hard pressed for someone to tell me that they do
because it feels very much like engineering the plane while you're flying it, which is fine.
That's business, that's startup, that's problem solving. You know, I think when people say like,
I've planned the next five years. No, you haven't. You haven't. It's such a meaningless exercise.
And so that's all of that is fine. But also like as a Bitcoiner,
I'm gonna, we can, we can, we can acknowledge, you know, these things. And so, yeah, I, I do,
I mean, the strategy has changed a bunch. The metrics have changed a bunch. The guidance has
changed. I mean, everything's been changing. And so having questions, I still don't totally
understand how it's going to work, how it's going to play out, how sustainable all of it is, but
whatever. Um, I'm also like, not like king of the jungle and the smartest person ever. So,
So, you know, I can miss things.
As someone who's also been on the receiving end
of the Twitter treasury company mob for asking questions,
I think your questions were valid.
Like, I think we should be able to ask questions.
We should ask everything.
What would you have done differently?
Like, I know that's very easy with sort of 2020 hindsight
to pick at the moment,
but is there any one thing that sticks out
that you wish you'd not done?
I think...
the level of expectation that I set publicly,
in hindsight, should have been much more measured.
I'd never experienced Wall Street.
I'd never been a part of a board
where I ultimately couldn't act decisively
when I felt convicted.
I had never been part of a public company. And so I think, you know, I think fundamentally that
optimists define the future. I think it's so artistic almost that going long something pays
way more than going short something. You can never make more than, you know, 100% going short or
whatever, right? Like you, you can, you get paid way more for being an optimist. Um, people that
believe, see the glass half full, you know, are passionate and full of energy about the future
are the ones that define it and build it rather than the one. So it's, you know, it's part of my
personality. It's part of being a leader, but in hindsight, um, I think I, I was, I did not do the
best job at managing expectations when it became this web between shareholders and the board. And
because my ability to take conversations about a unified vision and dispel them into expectations
and conviction to the public, only to realize that following through on that was harder than
it has historically been in my career at Strike, I regret that. I did not mean to
set an expectation about what this thing was going to become while I was leading it without,
you know, fully appreciating what it was going to take for me to follow through on that.
And that's where I own that because I know that people believe in me, believed in me,
and specifically as the leader of this thing. And probably, and I know just from being on the
internet and seeing the comments, like feel let down in that way that they heard me say things
and set expectations and didn't see the follow through there and, and, uh, feel as if I was
misleading or, or if I, um, yeah. So that, that, that was, that's probably the biggest, the biggest
one. And of course, like throughout the whole thing, there's tinier ones, but that's probably,
um, the biggest one. Cause we did, I mean, we did accomplish stuff and we were on our way. Um,
And 21 can still go on to accomplish great things
and be something meaningful for Bitcoin
and return a lot of investment capital for shareholders.
But my lack of ability to achieve what I said I would
and what I wanted to while I was there,
in hindsight, I would have managed that differently.
So it's very hard for, I think,
probably almost everyone listening
to imagine the pressure that you were under
while you did this.
I have no context of it.
I have no idea what it's like working on Wall Street.
Like this is a new thing for you as well, right?
I'm sure you've learned a ton about yourself, about business.
But does any part of you regret ever doing it?
No, I don't believe.
I also don't believe in that.
I don't believe, you know,
I tell you a story about the last bear market in 2022 So for people that don know in 2022 this was the Bitcoin conference that directly followed the El Salvador announcement that I made
There's lots of pressure, expectations, and Strike was a tiny little child baby.
I think we released like a beta in the App Store in 2021, right?
So pre-revenue.
And mind you, after El Salvador and Bitcoin was in this craze bull run, like the bull run,
I'm putting it in air quotes for the podcast listeners that we experienced in 2025, to me
was not real.
We didn't hit all-time highs in gold terms.
It was not an actual, like 2021 was the last bull run in my mind.
And I was surrounded by professional athletes, superstar artists, the top VC firms, and everyone was inviting me to parties and giving me investment capital.
I had no idea that I needed to generate revenue, turn a profit someday.
I literally, I was a kid and I thought that all I had to do was champion Bitcoin and like build
stuff that like was popular and people I thought were downloading it, but I didn't even know
and run around and like make sure that like the orange pill message was getting through.
And like, I don't like, don't VCs fund the payroll. I had no idea. And we had worked on
some partnerships that were in the very early stages with some merchant vendors. And I got out
on the Bitcoin conference and I laid out the vision that I had and how we were going to,
through these partnerships, get Bitcoin accepted pretty much throughout the United States.
Now, fast forward, the Fed hiked rates faster than they ever had. The bull market turned into
a bear market. Every vendor partnerships, R&D, crypto department got fired. Our partnerships fell
through. None of it ever met the market. And strike almost failed because all of the VC money
that was like around and like, here, take this, take this, like disappeared. And like, you didn't
have any revenue. You didn't have anything. And that was one of the most painful times in my life.
Feel abandoned. You feel used. You feel angry. You feel depressed. And like lots of finger
point like why well why did this person tell me this or why did this person convince me the world
worked that way and then it was that moment where i acquired some of the most valuable lessons i've
ever acquired in my life like about ego about who i am as a man what i care about what strike should
be about business about about everything now strike turns out to be a very successful thing
very profitable now, big company. Now, what I tell myself and what I tell my employees all the time
is how expensive were the lessons that I acquired in that moment? Think about that in hindsight.
And that goes back to what I wrote in the essay, what punishments are not gifts?
Because I acquired a wealth of knowledge, experience, really, really painful, but valuable
tutorial of how to build things, who to trust, how to set up strike. I acquired that, Danny.
I didn't lose a limb. I didn't lose my parents. I didn't lose my business. I didn't lose my
friends. I didn't lose any Bitcoins. I just took a couple of really tough punches to the ego and
needed to adopt a decent amount of humility and just emotional pain.
And so, I don't know, that chapter of my life was very hard. Like, oh, Jack is a hype marketing,
over-promising, you know, all of the things. And, you know, some of those things hurt because you
starts to question like, is that true? But then once you, once you stay the course and you see
the other side, you realize like things that you mistake for punishments are really just gifts.
The world had to teach me a lot if I wanted to become the man that I am now.
And how else would I have acquired what I needed to acquire if it wasn't then? And if it wasn't that
I could have, it could have been a lot worse or I could have never acquired it at all.
Yeah. You only get those lessons from putting yourself out there.
Yeah, and you have to pay for the lessons.
This goes to Bitcoin Austrian theory of there's no free lunch.
You can't print the money out of thin air.
You can't print the lessons out of thin air.
What's the tuition fee?
What's the cost of the education?
And so anyway I want to be a good man I want to be a good eventually husband and dad and colleague and Bitcoiner So I don regret any of these things And I think people spend too much time honestly being depressed
and wallowing about the past. You can't change the past. And so I do not regret it. You know,
what punishments are not gifts. My intentions were real. What we built was real. I mean,
It's not like, oh, just kidding.
The Bitcoin's not there.
It's there.
It's a stock listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
It gets quarterly audits by the public markets.
It's a very legit thing.
And I tried to do a thing.
And the universe needed me to learn a lot about myself
and about being a Bitcoiner
and about being a man and integrity and humility and ego.
And so I appreciate the lessons.
and I'm very fortunate and grateful
that they didn't cost me, you know,
my relationship with my fiance or my health, right?
So I don't know if that resonates at all, but-
Totally.
I just don't believe in, yeah,
regretting any part of the past.
Like what punishments are not gifts?
I fundamentally believe that.
Every Bitcoiner eventually has to answer one question.
If something happened to me,
would my family know what to do?
Could my wife or parents recover my Bitcoin?
And would my children inherit the Bitcoin I spent years stacking?
That's where AnchorWatch builds Bitcoin custody models to protect you and your family against real life.
Accidents, errors, kidnappings, and even your own death.
Every AnchorWatch custody solution includes their inheritance protocol.
Designed so when the unthinkable happens, your Bitcoin reaches the people you intended it for.
Whether you're a self-custody expert or want multi-institutional support,
your Bitcoin estate plan shouldn't be an afterthought.
Bitcoin is only generational wealth if it can actually be passed down through the generations.
So make sure they can access in the future what you've built today.
Anchor Watch is your custody, your way.
Visit anchorwatch.com to get started.
That's anchorwatch.com.
Do you want to pay less in taxes and stack more Bitcoin?
Of course you do.
Well, by mining Bitcoin with Blockway, you can.
Under section 168k of the US tax code, Bitcoin mining servers qualify for 100% bonus depreciation.
This means every dollar you spend on miners can directly offset your income in a single year.
And it's true for both business owners and W2 earners.
So if you have $100,000 in ordinary income,
you can purchase $100,000 in miners and potentially offset your tax liability entirely.
Blockware's mining as a service does all the heavy lifting.
They secure the rigs, they source the low-cost power,
and they handle all the day-to-day maintenance.
So you get to stack Bitcoin every single day while drastically shrinking your tax bill.
Get started today at blockwaresolutions.com forward slash WBD
and use code WBD for $100 off your first miner.
That's blockwaresolutions.com forward slash WBD.
If you're already self-custody Bitcoin, you know the deal with hardware wallets,
complex setups, clumsy interfaces, and a seed phrase that can be lost, stolen, or forgotten.
BitKey fixes that.
BitKey is self-custody built for real life.
It gives you an intuitive, easy-to-use wallet with no seed phrase to sweat over.
and it has a strong recovery system and built inheritance for long-term peace of mind.
And BitKey's just had a massive upgrade.
The new device now has a screen.
So before you approve something, you can check it on the BitKey itself.
The transaction, the address, or any account changes.
It's a big difference.
You're not just trusting what's on your phone.
You're seeing it for yourself on the device.
It's simple, secure self-custody without the stress.
Go to bitkey.world today and use the code WBD to get 10% off the new BitKey.
That's bitkey.world and use the code WBD.
So when I first heard about this news, like I said, I was at Odell's house
and he had a call with you that day.
And when he got off the call, I was like, how is he?
Because I had no idea how he would be taking this news.
Because I think one of the reasons that people like you so much
in the Bitcoin world is because you are very authentic.
You do wear your emotions on a sleeve.
I was like, how is he going to be handling this?
And Odell was just like, he seems great.
Do you feel like a weight off your shoulders,
like you're ready to go again on, you know, well, obviously keep going on strike, but just move
forward. Yes. Um, because I have, um, me and I have Bitcoin and that's all that like, it's like,
you don't want to say that's all that mattered. Cause of course, like it kills me that I, I
started this thing which uh is my baby in some ways like i created the logo and i branded it and
i like registered the domain name like when i was transferring myself out of the business
like i realized i still personally owned the domain you know you forget to like transfer it
corporate accounts i'm like man so um of course i this is not how i wanted the my chapter with
the business to end. But obviously when I was presented with whatever it was going to be,
money and fame and access and all this stuff, like I found myself saying no before I can even
reason it out and fully understand it. I just had like a physical, almost like repulsive reaction
to leading something and promoting something.
thing. And the other thing, too, is like, I just, Danny, I would not be able to look you in the eye
or look my employees in the eye or look Bitcoiners in the eye or my customers in the eye or my
investors in the eye if I knew they weren't ultimately entrusting in me. And so, yeah, I have
me and I have strike and I have Bitcoin. And in many ways, that's all not only I've ever needed,
but all Bitcoiners have ever wanted out of me. It was another really endearing and valuable
experience is the emails and the texts and the notes I've been getting both before and after the
resignation was public of just like who a lot of people view me as in the community of just
someone who would never sell out, who would never compromise on their ideals and their principles,
who people entrust to hold the integrity of Bitcoin as a leader and as a CEO and as a person.
And yeah, so I feel I'm very excited to be able to do things my way. And that's the other thing,
too. I don't know how big strike can be. I think, I mean, for a business that what, five, six years
old, depending on where you count, I'm thrilled. I mean, we've got, we're in 50% off highs and we've
got over a hundred million dollars of Bitcoin. So what we make a new all-time high. I've got
probably less than a hundred employees, a quarter billion dollars on the balance sheet.
We produce cashflow and we're still, I mean, growing as Bitcoin grows, we'll grow. Like I'm
thrilled with that. But are we going to own the most Bitcoin? Are we going to be the cover of
magazines? Maybe one day. I don't know. I'm bullish. I'd like to think Strike will continue
to grow into a valuable institution within the revolution that is Bitcoin. But I guess it will be
a side effect of what actually matters, which is like, I want to build what I believe in.
i want to build for people that believe in the things that i do i want to build for bitcoiners
i want to build a company that i want to work for i want to build products that i would actually use
um and that's what nothing that's okay and if strike is just like a hobbyist
business you know as long as we're able to pay our own bills like i'm cool with that
you know like i like here's another thing it does 250 million on the balance sheet count
as a hobbyist business i don't think so no no but but um you know i was talking to my fiance again
who by the way like superstar um people ever run into her at conferences she deserves a lot of
credit for helping me weather all this stuff that's my my partner and i was talking to her
and i was just obviously sad and angry and ranting and i'm like you know people say
oh, it's early in Bitcoin.
We're only at like 1% of global adoption.
I was telling her, that's not true.
Like we're not even at 1%.
What's that, 85 million?
Yeah, 85 million people have a vague
relative understanding of Bitcoin.
Nope.
Not even know, not even close.
And I would wage to say,
we're not even at 8.5 million.
I'm not even sure we're at 850,000.
See, I had this conversation with Checkmate
a long time ago.
I don't know if it was on a podcast
or we were just chatting.
I think it's a way lower number than people think.
And it really is very hard.
It depends how you define what someone who understands Bitcoin is.
But if you just use the metrics that you can see,
I think there's something like 25 million addresses
with more than $100 of Bitcoin.
And as you know, people will own...
If you've been DCAing for five years
at more than $100 a month,
you'll own more than 60 of them yourself.
So I think if you count owning self-custody Bitcoin as understanding Bitcoin, it's probably like less than 5 million.
Oh, yeah, for sure.
Well, yeah, and it depends on your definition, right?
Like some people will say, well, you know, this person's got proxied, proxied, proxied, proxied exposure in their proxied 401k that's proxied by the BlackRock ETF or whatever.
And so they technically have exposure.
But that's not how I would consider adoption.
I find that, frankly, meaningless.
Because if some money manager flips a switch,
now all of a sudden they're unadopted.
I consider it adopted.
You understand what money is.
You understand why it's valuable.
You understand what this whole thing is supposed to do.
Even vaguely.
And whether you want to own the ETF or real Bitcoin,
that part's irrelevant.
But it's adopted in a way that's meaningful
and that you get it.
um i and anyways i'm uh ranting and complaining to my fiance and she makes this point of like
well why don you do something about it and it was one of those moments where i was like you right Because she like well it doesn sound like Coinbase is educating people in the way that you want And it doesn sound like you know these treasury companies are educating people in the way that you want
So, like, why don't you do it?
I'm like, well, you know, like, you know, that's not Wall Street and, you know, the business.
And she's like, but why do you care?
Like, that doesn't seem like that's what it's about and what you're about and what, like, this means to you.
and to all the people because it was a very endearing,
so right in the middle of like a lot of this
and was going through like a decently tough time,
we were touring wedding venues, my fiance and I.
So it was really like a weird time, right?
Because in my professional life, I'm like, oh my goodness,
I shouldn't be leading this thing
that has diverged from what I wanted to build.
But then you go on a wedding tour and you're like,
this is where I say I do
and this is where my family's going to start.
And like, you know, hey, you want a glass of champagne?
I'm like, I guess.
I mean, sure, I feel guilty drinking this.
And we kept, it was almost,
it had to have been like fate or something.
Every day, multiple times, people come running up,
say, are you Jack?
Yeah, sorry, I'm going to, you know,
I don't want to take away from my fiance.
She had enough of the Bitcoin stuff.
She wants to get married.
And like, oh, no, I just I need to tell you you're the reason I understand Bitcoin and or you're the reason my dad finally got it.
Or the keynote you gave in Prague was like enough for me to like fully commit and like believe that there's a way out.
And that or or I don't feel alone.
Like you distilling these ideas makes me realize that it's not me.
I'm not a weirdo.
I'm not fucked up.
the world's fucked up and that like there's a community of people that are working on it
and that i could join that just by dcaing a little bit and this was happening multiple times a day
and my fiance was sitting there watching it and she was just like dude like you you have it right
here and like if one percent of the world is gonna like come to understand what this is all about
like you do that and who cares like strike makes money and it's successful and like doesn't
need to be the biggest and the wall streetist and the whatever ist like that is where you seem like
happy and passionate and motivated and that's also like what people have grown to appreciate
out of you like i don't think people need you to be this like you know thing and by the way i didn't
start 21 to become like a wall street conglomerate but anyway i like that was like a really like
touring that wedding venues. And I'm very grateful for all the Bitcoiners that stopped
and said hi and said those encouraging things. Cause, uh, yeah, my, my fiance was like, dude,
I think you can orange bill 1% of the world. Like if anyone's going to do it, like who's going to do
it? Like you should spend some of your time, like instead of, you know, corporate cogging. Um,
so any who, she's totally right as well. Um, like it wasn't you that got me into Bitcoin,
but I do remember there's a couple of talks you've done at conferences,
especially the one you did at Madeira about the time chain
that made me reconsider the way that Bitcoin works and rethink it.
Like you are brilliant.
I think that's a very good thing to have on team Bitcoin.
Yeah. You know, it's funny.
So another revelation is I did the Bitcoin conference
where I talked about, you know, Tether posts, blog posts.
And like I said, I'm directionally aligned with the vision
of like creating this Bitcoin thing.
And if Strike needs to be a part of it, let's figure that out.
and I talked about that and was supportive of the board and Tether and hey, let's go try and meet
and figure that out. People hated it, right? People hated the talk. It's not what they think
they're going to get from you. Exactly. So, but you got to understand, Danny, I'm not a character.
I'm not an actor. Like what I've got to be as close to like what you see is what you actually
Like there's no difference between the screen and like in real life.
That's what I was saying earlier about the authenticity.
That's why people love you.
Yeah.
And I, and I, and I think it's not even authenticity.
I think it's also the integrity.
Yep.
It's being able to like, look, you know, whatever, Wall Street or whatever in the eye and say,
you know, like you point a gun at me.
I tell you, shoot it, shoot it.
I'm not like, I'm not moving a muscle.
I think it's integrity too.
But anyway, about the keynote, my most, like the keynotes people love the most are not about my businesses or me.
It's about Bitcoin.
And it's this revelation of like, people want me to, orange pill folks, and people want me to build tools for Bitcoiners.
And that's where I've found like a life glitch of purpose
and passion and like something I could do forever And that I guess why I fully full of energy and full of enthusiasm despite just like getting my ass kicked and getting punched in the mouth
like pretty bad and failing publicly in a fairly embarrassing way is because like these revelations
of like, I shouldn't do keynotes about, and obviously some of my employees are investors
are like, no, no, no, you should talk about strike. And of course, like probably people,
hopefully people support me over time by using our products.
But yeah, that of like people saying like,
I don't want you to talk about 21 or what,
I want you to talk about Bitcoin and hope and this revolution
and want you to like lead in a way.
And that's something that you can do in like that most other business owners,
even within the Bitcoin space can't like every,
every keynote now is about a company at these big conferences. There's very few that are actually
about Bitcoin and it used to only be about Bitcoin really. But if you put the CEO of Robinhood,
I don't know, on stage at the Bitcoin conference, like he can't talk about Bitcoin like you can.
That's like, that's a huge advantage you have. Yeah, I could. It's a, I mean, it's a very
counterintuitive business strategy is like, don't do any marketing. Don't talk about yourself at all.
Do right for the mission and for the vision and for everyone else. And then, you know,
hopefully it's reciprocated back by people supporting you through product
through using your products like you could buy bitcoin a million places
why would you buy it here well you know we have good fees and free withdrawals and all the good
stuff but then also like you resonate with who i am and who we are it's a it's a counterintuitive
idea and i have no idea if it's like scientifically sound and if that's gonna work but the point is
like, I'm okay. There was people doing all the Twitter clipping where they clip your videos
out of context and post it for views and everyone gets in a fight. And there's a clip that goes
viral constantly, which is like, I said, we wanted to own the most Bitcoin in the world,
which is, of course, who doesn't, right? But it should be known, I don't need to.
I don't need to
the Bitcoins don't generate yield
they don't give you any more power over the protocol
they sit there
and I'm not saying that
less is more in Bitcoin
that's certainly not the case
especially if something finitely scarce
more is more
but the point is I don't need that
and that was like one of the very painful things
of my ego
I see opportunities
I have big business partners
I can list a public equity and I can, I can, I can.
And it was like, the ego has to die once more.
And the integrity and the humility has to be proven.
Because it's one thing to say, I'm not for sale
and my principles aren't for sale.
My voice isn't for sale.
But it's another for someone to put a check
in front of your face and say like, well, actually.
and then for me to you know really feel what it means for bitcoiners around the world
to feel inspired and and feel uh connected to me and what i represent and then you know to have the
you know and to really like be tested to the fire in that way it's different and i learned all of
that i was very excited like part of where i'm going to be spending more my time is content
of just like, yeah, I don't think Coinbase is going to do a lot of like specific orange
pilling.
Like why?
And I don't know if me creating tons of really well-produced videos and like commercials
on what is money, Austrian theory, free markets.
I don't know if that's going to make me a lot of money or make me a lot of sats per share.
I don't know, but I don't care.
you know and I mean
yeah Satoshi
Hal you know like
they didn't either
so I don't know
to each their own but
I think that's awesome I just have one last question on the 21 stuff
and then I've got a ton of other things I want to talk to you about
yeah yeah I mean we could go as long as you want
when so I know your dad
has been a mentor to you throughout your entire
sort of business career for anyone who doesn't know
he's also like an OG Bitcoiner
he's quite
to the point, I think would be fair.
Yeah.
I'd be really curious
if he gave you any advice through this.
I was thinking about it on the way over.
Oh my goodness.
I mean, what's funny is my dad sold his first business
for, I mean, I'm not going to like overly dox
and share my family's history,
but for like the revenue that Strike generates
and like a, so like a minuscule number relative to where this Bitcoin stuff has taken us. Like
people view my father or my family because of some wiki page that they found as like this all dominant banking empire I mean Strike you know like I said generates more revenue than the total value
of my dad's company in a short amount of time.
And my dad's, like, it's all Bitcoin.
Like, we're just early to Bitcoin,
very lucky, good timing.
And it's funny because my dad,
the first time someone wanted to acquire Strike
was in 2021.
I don't know if I've ever told this story,
but I called my dad and I said,
well, dude, this is like an amount of money I never thought. Like, what the hell? Should I sign it?
And he told me, yeah. Like, duh. Are you crazy? And I ended up not, obviously, and for similar
reasons. But then he's always said, you know, my son has more ambition in his pinky than I do
in 10 times of my body. My son is out of his fucking mind. He's a crazy lunatic. He's like,
going to build a revolution and stand on principles and integrity. And like, I mean,
I would have sold strike years ago. So I think there's that part of my dad, which I just find
kind of funny. He's more of a traitor than, but the part of my dad that I've taken with me that
is incredibly meaningful in all, in the advice and my experiences is the integrity and what it
means to be a man and a good person. Like he, when I had conversations with him about it,
he said, um, the difference between a good man and a great man, an honorable man, an integral man
is doing the right thing, no matter how hard it is, because people don't appreciate that doing
the right thing is not for lack of understanding what is right. You know, what is right. You know
that eating the chicken is better for you than eating the donut. You know that going to the gym
is better than sitting on the couch. You know these things within you. But the question is,
what level of commitment do you have to doing what's right, despite how difficult it may be?
And he was just very supportive of like, you know in your heart what's right. Don't convince yourself
that it's more complicated than that.
And you're a great man,
and I've raised you to be a great man.
And the difficult part, but the worthy part,
is committing to doing it
despite how challenging it may be.
Failing in public, taking the criticism,
not being able to tell the full story,
dealing with the consequences of mistakes.
Like, that's the hard part.
The easier part might have been taking a bunch of money
and taking a bunch of access and stuff
and, you know, the company might work, it might not, it might be aligned with me, it might not,
but, you know, beggars can't be choosers. And he's like, that was probably easier.
Sometimes the easy thing to do is to avoid the hard thing. And so that, you know, despite,
it's funny, like he can't believe the level of ambition and where my career has gone,
but still at the core is just where I get my integrity from and, and, uh, humility and, and,
and, uh, kind of just like, uh, I'm fearless and, uh, not afraid to fail and own it and stuff like
that comes from him. That's awesome. Um, is there anything else on the 21 before we move on
on the 21 thing? You tell me, man. I mean, I've asked all the things that were major questions
for me. I didn't know if there's anything else that you kind of almost wanted to get off your
chest though. I don't think so. I mean, you know, I'll just reiterate like 21 is a company and we
built a thing and the thing has 43,514 Bitcoin and it's listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
So access to capital markets is a huge advantage. Having that much Bitcoin is a huge advantage.
And I think the company can go on and be great. And I believe in the people that are on the board and I believe in Giancarlo and Tether. And so I don't know. Sometimes I see people say, you rug pulled me. And I get it. I'm not disowning outcomes and I'm not pointing fingers.
but like it's still a company and it and it can go on and do great things um the announcement was
more that i'm not the right person to lead it anymore because of the divergence between
the company's beliefs and my beliefs and um lessons have been learned albeit painfully
and i'm very grateful to be in the position i am now i'm very excited to do bitcoin my way and
and create more content and I'm back.
Let's go.
You ready for the gear shift of all gear shifts?
Yeah.
Can we talk a bit about markets?
Yes.
So I've done a few shows over the last week that have,
I feel like they've crystallized
what I think is gonna happen next.
that's going to potentially age like milk.
But especially a conversation I had with Luke Groman yesterday,
and that show will actually go out after this one.
But we were talking about the AI CapEx boom,
and if that's sort of reaching its end point.
We were talking about how it's kind of almost a sprinkling of 2001 and 2008 at the same time.
And I've got this sort of thought in my head that,
does the AI CapEx slow down at the same time as sort of China open weight models
sort of take over and potentially become very, very competitive with the frontier labs.
And what situation does that then put the US government in? And it seems like the obvious
answer is they then regulate the Chinese companies. They probably have to print a ton of money if these
AI frontier labs seem too big to fail. And is that where we get sort of the next big print?
probably um i like i would assume to me it's very simple like um why does anyone borrow money in the
first place well you know you're you're pulling forward your future that's what borrowing money
and incurring debt is is you're taking future productivity uh and you're spending it today so
You're taking future time, energy, effort, labor, all of the money things I go on about.
And you're spending it now.
And you're doing so because you think you can actually arrive at that future state with more than if you didn't.
So you have to pay that debt back.
You have to produce profits.
And you have all these companies that have borrowed a tremendous amount of money with no seemingly obvious way of paying it back.
And so you keep seeing the can being kicked from, well, we're going to borrow from your classic venture capitalists like SoftBank.
And then we're going to borrow from Oracle.
And then Oracle's creditworthiness looks awful.
And so they've now kicked it to NVIDIA, which happened this week.
I don't know if you and Luke had an opportunity to talk about that.
I mean, NVIDIA backstopping $250 billion of an open AI build out in Ohio is outrageous.
That's 135% of their retained earnings.
I mean, that's an astronomically high number.
and their stock got hit for that.
And then you would assume
that this is going to continually get kicked up
to ultimately who's paying for financing something
that may not be productive enough
to make everyone whole for it.
And the part that I assume you talked about, Luke,
with China is, well, if OpenAI, for example,
they're the most, it's the economics around OpenAI,
the amount they've borrowed, the lack of their path to profitability is like the cleanest target
to talk about. But it's for all of, I mean, Anthropic as well. But if you borrow a billion
dollars, assuming you're going to have X amount market share, be able to charge X amount, and then
China comes out and it's, you know, a hundred times cheaper and about as good. Well, then
your credit worthiness and your ability to pay back really takes a hit. And so it's become
abundantly clear that this cost is going to have to be realized by somebody, that it's not clear
that there hasn't been malinvestment and there isn't going to be losses that have to be realized.
And this is at the scale of trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars. Now,
when it comes to politics, according to the Trump administration, they claim that AI is a race that
we must win strategically against China. They also have declared it a national security threat if we
don't win. So across the like political sphere of elevating this to supreme importance, they've used
all of them, you know, strategic national security threat, you know, and it is the economy war,
right. I mean, it also is representative of all of the GDP growth, right. And so if that were to
slow down all of the job creation, all the re-industrialization that's going on. And so,
yeah, you, you now, now you have a very classic political question, unfortunately, seemingly
someone has to lose is where this looks like it's going. It doesn't look like everyone that borrowed
money is going to be able to pay it back. The productivity was as planned. And it's not that
AI isn't awesome. I think AI is great. It's here to stay. It's that, wait a second, did anyone
realize that China was going to have open source, like near free competitors to a business that
needs to somehow make whole on like trillions of dollars that says they don't view profitability
until like 2035. Like did anyone like, so someone has to lose. There's been malinvestment. And
ultimately it sounds like it's going to be a question of the government and the central bank
of like, who's going to lose? Are you going to let, and the other problem is all of the Mag7,
like all of these big tech companies are now looped into this. They've gone from extremely
cashflow positive cash generating businesses to businesses that carry debt that are no longer
participating in stock buybacks.
So you've got the most heavily weighted S&P 500
in the US capital markets, which is the United States
savings account.
So if you let the AI trade in large part unwind and fail then the NVIDIAs and the Googles and the Metas and stuff will take a big hit They take a big hit Then U wealth takes a big hit
And so it's a question of like who is allowed to fail.
And if no one's allowed to fail, well, then yeah, then you have to paper it over with printed capital.
Do you think they are already too big to fail?
No one's too big to fail.
Again, these are political.
We have invented man-made conditions
to allow ourselves to decide who's too big to fail.
In the most basic form of pure free markets
in Austrian theory, there's no one too big to fail.
You fail, it's like a form of Darwinism.
The giraffe with a neck not long enough to eat died.
That's not a good or bad thing.
That's the natural thing.
That's evolutionary.
That's science.
And so if you borrow a bunch of money and spend said money with an inability to pay it back, your future is not up to you.
People need to understand a business's biggest competitor always is their costs.
You're only competing against your costs because your right to wake up and continue to run your business is if you're earning more than it costs you to run it, period.
And so if you're not in that position, your future is not up to you.
It's up to Oracle.
It's up to now NVIDIA.
And eventually, it'll be up to the US government.
So these are all man-made constructs that are recent.
So do I think that the US government will let them fail?
No, I don't.
I think that we will print the money.
But yeah, that is increasingly where this is all headed.
And I think what Luke is probably getting at,
and that this is more like 2008 than 2000,
you know, people say, oh, this is the dot-com bubble,
and it's online.
But the dot-com bubble was over-exuberance about the future of technology and the internet,
meaning the equities were just valued too much.
We were too excited and too rewarding of what these businesses could produce in the near-term future.
And the value of the equities just had to come down.
The problem with AI companies is they're not software companies.
They're like real estate companies almost.
You know, when you see Google go from producing ungodly amounts of cash and taking that cash and plowing it into the equity, like that's what gets you these crazy premiums is because the largest purchaser of the stock is the person printing billions of dollars where their costs are relatively fixed and they're able to still grow.
Now, all of a sudden, Google's riddled with debt and they're issuing ATM equity.
They're diluting the equity to finance this stuff.
So that's not over exuberance of equity based on the future.
That's like, wait, that's more like 2008 real estate market.
So I assume that was the Luke conversation.
Yeah, that was basically it.
And the thing that Luke said, obviously in a healthy market,
he was saying, if you're too big, well, get smaller is the answer.
But it's whether the US government will let them get smaller
because of those national security implications,
as well as the fact that they're driving all the economy GDP growth.
Yeah. I mean, I agree with all of that.
And it's also, you know, again, the problem is if you're too big, get smaller, sure.
But after you've borrowed so much, get smaller is not an option.
You have to produce the productivity necessary to pay that back.
I mean, you want to take an example. What about the $40 trillion of debt the United States is in?
Well, should the United States just get smaller? That's not an option. They have to find the growth
necessary to pay that back. And it will be some combination of hopefully productivity through
innovation in America combined with debasement of the debt. Now, how is that? Is that split 50-50
or is it split 199? It will probably be lots of inflation and deficit monetization. But yeah,
I don't know if they can get smaller, both because the US government probably wouldn't
want that competitively, but also because, again, like someone has to, you got to, and
the way that these companies do it is they're refinancing based on their equity.
So, and I assume, you know, so one of the issues is what they keep doing is they take
on a bunch of financial obligations.
They borrow a bunch of money.
We're building all these data centers.
We're doing all this shit.
And then they raise a private venture capital round that values the equity up, which then
allows them to refinance everything because their equity capital is now worth more.
Like OpenAI goes from being worth $8 billion to $80 billion to $800 billion.
And then you can continue to refinance that.
But then my suspicion of why these businesses halted going public is because you know who's
not as giving and as easy as the public market?
The public markets aren't going to be like, oh, I'll give you this markup.
We believe in the roadmap.
Send the deck to my email.
The public markets are a bit more ruthless, and they also involve
foreign capital.
And if there a war sometimes things trade down for things that are outside of your control And if these companies lose the equity value and that starts to drop then they lose the ability to refinance it
I mean, OpenAI already is not creditworthy enough
to borrow from a bank.
This is why they need NVIDIA to step in.
There's effectively a bank is saying,
we don't believe in your ability to backstop all of this.
Like we need someone who's far more creditworthy
to be able to step in and say, no, no, no.
if shit hits the fan, I'll handle it. So yeah, it's a mess. I do not think it's going to end well.
I think there's been malinvestment. And I also do not think the United States can ban
Chinese models either. I know that you said you think that's what they might do. I do not
think that. I don't know if it is what they'll do, but there's been talk of it. Like people
have been talking about whether regulation is going to be the way to get through this. But
the interesting thing is if it does come down to the treasury department and the Fed to kind of
backstop these major companies. It's going to be the most politically unpopular decision ever.
Like people already hate the data centers. They hate, they're very scared of AI. And like, if you
look back at 2008, it's like, we print money or you all lose your houses. Like that was relatively
politically palatable. I think COVID it's like, no one really knew what was happening. It kind of
makes sense in the moment, but this one doesn't. And I don't know if it will to most of the Americans,
But I'm not sure anything has been politically popular for a long time.
That's fair.
I think trust in government and institutions, according to recent polling, is still under 30% and declining.
So I don't think the people believe in what big corporations and government has been telling them for a while.
I don't think that AI is piercing through a layer of trust that we had before ChatGVT hit the app stores.
I don't think that's the case.
I mean, what's going on in New York is equally as polarizing, but just on the opposite side of the spectrum.
Totally.
So, yeah, I think the system is crumbling upon itself.
I would recommend everyone read a book called The End Times by Peter Turchin.
Luke recommended the same book.
Oh, did he?
Yeah.
I mean, he's a really fascinating guy.
He basically takes science and math and tries to make sense of history.
and so he looks at the fall of empires and you know cyclical behavior in human history
of like the roman empire grows achieves great things and eventually collapse and oh there's
chinese empires that had similar behavior like is there any mathematical correlation there that we
can identify and future project to try and understand mistakes that we shouldn't make
and the two core kpis that he comes up with for an empire that would you know is in potential
decline is a decline of wage growth. So things are going up in price and you're not getting
compensated. So there's a divergence between the price of things and how much you're getting
compensated in real terms. So the decline of growth of wages. And then the other is what he
calls elite overproduction, where you are producing more elite aspirers, potential elites,
which I consider, you know, you go to a coastal university, you want to be a lawyer, you want to
be the president, you want to be a hedge fund manager, you know, like that's what it means now
to afford the American dream. You cannot be a blue collar welder, you cannot be a handmade
manufacturer. So all of those jobs, you know, because of the printed money and the globalism
are now elsewhere.
So in order to make a life for yourself in this country,
you have to be a coastal elitist.
And the problem is there's just not enough room
for everybody.
And he makes this point that, well,
when you think of revolutionaries, you assume, well,
it's the poor that must be taking out the pitchforks
or pointing the guns at people and threatening to shoot up
and protesting.
And that's actually not true.
You know, the poorest, you know, the homeless people
in Chicago are not like, didn't put a bullet
into Charlie Kirk.
It was a university-educated kid.
And it's elite aspirants that realize
there's not enough room for them.
And the combination of those two,
this guy identifies as a leading indicator
for an empire in decline,
is where the real wages can't keep up
with the prices of the goods and services,
and there's too many elites aspiring
and not enough room for them.
And that's when you get revolutionary
forth-turning tendencies.
So that's what I think is happening.
Yeah, I mean, I think...
it's just from looking around,
it feels like that's what's happening.
Yeah.
Do you think, like we talk about it in Bitcoin all the time,
this sort of death of fiat currency,
the death of the dollar.
Do you think it's happening?
Because like essentially what you're saying is
malinvestment's got us here.
And if the Fed and the treasury do step in
and try and prop these too big to fail AI companies up,
it's like malinvestment on malinvestment.
And when does that spiral end?
Like, do you think this is the,
not the start of the end but we in the end times of this It could be but you know you got to define end What end to you End is hyperinflation of the currency Like no dollar at all
Maybe not no dollar at all, but like huge, huge levels of inflation.
I think, I don't know exactly how you define the end,
but I think you'll know the end when you see it.
Yeah.
So that, but I think that's kind of the issue with this conversation is that,
you know, was COVID the end of fiat?
It feels like a lot of these may be the start of the end.
Right, right. But like COVID could have been. I mean, we had double digit inflation in the United
States and you saw incredible amounts of asset inflation. And so, I mean, you could make the
argument that like, yeah, I mean, know the end when you see it, but it's the market can remain
irrational longer than you can remain solvent type of thing. It feels like a tower that to your point
has already been tipped over and is falling, but the fall could take what amount of time and when
is it technically fallen? Like when it's already like elevated off the ground, but not totally
on the cement. So I don't know, but yeah, I agree with the, I do think that treasuries,
like sovereign debt as the reserve asset of the world, that's changing today, already has been.
Like central banks have not added on net to the sovereign paper, US sovereign paper, in like a decade.
And they've been buying gold.
And now gold balances have exceeded these paper fiat currency balances.
And so I think that, I think we're seeing a repricing of the world.
People are repricing down fiat paper claims.
And that has been happening.
And I do agree with you that that'll, and so that looks like a significantly higher gold,
to significantly higher Bitcoin, significantly higher assets.
But, you know, does that mean the dollar is ending?
I don't know.
It just depends on your definition.
The dollar has ended for me a long time ago.
I don't use it much, if ever.
So it depends.
I'm a bit of a hypocrite for saying this,
because if you'd have told me 10 years ago
when I first got into Bitcoin
that the price would be $65,000,
I wouldn't have believed you.
But at the same time, I look at what's going on,
and I'm like, how is Bitcoin this cheap right now?
And you said earlier in the show,
you were like, we didn't really have a bull market.
You don't think we had a bull market in 2025.
Like what's happening?
Why do you think we are still here?
Because to me, Bitcoin,
it's the only free market we have left, truly free.
And so for that reason, to steal a Luke Groman line,
it's like the last functioning smoke alarm
of fiat liquidity.
So it somehow is the only thing
that's able to tell us the truth,
or at least it tells us the truth
in real time. Everything else seems to lag. And so to me, Bitcoin is just expressing
the dire straits that fiat is in. It's effectively telling me, so if it's a fiat liquidity smoke
alarm, what it's telling me is there's not enough liquidity in the system to support all of this.
So all these people have borrowed all this money and there's not enough productivity to make
everybody whole. And so that's what it's saying, which I think is a very honest view. Like when
Bitcoin started to fall in the beginning of this year and took a tumble. And everyone's like, well,
gold's still up and equity's still up. Well, just give it a second. Give it a few months because
these things, you know, they don't trade on weekends. They're circuit breakers. They're
central planning and intervention. I mean, the essay that I wrote was about how Bitcoin is so
free that it, you know, however bad you think bear markets can get, they will get worse. And
however good you think bull markets can get, they will get better because it is the most natural way
for you to experience the world as it actually is
because there's no one in the middle
editing your version of reality.
Everything else around us is like a sanded down version
where like the sharp edges are rounded off.
And so everything else gets towards
what Bitcoin has been expressing for some time
is there's just not enough fiat for this thing to work.
And so whether that means people are going to fail
or the US government's going to have to,
and the central bank's going to have to create more fiat
to make it work,
That's all Bitcoin has been continuously expressing. And you get these weird moments where after Silicon Valley Bank collapsed, Janet Yellen did some very clever financing in draining the reverse repo facility.
And that gave Bitcoin some legs to have what we would consider the 2020, what was that, 3 to 2025 run.
But I don't think that there's been a full business cycle.
I mean, rates have remained high.
Monetary policy has remained tight.
Even now, Kevin Warsh has remained what he claims to be a hawk.
We might have a cut this week.
And so monetary policy since that 2021 era has been tight.
I mean, the Fed has drastically reduced its balance sheet.
The business cycle has been fairly depressed.
And I think Bitcoin is telling you that very honestly.
And until they start providing the liquidity
that is necessary to make the system whole,
won't run. Is that? It makes total sense. But does Bitcoin need the central bank to start
cutting rates for it to run? Like when does it break out of this sort of tech trade that it's
become? I'm not sure. I mean, I don't, you know, when people get frustrated by the correlation to
tech, I don't know. I've always viewed Bitcoin as some combination of technology plus fiat
liquidity. It is a technology. It is software that solved a previously impossible computer
science problem. So it is innovative. It's disruptive. It is dematerializing existing
industries and creating new ones. And so in that respect, it is technology. And you can
try and price future growth based on activity. And you mentioned addresses that hold certain
amounts and all of that stuff. And then the other combination is it is a reflection of
fiat liquidity, like in many respects, Bitcoin is priced on the expectation of future fiat.
And so when the expectation of future fiat, like if Warsh comes out and says, I'm cutting
interest rates by 300 basis points, like Bitcoin is going to fly because the expectation of future
credit and fiat in the system is drastically rising. And so then there's Bitcoin as well.
And so it's some weird combination of that. And like people get very frustrated. It's like, no,
it's just like a tech stock. I don't think so. Oh, it's just like gold. I don't know about that.
So will it ever like fully decouple?
I don't know.
I don't know why it should need to.
I think your question is,
when will Bitcoin act more risk off as opposed to risk on?
Well, it feels like it should be both.
Right, but what does that mean?
Always go up.
Yeah, which is like, you know,
why isn't Bitcoin always going up?
Well, you know, you can answer that question.
And the other thing too, that I think is fascinating
I've gone through the mental exercise, which is probably helpful for others, which is,
well, why aren't central banks and governments adopting Bitcoin today in size?
And I asked, well, could they have adopted it on the first block?
Like the very first 50 Bitcoin that were mined,
could the United, would the United States have started to like sovereignly hold
you know, a real treasury in that? And the answer is no, because it was,
it didn't have the skeletal build to support liquidity and trade that big. Because the next
block was another 50 Bitcoins. And so you would have gotten debased heavily because you would have
gone from, I own 50 out of 50 to I own 50 out of 100. That's serious inflation. That's 100%
inflation. And so the early Bitcoin supply was extremely inflationary and it incentivized a
tremendous amount of speculation. You know, Satoshi begged speculators to come and speculate on
Bitcoin. He begged them because he's basically, you know, cutting the issuance in half and
basically saying, if you want to get in early on this thing, you only have so much time. You can't
wait to see if it works because then you're too late. And he built this curve on purpose.
But it was so inflationary in the beginning that like no large, you know, the government can't buy.
I mean, China's trade surplus was a trillion dollars last year. That's like the size of the
entire Bitcoin market. So it also has this interesting, like it's not a problem, but it
has this, it's skeletal frame can only support so much mass as well. It's a great thing. It means
that the people who are cleaning toilets and selling baklava got to get Bitcoin early.
Correct.
Shout out Mandrake.
But Danny, it's such a prescient point that needs to be understood.
Somehow Satoshi engineered the thing to make sure that it got distributed to the people.
And people say, well, it's because he leaked it on a mailing list.
Probably true.
Well, it's because it was anarchist, libertarian, cypherpunk leaning.
Probably true.
But it also is almost like scientific because you could not have aped into this thing early on.
It was far too inflationary.
It was far too volatile.
The float of the thing was not large enough.
Float meaning how much liquid supply was actually active because I can't get in and out with
any like real liquidity until it was far more mature.
Like strategy as we know it today could not have existed when Saylor first wrote Bitcoin off.
It just couldn't have because of the skeletal frame.
So the only people that functionally could have spent time understanding it and adopting it were the individual.
It almost was forcefully a bottoms-up movement by design, which I don't know how much of that was purposeful.
We never will.
But it's an unbelievable achievement to somehow build something that is, how do you fairly distribute new money without knowing anyone's name,
without having them registered anywhere central and do it in a way where it becomes bottoms
up and individually owned so much so that now that it's a trillion dollar asset, it's
fairly impossible to corner the market or to take it over So yeah I think like I got into Bitcoin before Sailor Sailor getting into Bitcoin before governments And I think that a good thing
And I think it's by design.
And so why isn't Bitcoin up only hyper-Bitcoinization?
It's like, well, there's almost like physical limitations
to, you know, like if you're a central bank,
you know, someone asked me on my podcast
during the live Q&A yesterday,
said, well, why doesn't the United States,
China's buying a lot of gold, record amounts of gold. They're clearly remonetizing gold. And if
they're our enemy, why don't we sell all of our gold, crash the gold price, and buy a bunch of
Bitcoins? It's like, well, Bitcoin's only worth a trillion dollars. So if Bitcoin's going to become
a $50 trillion asset and the United States is going to own 49 trillion of it and then sell it
to who? And to themselves? It's going to be adopted in this very methodical
way. I think that's the really key point. It's like, we don't know if that was on purpose or
if that was an accident of the design, but we do know it's the only reason it's still here and it's
still interesting because if it didn't have that supply schedule, it just wouldn't be.
If Satoshi went to Goldman Sachs and said, hey, I solved the Byzantine Generals problem. I'd like
to IPO it on the New York Stock Exchange. Bitcoin would have failed. So it is a miracle. And the
innovation of using proof of work to say, you know, the current, because everyone is purchasing
Bitcoin, whether with fiat currency on strike or in mother nature's currency, which is energy.
But you have to do real work in the real world to get Bitcoins. No one's ever gotten them for free.
Apart from when they had the, what were they called? The faucets.
Sure. But that was someone else donating their real work in the real world. But the point is
Bitcoin has a very strict policy that you have to expend real work that someone else values in
order to obtain this thing. And the currency Satoshi used to fairly distribute Bitcoin is,
I'll take energy in exchange for newly minted coins. And it's not he'll take energy. The network
will take energy and use energy in exchange for newly minted coins. And it's such an ingenious
idea of that's how I'll decide who gets it. Not by their skin color, not by their eye color,
not by their hair color, but by whoever's able to harness the cheapest energy and channel it to
the network. And then to have the insight on top of that, well, what if everyone figures it out
and starts channeling a bunch of energy to the network? Or what if people get disenthused
and take the energy off of the network? How do we give it a consistent heartbeat?
Because if the thing starts beating too fast, it's going to have a heart attack.
If it doesn't beat enough, it's going to die because lack of blood flow. So how does it beat
just enough every 10 minutes on average? And to layer on the difficulty adjustment on top of that
And so that Bitcoin has a predictable heartbeat that everyone can rely on.
And the heart is going to beat a certain amount of time in the early days, which will bring
a certain crowd and bring the individual and not necessarily have the physical frame for
the institutions and the sovereigns to be able to actually monetize it.
And only 20 years later, it's a remarkable achievement.
It's probably one of the most impressive things I've ever seen.
Yeah, I don't know about you, but it still blows my mind the way that it was designed. And again, you have to just assume that everything was intentional because it's worked. But like to think this far ahead and the game theory of the whole thing, it's insane.
And going back to the first part of this episode, which is a different world, 21 and stuff,
but that's what inspires me is Satoshi, there was no ego involved. There's no statue of Satoshi,
he's not on Time Magazine. He didn't take the Bitcoins that he mined early. Yeah, the guy just
wanted, but that didn't represent lack of ambition just because, right? But the guy,
yeah, he cared deeply about building and crafting something that worked and solved a very specific
problem. And it was good enough to last long enough to then bleed into solving like many other
problems. But I don't think Satoshi had the ambition of fix the money, fix the world, or
or had the foresight to figure out that Bitcoin would also inspire people to stop eating carbs.
I don't think he had that foresight.
I think he was like, well, hold on a second.
The core issue with money as it exists today are the central parties that are required.
And in order for me to fix that and have a money that doesn't have that reliance,
I got to solve the Byzantine generals problem.
And it's just, okay, well, if I put that, okay, I think I solved it.
What do you guys think?
And it was just caring about the craft, the lack of ego
and the level of humility and integrity that that took
is so inspiring.
And to engineer something so well, that's so focused
and so simple and so honest that it's able to scale
and last as long as it did and grow into solving
so many other things.
So Bitcoin's won in so many ways,
but getting back to something we said earlier about the number of people who are all holding self Bitcoin do you think there been a slight failure there Because we have ETF adoption we have institutional adoption there a nation state that has Bitcoin on the balance sheet
but only, let's guess, 5 million people holding on-chain Bitcoin.
Is that a failure?
No, I don't think so.
You know, like when I was saying Bitcoin adoption,
I'm thinking people have a vague understanding
or some remote understanding of what it is and why it's different,
and why it's important.
I would say a lot of the ETF holders have that.
Like I would say Larry Fink has that.
A lot of the fund managers that I meet
that get exposure via the ETF have that.
And that's to me what matters
because it's the conscious, you know,
people say I'm in it for the technology.
I'm not in it for the price.
That's what-
I'm in it for both.
Right.
But you know, your question,
it doesn't imply that,
but it alludes to this culture of like,
what's ETF adoption if it isn't, you know, someone holding their own keys? Like, we're in it for the
tech. We're in it for the revolution. We're not in it for, you know, for the number go up. And my
response to that is the number go up is the only metric that matters in Bitcoin because it tells
us how much of the world is storing their cash balance, their time, energy effort, how much of
the world is monetizing Bitcoin. That's the only thing that matters. When the price goes up, Bitcoin
is getting more adopted. When the price goes down, Bitcoin is getting less adopted because people
are storing less of their effort and less of their future in this thing. And so to me, that's what
matters. And if people can, people are, cause every single day you have to make a monetary
decision. People don't appreciate that. Every single day I wake up and I say, okay, I'm storing
my future and the work I've done in the past in Bitcoin. Do I still want to do that? And I make
a conscious decision. Yeah, I do. I almost re-employ Bitcoin to be my money and weapon of
choice to provide for my future and protect the work I've done in the past every day. I wake up,
I go, yep, this is still the right choice. And so the fact that people are making those decisions
at the margin via the ETF, via these instruments, that's fine. Of course, I think that there's
counterparty risk implied in that. And then the most pure expression of Bitcoin is owning it in
cold storage, buying the physical. I'm not comfortable holding it with the state or with
a fund or whatever. But to me, adoption is making that conscious decision at the margins of,
okay, I could do treasuries, I could do dollars, I could do Nvidia stock. Nah, I'm going to do
Bitcoin. And that's, we're monetizing a thing in real time. To me, that's adoption, you know?
Yeah, makes sense. Why do you think that gold had a bull run last year when we didn't? Because
you would expect the two to move in tandem and every bull run we've broken new all-time highs
versus gold? Because I think that China is the answer. I think that gold is being reintroduced
into the financial system as a reserve asset. And I think a lot of that was East and China.
And I don't know if who was buying gold in size was competing. Gold was competing with Bitcoin.
I don't know if Bitcoin was an option. I view it as they were rejecting the notion of sovereign debt and treasuries and re-monetizing a neutral thing.
But I don't think Bitcoin was actually competing for that monetary use case. It's just not big enough.
and so that is my honest answer
because going back to what we were talking about
Bitcoin implied in it is individual and retail adoption
implied in it is small medium sized businesses
and now institutions and treasury company adoption and stuff
there is not a sovereign bid yet
and so the fact that so many central banks
and China and everyone was
If you look at the growth of the Chinese international payment system, I think that's it, C-I-P-E-S, skyrocketing.
And people are settling trade in their currency, but their currency is effectively gold-backed at this point because they're taking all of their trade surplus and they're just recycling it into gold.
And so you're seeing this like re-monetization, this reintroduction.
And the US government is actually exporting non-monetary gold to help settle trade deficits.
And so I think gold is, I think it's good.
Well, it's good for Bitcoin because it's promotional of the long-term thesis that sovereign debt and paper claims are worthless.
Right. And, but it just was a different bid.
It was a different bid.
the liquidity hasn flowed all the way down yet It this kind of K thing And you think that just again we too small Yeah well so it
I would say it's just a practical question of,
okay, China wants to,
so let's say China's bought trillions of dollars of gold
over the last few years.
Like how would they have,
let's say they wanted to do it, like how?
But like, are you surprised they didn't even do
even 1% in Bitcoin?
No, but who's to say they didn't?
True.
I think they are.
If I were a sovereign and I knew that I couldn't take trillion dollar trade surplus and smash buy, you know what I would do?
Stop mining.
Mining.
You know what they're doing?
Mining.
Yeah.
I think they are.
I wouldn't be convinced that they're not.
But that's the amazing part is like it's all fair.
Like I'm DCAing, China's mining.
Like they, I don't think they can smash buy a trillion.
And Bitcoin will build this skeletal frame with time that can be supportive of that level
of liquidity.
And I think we're getting there very, very soon because what's so important is the halvings,
cutting the inflation rate.
Now the stock to flow of Bitcoin is better than gold.
So I would say Bitcoin has achieved the skeletal frame, and now it needs a higher floating price.
The most attractive thing about a gold or about a Bitcoin is it's like a zero yielding
bond but can go infinitely high in price.
A bond can only go so high because then the yield hits zero, right?
And vice versa.
Governments won't let bonds go so low because the yield hits too high for them to afford.
So Bitcoin is like it's zero yielding, but it's infinite price.
And that's kind of like the escape hatch of all of the needed money printing and liquidity
like where's it going to go? People say, oh, they need to debase the dollar. The dollar needs to get
weaker. Sure. But against what? Probably if the currency of choice to debase the dollar against
is the Chinese currency to help rebalance this trade. But think of it this way, Danny.
If China ran this trillion dollar trade surplus, let's say, or whatever, based on the amount of,
and they didn't pour it all into gold, obviously. But let's say, based on the amount of gold that
that China has been importing and purchasing as a sovereign,
and they ran a surplus of a trillion,
and I think that was globally.
I don't know how much of that was US-specific.
What would the price of gold had to have been
for the trade to be neutral?
Does that make sense?
Yeah.
Where they ran such a...
So the amount of imported gold,
well, the way you can balance the trade is very simple.
If gold was $25,000 an ounce,
China didn't run a surplus at all.
trade was neutral. And that's like a very mind shift, interesting way to think about it as,
oh, that's what it would mean to base the dollar dramatically and rebalance the world's trade.
The answer to all of this, like I can solve the United States problem in five seconds.
Don't be the world reserve currency. What comes with that is an artificially strong currency and
artificially strong US assets because people have innate demand for your money just because they need
it for trade. They need it for settlement. They need it to repay debts. So the US currency is far
too strong. So implied in rebalancing trade and everything that everyone's talking about is gold,
25,000, Bitcoin, whatever, 1 million. But it's this idea of what's something that can float in
price and absorb all of this liquidity and all of this debasement. It's not treasuries.
That's why I think gold got a bid.
Just the world's repricing fiat paper claims lower
and everything else higher.
And Bitcoin will catch its bid eventually.
Do you think next bull market, whenever that might be,
will have a proper bull market?
Yes, I do.
Let's go.
What? That's a, you know,
the next bull market will be a bull market, of course.
I mean, a proper bull market, like we used to have.
Yeah, I do. I do.
I do. I, you know, I think I'm not sure what this Warsh guy is going to do. The market is claiming
that he's going to cut now based on. Oh, they, I thought they were still. Excuse me, excuse me,
hike. You're right. I'm sorry. Uh, that, that he's going to hike and, uh, and the math just doesn't
work. I mean, it's very likely politics related of, I think the fed board is putting a lot of
pressure on him according to Trump and he needs to look independent. Um, but he, that's very
unsustainable for a variety of reasons. And he'll likely blow someone up by doing that. Um, but
cutting is not an option either because of what seems to be sticky, fairly persistent inflation.
So yeah, I mean, someone has to lose. The loss has to be realized. Uh, standing still is not an
Like one of the most beautiful things
about the game of chess is you're not allowed to pass.
You know?
You got to make your move.
Yeah, we call it Zugswang.
Is every moves a bad move.
You wish you could say, I'm not going to move,
but you got to move.
And so,
So I assume that they'll print the money
and keep the empire alive, but we'll see.
Thank God Bitcoin exists.
Jack, this has been awesome.
Yeah, good.
I'm really genuinely excited to see what you do next.
Jack's back.
I'm back.
I think this is going to be awesome.
Thank you, man.
Yeah, thanks, dude.
Thank you.