The Sound Money Supercycle: Gold & Bitcoin vs. the Dollar

What you're telling me is that music is about to stop and we're going to be left holding the biggest bag of odorous excrement ever assembled in the history of darkness. 1974198792972000 and whatever we want to call this, it's all just the same thing over and over. We can't help ourselves. I say when we sell. Hey, OK. I say when we sell. What's going on with Bitcoin treasury companies? Is this the Super cycle that people have been talking about? Why are bond yields spiking, gold prices hitting new all time highs? How do you protect yourself in this environment? So we sat down with Jesse Kobernick this week. May not be familiar with Jesse, but he is a corporate lawyer. He's a bitcoiner and it was fun to have him on the show. He's been a friend of On Ramp for a long time. He's had great and balanced takes on the Bitcoin treasury companies and you know, he just has a great understanding of what's going on in the market. So I enjoyed this conversation and ultimately we meandered in a lot of different directions that I think you'll really enjoy. Had a lot of good laughs, but also I think a lot of great insights. So stay tuned for this one. And ultimately we talked a little bit about how do you actually protect your Bitcoin for the long haul? Of course, here at Onramp, we feel like multi institution custody is really the best way for most people to do so to make sure that not only you, but your family can access Bitcoin for generations so that you can borrow against it, so you can securely hold it, so you have insurance built around it and more. So if you're not in touch with us already, head to on rampbitcoin.com, schedule a consultation and I would love to meet you really enjoy connecting with listeners to the show. So I hope you enjoy this one. It was a good one. We are back. Am I, am I allowed to say that? Michael Brian were giving me a little bit of grief before we hit record here. But we're back. It's the last trade this week. We got Jesse Kobernick joining. Jesse is a hidden gem in this space. Jesse, I think we've been connected for a while before, way back when you were anonymous on Twitter, and now you've revealed yourself to the world and you've had some really great takes on Bitcoin, treasury companies, just market structure. You're a corporate attorney. So you have a lot of great perspectives that I think are usually missing in this space and excited for this conversation. So, Jesse, thanks for joining us. What's going on? Yeah, you bet. Thank you for having me. I'm a big fan of On Ramp and the podcast, so I appreciate it. Yeah, I'm a I'm a corporate lawyer. So sorry. Go ahead, Michael. What what's your handle on Twitter or you do you have? That out, it's just by name now. I just changed it to at Jesse Kovernick. I forget what it was before. Are you? Allowed to share? Am I allowed to say what I think it? Was what was it? Yeah. No, no, go ahead. Wasn't it like something like MKMK Ultra or something? Isn't that like, is that a Mexican or something? No. It wasn't MK Ultra. No MK Ultra. OK, so there's somebody else why I'm calling it out. Is because mission wasn't it. Yeah, see, I but there is a, there is another ultra out there that's listening because there's a lot of anons out there that listen and they comment all the time and they DM us and we appreciate it. We appreciate listeners and Jesse was one of them, but I think it was a different handle. I'm getting a mixed. Up that might be my. Other side of the housekeeping. That might be my. Did I got your alt account? Is that or? Deny. See, that's why I was asking. You know what I didn't know, but the other side of the housekeeping was we were having a discussion about, you know, Jackson and how this like, we have to maybe stop unless the audience really enjoys us, you know, just discussing his financial and personal matters. They do. I actually know for a fact the audience enjoys that. But go ahead, yeah. Because, you know, we were looking at the comments recently and it I really appreciated them because we hear Jackson, you know, bellyache about the home prices and all these things, the boomers. And by the way, we have boomers listening. So they don't really take kindly to, you know, them being looked at as the problem. But the most recent or either with Grohman, I believe, was explaining that Jackson should just, you know, pull himself up by the bootstraps, get a a paint roller and get his get some elbow grease and get a little dirty and figure it out. Like just quit crying on the podcast. So if if you feel the same way, let us know in the pod. If you think he needs a raise, actually, then let us know as well. And we'll figure this out as we go on through the podcast. Unless Jackson just quits out of just pure spite. And then we're kind of gonna have to figure that part out as well. Yeah, I mean, I've been humiliated on this podcast so many times and I've grown immune to it, to be honest. And. Was it when you called for easy eye? Was it called for easy? Comments. Let us know in the comments whose side you're on. We want to know. But yeah, it's it's good to be back and maybe I will learn to pick up a paint roller. If enough people tell me in the comments, I'll do that. But anyways, banter aside, let's get into this conversation today. Jesse, I'm excited to have you all. And because like I said, I particularly have found your insights to be spot on and very balanced as well, particularly on the Bitcoin treasury topic. And so I think we've let that topic breathe a little bit. It's been at least a month, maybe two since we've really gotten deep in the weeds or discuss what's going on there. And when we did have guests on let's say back in June, May time frame, people were ecstatic about the opportunities in Bitcoin treasury companies. Exuberant. Exuberant Brian Michael myself, you know, we're we're called out in the comments. We're we're somebody even the guests were getting a little angry with us in terms of just our perceived lack of understanding of Bitcoin treasuries because we weren't weren't really bought in on the idea of investing in public companies to aim to outperform Bitcoin. So I would love to revisit that to start this conversation off. Jesse, what what are your thoughts just on the past couple of months here with the price action as it relates to Bitcoin treasury companies? And yeah, as this kind of have things ended up, not to say this over, but if things ended up so far where you thought they would be or have outcomes been a little bit different than you thought like 6 months ago? That's a that's a tricky question. I think with, I think the divergent between Bitcoin and treasury companies has surprised me and surprised a lot of people over the last. I mean, I guess it's been at this point, it's like 3 to 6 months where over the longer horizon, there was an expectation, of course, that if you have a company that's holding Bitcoin kind of in a leveraged way that they will naturally kind of rise with the Bitcoin price and outperform Bitcoin. And same thing will happen kind of in the reverse way. So I think it's been surprising to see a lot of these companies, including MicroStrategy. Do you know so poorly. And I think MicroStrategy to date or year to date to underperform Bitcoin by 5 to 10% or something along those lines, which of course, if you're going out on the risk curve and trying to kind of outperform Bitcoin, that's just the worst thing that can happen. As far as kind of why that's happened, I think that's a much kind of trickier question and A and a harder thing to understand. There's all sorts of kind of postulations about what's occurring. Is this kind of the death of Bitcoin treasury companies? Are they all just going to inevitably go to MNAV 1? I think there's, there's some people out there that have been saying that. I, I don't think that's the case. I think we're, we'll probably continue to see similar oscillations as we've seen with strategy with Metaplanet. I don't pay as much attention to the newer ones that don't have any track record because I just don't think it's, it's, it's not a great use of time, I think. But I, I think we still see oscillations. I feel like if, if Bitcoin runs, you know, goes up another 100% over the next 12 months, it's hard for me to see kind of a continued underperformance by likes of Strategy and Metaplanet. But I do think what what I think is most likely to occur is you see oscillations, but you have a lower high and kind of then lower lows. So they kind of do at least from an M NAV perspective, from a multiple of NAV perspective, that's I think the most likely outcome. And then there's several reasons I think why they perform so poorly. But I'm kind of curious what you guys think. What? What do you and before I give my theory on, you know, at least the last few months. Yeah. I mean, I so there's all these narratives out there, right about there's institutional capital that's looking to get in from equity and debt markets into the Bitcoin treasury companies. And I think there's some truth to that. But I think largely these are retail driven markets. And so to your point, Jesse, if if I'm correct about that, these are largely retail driven markets, especially of course on the equity side. You could make it and you could say MSTR is a little bit different than the rest of them in terms of their corporate structure and the types of investors that have participated there. But let's like you know, put that aside for a second focus on the equity stack of these companies. The people are investing in my opinion and from what I've seen are largely retail investors and they're looking to outperform spot Bitcoin. And so I just don't know how long people could be bag holders in these companies and underperform Bitcoin, right? So to your point, like, yeah, if if sentiment shifts and Bitcoin starts to rally, things pick up steam here and those equity prices start to get some momentum and come back, then I think if that happens in short order, then I do think that there will be still a lot of euphoria around this trade. But at the same time, I just wonder how long people will hold on to these companies, especially the ones that, as you mentioned don't have any track record, you know, just kind of been spun up in the past couple months. So that's kind of my thought is like people are underwater. Most people are underwater pretty significantly. And I wonder how long they they hang in for. Yeah, there's a There's so much here I don't even know. I don't, I, I, I love Jesse, so I don't, I, I wouldn't say this if it was just a normal guess. Like I, I disagree. I think these things won't, won't only trend to 1, they're going to trend to lower than one. But before going maybe into that, if you guys want me to expand, I think this came out, which partially is with MSTR is basically NASDAQ requiring additional shareholder approval. And just as it relates to crypto stocks and what does it look like for them to be raising capital? And you know, and I'm kind of surprised that this didn't happen before. It's always been a little weird with what strategy was doing in the markets and how it was pretty neutral, right? There was no like positive or real hard negative sentiment for three or four years, you know, basically taking leverage out to buy Bitcoin. It's a publicly traded company being really loud about it, not saying it's good or bad, just that the market didn't do anything. I think it just from a very basic level, you're effectively, you know, trading in a dollar and hoping to get $1.20. Like at the, the simplest level, like that's the, the role of a treasury company. And at a closed end fund, which is what these mimic, they should trade at a discounts, an app, you get management fees and other associated cost. And so the idea is that they're going to trade at a as A at a increased premium. And I think where people, I don't say got lost, but assume that that's the case between a number of reasons why they'll make up is just because of the financialization of just everything else. And so to the point that I think we all agree on is it's speculative and to what Jackson is sharing, that speculation has real fundamentals outside of vibes and who's on the management team. So ultimately, when that reflexivity comes up and volatility, nobody wants any part of that. People can barely hold on to BTC and that has all the fundamentals of basically being money. So what are they going to do with these assets? Now, when you take it a step further, you just naturally look at like the long and short end of time duration. The long end is if anybody goes down the path that Bitcoin becomes money, Well, that drastically reduces the amount of financial services businesses that exist. Parker Lewis had a great article back in 21 called bitcoins the great D financialization, right? So it just doesn't even isn't coherent that there would be these many companies in a long end. But let's talk about the short end, which is today, and you have 10 different ways that these things D lever. The easiest one to point to is we all know anybody that's held Bitcoin for multiple years, the amount of learning curve and time it takes place to come into this asset and hold on to it. How can we expect somebody to come in and ape into a hundred $500 billion positions and have any idea what they're doing, whether it's managing it from a custody perspective and all the diligence required. And so somebody somewhere will mess up. And when that happens, all these retail investors that have no idea that custody actually even matters are going to flee from these assets, causing them to dislocate from their traditional like price that they're looking at. And there's a number of other things, but I don't actually, there's no, this isn't the time to dance on treasury company graves because that's going to be in like 20-4 months when they blow up like the traditional markets right now, this is just showing what's going to happen. But it's going to come back like interest rates are going to go, people go further out on the risk curve and we're going to see this come back with a vengeance. But from a very base level perspective, there's no real value. And then I guess maybe the last part is people just actually have to go further on the risk curve to generate of validity why they'd be trading above A1 XM or whatever it is. And nobody in bitcoins history 'cause you know of them and they're only the, the right people know of them can generate that kind of alpha. So you're effectively just setting yourself up to be blown up by trying to go and speculate to increase like every. And that ties into where a lot of these companies say they're going to go become the Berkshire Hathaways. All it is so much bullshit that's being told out in the market that because you're going to be able, there's all the crazy people out there. I can't call them out because it's sad. But like that they're going to accumulate and they're going to become these Warren Buffett ask empires that are going to now allocate across the board and make more Bitcoin. It's like you couldn't do that in the private market in a private entity vehicle, whether because there's no different if you just set up your own company or VC fund or PE fund, why would it make any different? Now that you're in public forum, you're going to just turn into like God. So yeah, just some light opinions. Yeah. Maybe what I would add to that is I think we've we sort of hit on this idea of, you know, in the treasury company space, there's an idea or there's a notion that these things should change trade at a premium to M NAV because of the financial engineering, because of the leverage, etcetera, the creative dilution, whatever you want to call these mechanisms. Now I would take it sort of a step further and say even saying that the floor of one XM NAV, Michael, to your point is kind of a fallacy in the sense that it would be one thing if like these were actual funds wherein you could redeem Bitcoin out of them or you ate even had some claim on the Bitcoin. But because you don't and there's no claim and there's no redeemability. It doesn't even necessarily have to trade it at one M NAV like it could. They could definitely go below and they probably should because if there's no go forward accumulation mechanism or even business prospects of like a core operating business, whether that's Bitcoin related or not, there's no reason to trade at 1X because you're layering in all of these additional risks from mismanagement to custody. All of these sort of layers of, of counterparty risk are added on to that quote UN quote Bitcoin exposure, which you actually have no claim on. So I, I expect a lot of these to go well below 1. And you know, we've talked about this in the past, maybe the, the bigger boys, the MSTRS of the world buy up the smaller ones when they're trading at, you know, a discount for a prolonged period. But I would also agree like it, you know, certainly not the time to dance on Grays because this stuff will come back as Bitcoin moves again, most likely. And, you know, rates are cut. All these things that you mentioned, Michael, like I do think there's still legs on this, this trade per SE, but the, the underlying dynamics of the, the layers of risks associated with this proxy exposure where again, there's no claim or redeemability, I think that all remains, remains the same. The the thesis against these things in mass is is the same. The, the only distinction I'd make there is between I think the retail investor and like his performance versus the company itself and like the decision making a company would make. Because sometimes I think about it from sort of an individual's perspective where, OK, let's say you have cash reserves, $100,000 or $1,000,000 and you go out and you buy Bitcoin and you, you continue to kind of work. Bitcoin goes up, Bitcoin goes down. You're still sort of better off, I think in, you know, a few years having moved a substantial portion of your reserves into Bitcoin. And so I, I kind of think with some of these Bitcoin treasury companies, there's a conflation between like the underperformance by the investor and the kind of destruction of the company itself. Because I could see if you look at company like Metaplanet that's grown, you know, I don't know how much, how much bigger in market cap if it were to kind of go back to being a hotel company. It has one hotel. And so if it were to go back to being a hotel company now, now it has now it's a hotel company with 20,000 Bitcoin that's like significantly better than like before where it was just a hotel company that was suffering and had not, no, no balance sheet with Bitcoin. So I do think from we might see sort of a second wave of companies that aren't trying to solely put Bitcoin in the balance sheet or raise equity or, or kind of sell common stock or raise debt to buy Bitcoin, but instead or just using it as a reserve the same way individuals are. And so I, I, I'm a little bit, I'm a little bit hesitant to say that these companies will kind of implode so much as they might just continue to underperform and have to come up with some other business plan around what they're doing. Yeah, my, I mean my feedback to that would be like. The guy's a hotel. Company, why would I want 20 as an investor him to have 20,000 BTC to do anything like I think that's because I've had this discussion with very prominent people in this space that so assume an associate and this is just a product of like over financialization of the market where if you're a good trader or a good like money, money manager view conflate. OK, if I get a balance sheet and a war chest, now I'm going to go be able to allocate it and deliver value to the market. And it's kind of insane because everyone knows M&A generally ends up in like a negative outcome. It's very hard to build businesses and when you think about pure like running and operations. And so it's just the notion that and and so like in in we were talking about this earlier, like part of part of, you know, great lies is there's always parts of truth. That's kind of like, you know, the story of crypto and there's blockchain and there's like, you know, defy and whatever that. There's just some truth to it. It's just not like the soundness that Bitcoin has in the same way that there's an insane amount of truth that the right companies like a Figma that have core competencies having a better war chest that's going to allow them to go out compete in the market is there and every business is going to need Bitcoin. Like those things are all fundamental. It's just the notion of if somebody sold investors on, they're going to accumulate this and then the market naturally recognizes because. At A at. A base level like being in this industry for so long, you start to realize people just are scared shitless and holding spot for a number of reason and custody's like a a sub, like a sub subconscious version of it or how it manifested. You end up in like all these crazy products. You're just like pushing out the, the risk to somebody else and overtime, whether it's multi institution or whatever it is, people just naturally gravitate. The market will form around how do I just get the best, most synthetic version, like the underlying without any of the dirt and pork, uh, associated with it. And that's effectively what these companies are. We're just this early that people are conflating the exposure. And so that's the biggest. Like if I had to pick one thing why I don't see this persistently long enough is because once the market gets educated, they're like we didn't even talk about the insane management fees and structures that Bitmex came out with that went in deep dive into some of these companies. So it's a Brian's point. Like they theoretically should be much less than 1X because if you look at like the way that they're taking fees, I think the pro cap is taking like 20% of the big or it could exposure on the upside. So. I do think, I do think it's a, it's an important distinction that, that Jesse you raised though, because I totally agree. Like over the long term, every, every business of any type or form or size should and will own Bitcoin as a reserve asset. That's very different than, you know, a SPAC merger shell company who doesn't have an operating business, but their plan is to accumulate Bitcoin. Like they're just, there's different flavors of these things and there's sort of a, a taxonomy that's emerging of like the figmas of the world where they're not focused on their Bitcoin treasury strategy as a, as a core of their business, but it's additive to what they're doing versus, you know, a, a purest Bitcoin treasury company that's just looking to accumulate as much Bitcoin as possible. It's very difficult to have differentiation there. And and where you end up is either A, taking more leverage or B, doing something actually innovative, which like I will grant seller and strategy some, some kudos on the actual financial engineering and innovation that they've done in terms of basically offering different risk return profiles for this, the underlying asset Bitcoin to all these different investors. I get it. That makes sense that their business is actually the stock itself. I think that's very difficult to replicate. Metaplanet probably has the best shot of doing something like that. But for everybody else, they're kind of in this limbo, no man's land unless they have a core operating business. And then there's this other camp which like is sort of promising a core operating business but doesn't have it yet. And that's sort of the the incorrect order of operations there. So I think it's a good call out, Jesse, just in the sense that there is it's sort of an emerging taxonomy. There's different flavors of these things and I think they have to be looked at in slightly different ways. Yeah, I think. That's right. And I think, you know, Michael, you brought up the point of investors not being able to weather the volatility. And I, I said this kind of early 2024 warning people like, if you haven't helped Bitcoin through a bear market, you have like almost zero chance of coming out on top holding like being able to hold micro strategy because it's going to be more volatile and it's going to have more kind of associated risks because it's a company and it has fallible people associated with it in the way Bitcoin doesn't quite as much. And I, I mean, I, I actually think most investors in Bitcoin treasury companies, even the ones that have done well, are going to underperform Bitcoin. And the reason I think that is because, you know, the folks that think they can time things and lose their of course going to lose and out to Bitcoin. But the folks that win, I think that they, they to a degree, will have some confirmation bias about their ability to trade around Bitcoin. And so they won't, most of them won't just do what they should do, which is, hey, I made this trade and I and I ended up on top. I'm going to put my, I'm going to now put this back into Bitcoin. Instead, I see a lot of people trying to time sort of the market, try to go either time the market around Bitcoin or go further out on the risk curve, go to smaller Bitcoin treasury companies, take on kind of pursue kind of riskier options plays. So I think by and large, it's going to be a small minority of people that outperform just buying and holding Bitcoin. Yeah, I mean, it's a good. Somewhat. Transition to like, I don't know if this was on the list, but it's just like very present in the past few weeks that just resurgence of crypto. I think even Bitcoin dominance got down to like 55% yesterday. And the notion of I think honestly, that's where I've just been the most frustrated and spoken out is because I've seen it over time, especially like in a business like on ramp or we're trying to help protect people's wealth that you want to help. We see people, you know, there's been margin calls for people's MSTR shares. There's just like no shortage of different ways people can lose their money. It's happened for 15 years and it never looks like it at face value. It looks like in hindsight, right, the block fives of Celsius, like all of those things. And to your point, you'll, you ultimately have to be a trader to get out on top. And in my view, there's no difference between that and like Solana or crypto or whatever else that you're doing. And the whole point of like, you know, finding the the best performing asset is you park your money in there and then you get to go back to whatever you're meant to do and maybe make more Bitcoin. And what you're this sharing is like what we're seeing now coming back and there's like not only the, if you're already talking, you know, pretty objectively about the Bitcoin digital asset treasury companies, then like definitely know your feelings on, you know, there's hyper liquid and all these crazy treasure companies. But then there's just naturally the narrative coming back with ETH and everything else and it's coming back with a vengeance. And I'm curious like, did you see that coming? Because we had been, you know, discussing for months of like will retail make the same mistakes and blah, blah, blah. And I'm just curious like how you see this and if you foresaw it or you're, you're also shocked of like, I can't believe we're going to re kind of redo all point season and everything associated. No, that shocked me to be honest. I but I'm surprised anytime like it doesn't just trend down to 0. And so the idea of big institutional players building ETH treasury companies, where I think I saw a Doge, did I see a Doge treasury company? Maybe it was Solana. It, it it seems absurd and but I don't know, maybe it's a maybe it's a sign of that the the cycles continuing and we're entering more euphoric stages. I'm not sure it, but it definitely surprised me, Yeah. I mean, on that point too, Michael and Jesse, it's kind of interesting to me because a lot of people cite how, you know, prior to just being Bitcoin only they were involved in trading all coins. Then they kind of realized they sucked at trading. They understood why Bitcoin was really a winner take all market and has the monetary properties and they stuck with Bitcoin. But then when the treasury companies came about, it was almost like they they had suppressed these urges to be like trading crazy, crazy shit. And so they went back into like the public, this time in public market equities. And because it's Bitcoin, like everyone on Bitcoin Twitter and all the podcasts are OK with it. And there's all these narratives surrounding it. But it's almost like had to like suppress these these urges to be trading all coins for a cycle or two. But now that there's like these other types of vehicles to get back into, that's pretty much what I see. And then, yeah, I mean, I don't have much to add. I think the crypto stuff is like it's going to persist for a while. It's just a matter of there are not many people like the four of us and the listeners of the show who are Bitcoin only. Most people have like very, very little understanding about Bitcoin. They haven't looked into it much at all. And so when they're bombarded by crypt, but the entire crypto ecosystem, it does take quite a while to actually start to discern what's going on here. So I think that's that's something we're going to have to deal with for a long time. Yeah, we're unfortunately it's going to be a very long time. I liken it to like basically whatever bubble we've been in, however long anybody here on this pot or listening is, you have to extrapolate that that's only like, call it just 1% for easy math of the total humanity, individual investor, whatever you want to call that understands any of this stuff. And so when the market comes back and the market is naturally following, you know, vibes for a bit like the word vibes can come in different forms. They can come from an influencer, they can just come from your government and telling you that it's OK to buy 4O1K right into crypto and you just put it in a basket. The point being is right now, the vibes that are that historically are 6040 and now we're seeing, you know, crypto assets and, you know, private equity has been the pre vibe to that, like people going further on the risk curve and alts. And so we're just going to have to see people get rugged. But I think it's important why you call it out because you can build a brand and a reputation if you're right around always kind of supporting and making sure you were kind of like the the pragmatic version, especially if you've seen this play out into Jackson's point. That's really been the second part. Most frustrating is, and it makes sense, like in Bitcoin, it's very hard to make money because what do you do? You sell it or you custody. I didn't even custody and very few people want to pay for whatever. And so historically the Bitcoin influencers have been doing a lot of work to educate and then everybody able to monetize. And so it was very easy to be like here, join, do this, you throw some shares, you throw whatever. But the reality is a you just can't make money from nothing. Money doesn't grow on trees. And so that's all you know what this is. But there's 2 is I think there's like when you, when your bags are packed, doesn't matter how whatever the investment is, you just like can't help. This is where the great traders have no problem switching on a dime, right? We talked, we talked with Luke Roman last week and he talked about he recognized he was wrong. You think about PJ and all these guys, but traditionally any investor, whether they invested in AVC fund or whatever their stock, you get real like connectivity to that. It's like this notion of throwing good money after bad money and you just continue to go down. Everybody's played poker. You get in a pot and you're like committed and you should just be cutting losses. And so point being, I lost what the point was going to be. It was like related to if you're oh, so so you get in that that trend, you're in there and you have these influencers where they got thrown a bone and you get involved and you're already into Bitcoin like you're there. So you're like, it's not a big deal. This is this is a way to create more Bitcoin. There's a lot of stories that go into, but the main point is that this is a sliver of risk capital. Like that's a great way to like, again, everything like lies and truths. It's like this is risk capital. I'm like, sure, there's no problem with anybody that's long Bitcoin to do whatever they want. It's I mean, they could do anything with anything, but the reality is most people aren't sophisticated to put risk capital. So they just associate like, oh, this is my Bitcoin exposure and they forgot how people come into the space, have no idea about anything we're talking about here. And so it's really like a negative incentive and really is going to burn a lot of people because I mean, you're, you see this first hand, like these groups in these communities become like their identities are tied to it. And it's always just the first version of like, like smoke before fire. You see this fucking Waco, you see like across the board, if you need a community to do anything, like you basically are running something that's not really because it should come organically. Yeah. And I think we've seen that with some of these, some of these companies have tried to manufacture that sort of that, that social sentiment around their companies. And but they can't get around sort of the fundamentals of how they went about raising capital. And I'm not going to call out specific companies, but there's plenty that that raised capital kind of on the belief or sort of professing that they needed to raise hundreds of millions or, you know, 700 million or billion dollars in capital in order to then be successful and get institutional interest and get preferred stock listed. And that was that's sort of been the, the communication that they've made. But the result has been kind of a lot of insiders and early investors getting very cheap warrants or participating in pipe offerings. And then at least from an outsider, this is what I was saying, these capital raisings occurring concurrent with this manufactured social sentiment on Twitter, whatever it may be, this is this is going to be kind of better than micro strategy. And the result of that like kind of inevitably is that retails going to get rubbed or going to get crushed. And I think we're seeing that now. And I don't know if that all I think that's goes to sort of the question of whether they'll still be positive sentiment around treasury companies, a lot of them when you've when you created a company and raised capital in that way. Yeah, and and what you just outlined is so eerily reminiscent of the ICO altcoin playbook, right? Like it, it is the same thing like senior age insiders getting a better deal, dumping on retail. That is the playbook. And so that's why there is again, we have to revert to the taxonomy. There's different flavors of these things. But in the instances that you just described, which is a large slew of these things, it just reeks of ICO, all coin pump and dumps like that. It's the same exact playbook. Yeah. And it's sad because you don't get a lot of people telling, talking about stuff like this because ultimately if they are not in their bags, are involved or they, you know, backed one their friend did like there's very few people in the industry that this didn't like touch super close. And so people just been hesitant. But it's just the reality. It's your point, the ICO stuff, Yeah, it's I don't, I think it's going to come back. I think it's going to come back. I think the reality though, is that the market. The the big. One of the big lies again in all of this is that institutional allocators can't get exposure to Bitcoin. Like you see Harvard with $100 million plus position, right? And they're in gold too. Like I would say it's almost infinitely harder to get a good position in a gold and a Bitcoin at this point, you know, from just like how you think about it and the number of players and and involvement in proxy exposures. And point being is that that will dry up even if it was true. I don't believe it was, but even if it was, I would say MSTR had the only angle from the convertible bond market. That's where you can't play unless you're a big boy. But when it comes to just getting exposure to BTC and. Over time, even. If it yeah, pre ETF. Yeah, exactly. Pre ETF, but when you play it out, that's the other side of it. It has to be a trade and at least recognizing because as allocators recognize not only the risk, but like you could just go get better exposure, reduce fees. Like this was always just a trade. And and that's where I called out the version of, well, on the other side of it, you're going to become the Warren Buffett or the Medici and you're going to be able to like allocate this capital like you're just a savant. It's just like incoherent because nobody's built a Bitcoin war chest and just like deployed it across and made a bunch of money. So it's yet to come. Yet to come so if you heard. The start of this episode we have a little bit of a battle going on between Michael and I. We air it out every week on the last trade. If you can show up in a big way this week, leave a comment in favor of me, Jackson. I appreciate it. Leave a like subscribe rate, 5 stars. All of that really helps grow the show, get the message out there. And we spend a lot of time right. We're reaching out to guests and then we're preparing for episodes and recording them. We are editing and distributing them. So a lot of work goes into it to package this up into an hour to two hours every single week. And hopefully it's valuable to you. So if it is, let us know in the comments section. Please leave us a like goes a long way. And if you want to hear more from us, not just on the podcast, I'd really recommend going to our website and signing up for our research newsletter. Brian does a great job. He's sending out one weekly newsletter, more of a roundup discussing what's going on in macro, Bitcoin, other markets, etcetera. And then typically one other newsletter will go out as well that's not necessarily topical, but could be more Evergreen or deeper dive or product announcement etcetera. So you're not subscribed already. Check that out as well. Is this a just? A treasury pod Jackson or do you have anything else you wanted to to chat about do we rock your world with the the house stuff is it that did that did like that that stun you for yeah I'm. Just yeah, I'm just stumbling through this one. I lost, I lost all confidence at the start of the show. I'm just trying to get through it at this point. But no, I wasn't sure if Jesse had any other thoughts, but I I was hoping to move on. I wanted to zoom out, zoom out to the the the big Ponzi scheme that's that's actually happening in in front of all of us and that's the US dollar. And for some reason it never occurred to me to like look at the historical chart over 100 year period for gold. But what we've pulled up here for people who are aren't not on YouTube and just listening have the chart of the gold price from 1915 to present July or July 2025. And when I look at this, if you removed all the context from this page here, just looked at the chart, it looks exactly like the Bitcoin price chart. And so it started to occur to me more. I mean, obviously we're kind of living through this debasement evaluation of the US dollar. But when we have Luke Roman on the podcast last week and he was just talking about how, you know, when he looked at the Bitcoin price after the blow off top in 2017, the price corrects 80% in 2018-2019, starts to come creeping back up in 2020 and into 21. He took a second look at it and determined that it was really, you know, Bitcoin was showing the collapse of a currency, the collapse of a dollar in in real time. And so I would love to talk about gold because a, well, Michael loves it. I'm trying to get back on Michael's good side. So we'll talk about gold for a little bit. But it's, it's kind of eerily similar to look at the Bitcoin price charts since inception. So call it whatever that is at this point, 16 years versus 110 years of gold. And you can see once that peg was broken and gold was no longer fixed at whatever it was, was like $35 or $40.00 an ounce, I forget. In 1971, the chart that looks exactly the same as the Bitcoin price chart. So I'd love to just talk about, you know, reactions to this. Maybe I'm just an idiot for not, you know, looking at these charts side by side before, but what do you guys think now I. Love that you brought it up because AI love gold because it's my Canary in the coal mine that the world's healing at the end of the day. Like gold's breakout means, you know, obviously not obviously, but we've seen Bitcoin follow, but it's a reality going back to money doesn't grow on trees. And when you have that happen, then all accountability ends up coming back on a long enough time horizon. What Jackson just shared is something that I've also kind of slowly realized and I feel very dumb. It was part of like multiple conversations, but really grown and highlighting some of the charts on his Twitter. Wonderful when it looks against, you know, housing gold, BTC and the dollar and the dollar being like down like 80%, Bitcoin being up. I want to say like crazy numbers. I don't even know is that you can target to see on the chart and then gold up like 8080%. But it's the reality of for like, I think all, you know, how we talk about like we're kind of feel it's so obvious that we're holding Bitcoin. It's like, how can nobody else see this? And we're just kind of like winning in life and blah, blah, blah. And you have more money and and you can make more optionality. It's just truth. Like that's what money's for. And we're like, how can't people see it? I'm starting to realize that this is actually how all the smart people have been navigating the past 100 years. Like when you look at sovereigns and you look at people, I remember in a previous life, like 10 plus years ago, I was in college. I ended up working at this like bullion dealer. And there would be this guy and there would be other people, but this guy would come in almost every two weeks. He'd buy 999. So $9999 worth of gold bullion or, or silver, junk silver. And I just didn't understand it. And I've always thought he was crazy, but it hit me. It's like he was stacking Bitcoin, right? Because he understood against everything else, it was depreciating. And when you look at these charts over the past, Groman had the 50 year chart against gold. Gold has been the best performing asset and you start to look back at like, what is, you know, time's a flat circle, What's old is new. And this was like written in biblical terms where you have your, you know, third of your money in your house or your land and your third of your money in your money, you know, gold and the third of money in your work. And look at Tether. Tether is one of the most sophisticated players on the planet Earth. That's exactly their playbook. They have hard assets, 50 tons of of gold, you know, 100,000 BTC. They have their business that's printing money and then they're buying a shit ton of land data centers. And so yeah, we're just seeing this like revert back and the most sophisticated people recognize it. And then the rest of the world lost its way and they're looking at this as Luddites when this is the most sophisticated play ever is You get the thing that's the hardest, which has been gold and now it's Bitcoin and you get yourself some land and and then you get back to winning. So yeah, it makes complete sense. It's kind of crazy that it's the inertia in the trap fight world is not to ever say any of these things. That's why nobody talks about it. Yeah. And part of the story there is what's happening with gold and Bitcoin is very reflective of what's happening with bond markets. And Jackson, I think I put a few, maybe a few charts related to this, but long term government bond yields are spiking. And that is, that is occurring at the same time that central banks around the world have already begun to cut rates at the short end of the curve and the US Fed is now signaling we're going to start cutting in September. Basically what's happening here is the bond market is calling the bluff and saying, you know, these these dollars are going to be continued to be debased. And so we are demanding higher yields, higher, higher coupons for this long dated debt because we know those dollars are going to be worth much less into the future given the unsustainability of debt, deficit spending, etcetera. And so this is, you know, this is really, you know, in my mind, early innings of what looks to be, you know, a debt spiral for the dollar. And, and gold, to your point, Michael, is the Canary that's telling you that it, you know, even if you didn't look at these bond yield spiking and you didn't sort of parse through what the the fixed income markets were telling you, gold is telling you the story, the same exact story. It's sort of this recognition of the unsustainability of the dollar system specifically more broadly all all Fiat currencies. And then this, you know, emergent sort of sound money renaissance via gold and Bitcoin that people are recognizing in this increasingly multi polar world where, you know, the the faith and trust in central banks continues to wane. You need to own hard assets. You need to own outside money that can't be debased or influenced by, you know, a few guys in a room that are setting monetary policy. And so I think you know it, it's, it's all this taken together, you know, it's gold, it's the bond market, it's, it's sort of the, the broader unwinding of of the Fiat system and and the increasing recognition of hard assets, sound money, etcetera. Yeah, I think a lot of those. I think both the kind of rising gold along with the reaction to terrace in which equity markets and bond markets kind of both perform poorly, introduced a new kind of sector or new segment of the market to the idea of what is money and like what it what is the USD worth? At least personally, I saw among kind of the more boomer Gen. X generation that I talked to that they were thinking a lot harder on that issue because kind of a lot of the fundamental investment beliefs, you know, 6040 portfolio always, you know, perform or undercut. And so I think both that price movement along with seeing gold rise and take kind of a larger share of the international reserves has been eye opening to a lot of people and gotten people to think a lot harder about about how to preserve value. Yeah, that that chart from. Yeah, Jesse. It's a great point. Yeah. You flagged this one ahead of recording, I think. So again, for people who are not looking at the video here, it's pretty much just global international reserves. And it shows the percentage split between gold, USD, pound sterling and, you know, some of the other largest currencies. And you can see back in the early 1900s that gold was about 90%, so roughly 90% in 19 O1 of global international reserves. And it looks like it bottoms out around 10% or so. Call it in the mid 2000s, twenty 10's. And now I think we're sitting at closer what gold is about 24% or so of global international reserves. And so, you know, my left bell curve take here is that pretty much reinforces everything that we're talking about, right? Like bonds are selling off globally. There's really not demand for long dated treasuries because who wants to get paid back 30 years later in a currency that can be printed into oblivion? Who wants to get their assets confiscated? And so it's remarkable, right? Because 100 years ago and 100 years in the grand scheme of things is pretty short amount of time. But 100 years ago, gold was 90% of the reserves globally and then it bottoms out at 10%. Massive haircut across the board and now we're really just at the very early innings of Sovereign starting to re accumulate hard money. Yeah. And maybe like with that whole hour, however long we talked about treasury companies that distillate, the distillation is, the big problem is the difference between saving and investing, right? Because if you look at the gold price, if you just held gold, you didn't have to become an investor and play the volatility of the markets and deal with a lot of the what happened over 50 years. And once you become a, you know, you naturally say, well, then you can decide what you want to invest in. The same thing with BTC. Most investors aren't prepared to even start investing because they're not even saving in a better form of money. So they're, they've been conditioned to go out and invest and go further on the risk curve. It's a product of like where we sit today and how crazy the world is. And so I think that's the core sentiment of like the notion of, you know, saving and investing are fundamentally different things. You've invested your time and efforts to make the money, and it should just be able to be preserved. You shouldn't have to invest it. And that's where everything's kind of falling apart. And then that's why you get the craziness in the traditional markets where there's every different product out there trying to take your capital and take their management fees and it becomes harder to hit a benchmark that you're trying to. Yeah, there was another chart Texan, if you want to pull up the just China's gold holdings that are just absolutely spiking. So like this isn't anecdotal, like this is there's empirical evidence to state that like central banks around the world are stockpiling gold, China in particular. And there's sort of long been rumors of, you know, would the BRICS nations do some sort of commodity linked or even gold backed currency. And, and, you know, I wouldn't be surprised to see that at some point. But the, the broader take away is like, this is this is the shift, this is the, the, you know, the monetary order shifting in real time and the move towards outside money becoming more prevalent and, and even normalized. And, you know, as we talked with Luke about last week, like the real starting gun for a lot of this was, you know, the US freezing and seizing Russia's treasuries that imparted on the rest of the world. Like, that's not risk free. There are stipulations that come with storing value in U.S. government debt. And unsurprisingly, most countries around the world are not really cool with that. And so now they need a different savings mechanism. And in many instances, at least currently, that that is gold. I think increasingly it will be Bitcoin. But yeah, that is that is the shift playing out in real time. This is like a side tangent, but like with me that made me realize is there's no such thing as risk free rate. Like it's just it doesn't make any sense because there's no such thing as risk free rate for us as individuals. Like the second you get out of bed, there's like risk and you just like calculate it. You decide to take a a chance. Like what was it? You ran a shocking number of the number of like people on a motorcycle that are at risk. Like it's just crazy. And point being is if there's no risk free rate for our personal, why would there be a risk free rate for any kind of financial investment? And so you could say gold or Bitcoin would be the risk free rate, but there's still risk associated because if you have 100% of your wealth and BTC or gold, well, what do you do with it? Do you do you bury it all under your house? Well, that's fine, But then you're still at risk. If somebody forgets and you get hit by a bus or somebody comes to try to steal it and you leave it all with a third party custodian or even multi institution custody. It's like, well, we think there's a lot of risk free right there, but it's not, it's not completely risk free. There's still a probability of all these bad things potentially happening. So the point being is that there's a lull and asleep of like that notion that it's just, there's no risk in life. You're just you take trade-offs. And I think that's a, that's just something we're going to have to reckon with in the future when it comes to like Bitcoin and storing wealth and what does it look like? But that notion of bonds and risk free rate, and then that's the benchmark. And then you start to think about multiples and interest rate and how you like quantify your investments. They're just all built on this foundation that is inherently flawed. Not only risk free rate, but also just like manipulating the cost of capital. Yeah, it's. It's pretty wild. I mean, none of these assumptions are really ever questioned, which is the remarkable thing. You know, I was in I was in still from a very young age that treasuries were the risk free rate. That's my parent. That's that they would read to me in my bedtime stories as a young child. But but in all seriousness, right, like you go to like college, right at I study finance and undergrad and every, everything in all those courses, although I will say I had pretty poor attendance, but every single thing in those courses built upon the assumption of U.S. Treasuries being the risk free rate, right? So then what if you question the assumption of that and not because you're a crazy person, but because you look at the, the mounting evidence of the amount of risk that there is in lending money to the government, the United States government over particularly over a long period of time. I mean, you can make the case that UST bill is fairly low risk if you're if you're lending for 30 days, right, and you're trying to generate some short term interest. But if you start going out on a longer duration and start lending money to an entity that is insolvent, that will just create more money and dilute you. Yeah, there's a lot of risk in that. And so I, I think it's an exciting time because I don't really think outside of the places online and the one person that we find ourselves in, there are not that many people that are really talking about this in a serious manner. And I think that's starting to change in particular with gold, right? I mean, like Bitcoin is still dismissed. It's still poo pooed is like this, like this garbage asset nonsense, whatever you want to call it, Ponzi scheme that is, that is changing, but it's not going to change this year. It's not going to change next year. But what might start to change is if gold continues to force allocators it can search to force retail investors to start to question these assumptions. That I think is probably the forcing function over a longer time horizon where we get back to harder assets, but could also just be wishful thinking. But I think that's the direction we're going in. I think that's, I think that's probably true. It feels like the market needs to our investors might need to understand like why gold has value like in the same way that we all went through the education process of like what, like what makes good money. I think a lot of people just don't even understand like what are the qualities of money and why has gold kind of retained its value for that long? And then, of course, the next logical step is to see, Hey, Bitcoin also has a lot of these attributes, but even more so in a lot of ways, except for maybe historical duration. So I think that'll that'll also kind of lead people inevitably to to Bitcoin. And I was kind of surprised too, to see here Luke Kerlman talk last week about, I think he said something like it'll become normal to have 10 to 20% in like gold and Bitcoin. Maybe he's just being conservative, but I feel like it would be it's going to be over the next couple decades, like significantly more percentage, higher percentage than that just based on kind of math in my mind. Yeah, I. Mean, I mean 100% like the on a long enough time horizon, you end up outliving your retirement if you choose to allocate to a 6040 portfolio, right? Like it was a couple weeks ago at this point, but there was some sort of letter or I don't know if I would call it a recommendation, but something came out of Vanguard and they were pretty much citing equity valuations are so stretched. We think on a forward-looking basis they produce a nominal rate of return of three or 4% or whatever it was. And so because of that, they recommended, again, I don't know if it's a recommendation, but they cited a 70% allocation to fixed income. And so you can imagine if you are living through a sovereign debt crisis and you choose to put 70% of your savings into lend it to an insolvent entity, it probably doesn't end well for you. And so it's actually, you know, this assumption, the challenging of assumptions of the risk free rate is really the early innings to totally rewiring how people choose to protect their wealth. And that goes from the individual and it goes all the way to the sovereign wealth fund or the central bank and everything in between. Yeah, and this kind of like it's a trope thrown out around how early we are, but this is where you guys really feel it, especially when you work day-to-day and have these conversations of what we're talking about here is so embedded in the inertia and psyche of of individuals that it'll take a very long time to move from the 6040 into what you're describing. Jesse, 10 to 20% and greater. But it's also the exhilarating, exciting part if you've been following and building or thinking about joining the industry and figuring it out. Because once you see it clearly, then you see all the opportunities that exist. You see it in an adventure as an easy example where eventually if the thought is that individual start to understand just sound money, whether it's gold or Bitcoin, their rate of return and benchmark will naturally change from dollars. And that's traditionally where people are benchmarked from a hurdle rate. And so you start to look at venture investments and you have the liquidity and all that, but then you also have them promising you dollars and you push that out to a general 10 year time frame and what is the dollar worth? You know, whatever their 3X hurdle or promising some of the best performing funds, it's like you're sitting on on realized losses. Like you're in real terms, you're underwater even if you got a top tier VC return. And so then you start thinking about well, what adventure firms start to do. It's like, well, naturally you would see them putting anywhere between, you know, 5 to 20% just as a liquid reserve to like help juice that return to get to a benchmark. But that slowly starts to creep into like other parts to the point of like, well, why are you even raising in dollars? And investors is part of like where the fur the the early writers in the funds stood up is for two parts. 1 is it's the logical conclusion where everyone comes to this conclusion like Bitcoin or angled, you're going to store the majority of your wealth in it. And so the realization is, well, then if I'm going to put my capital at risk, because money is money. It's not meant. It's meant to be spent. It's just like, where does it spend? Then I'm going to return. I want more Bitcoin, but then the other side of it is when you start to build a business with a Bitcoin treasury, and with that is your own personal horrible rate from how do you build and and think about, you know, pragmatic, efficient business building, You start to realize, Oh crap, that's actually going to be the future. How do you build businesses is you have a better treasury to, you know, out compete others via inflation and all the things associated which is better withholding a better form of money. And you're more discerning with that capital spend because you have bitcoins growth when you're naturally going to just have better forces at your back when it comes to competing with others. And so there's huge opportunities in this landscape, but because the alternative is you're like raising 10s, if not hundreds of millions of dollars and you're, you know, looking at your, your, your benchmark is a false benchmark when it comes to dollars and how you think about growth and building businesses. And you see this all the time. We're seeing it right now with interest rates. There's no shortage of companies that were prone to lower interest rates that have just completely gone out of business. And that'll continue to happen as he just whips all numbers back and forth and you go lower and you come back higher. And so I think it's just not really appreciated how like the noise of the cost of capital being distorted just completely ruins the fundamentals of all these businesses that people are investing in. And so that's like the first level of Tratfi having noise and then you just take that and then it just got grafted onto the to crypto and cryptos like the personification of like Fiat, but like at an accelerated time scale from like business cycles, right? The deleveraging that happened, but also like the craziness of things built. And that's just the status of where we're at. And that's why things look and feel so weird and nobody really talks about it. So people just are like ah. I don't know, they're just a little, you know, it's a they're a little crazy or whatever, but it's like, no, these things make zero sense. But very few people like will say it, but we're like coming up. That's where I say the gold is the the world healing. Like people are waking up to this stuff. It's just it's going to take time. Yeah, so. I wanted to go into Michael. It might have been something that you shared over Slack earlier this week and it ties into the theme of really nothing is risk free. I guess you could argue like even sleeping in your bed, there could be some risk associated with that because Michael said like once you get out of bed, there's risk like it could even happen before that. But that point aside, like if you're, if you're holding Bitcoin for the long term or you're holding gold or like you have exposure to equities, there's risk in everything, right? Not just from the investment perspective, but also from the counterparty risk that you take on by or counterparty or lack of counterparty risk that you take on. Because in a, in a traditional sense with self custody for gold or Bitcoin as bare assets, you remove counterparty risk, but you essentially become the sole responsibility of managing that asset indefinitely. And that bears risk as well. And so one thing, Michael, that you had shared over Slack that I caught my attention was the social engineering scam of pretty epic proportions and devastating, I mean, 783 Bitcoin. So again, for people who are just listening, looking at an article that was published about a week ago where a bitcoiner loses 783 Bitcoin in a social engineering scam. And so my, the context I would add to this is a lot of people, particularly on Bitcoin Twitter and these circles we find ourselves in, they make it sound very easy, right? It's like you buy Bitcoin and you just hold it for the long term and you become very rich. And there's a lot of gaps in that, in that path or that, you know, the logical progression because it's pretty easy to buy Bitcoin. But anyone who's actually held it for a cycle, 2 cycles or three cycles recognizes that it's, it's hard to do. It's hard to hold it for the long term, especially if you're talking about a material amount of wealth. Like forget it. If you have .1% of your net worth in Bitcoin, who cares? Like you don't really need to worry about that. But if you're serious about it and you have 10 percent, 2550, a 100% of your wealth in this asset, then it really becomes a scary thing. And so I wanted to open the floor just to some, some thoughts around how does this, how do we actually navigate the next decade of, of Bitcoin ownership, right? Because there's going to be those increasing types of, you know, social threats, You know, social engineering is kind of an interesting one. It's like a mix of, you know, it's mostly digital, but has some physical elements as well. This person was actually managing a hardware wallet and the, the scammers impersonated both the exchange that they were a customer of and also the support of the hardware wallet manufacturer. So it's like very sophisticated kind of coming from 2 angles. And so I'm, I'm curious, like your guys thoughts on just navigating the next decade of ownership. We also wanted to talk a little bit about Guardian, something we're doing here at On Ramp, So maybe Michael will hand it over to you first and then Jesse, Bryan, if you guys want to jump in as well. Yeah, I think one of the things to call out, I was in Dallas yesterday meeting with a bunch of folks and I was meeting with a family office and they've been in the space for a while and you know, we were gassing each other up around multi institution and all that. But what was sad was they were explaining very significant holders. They now have all sold their back when he made it public and went into the ETFs and this guy had no reason to lie. And I was like, that's insane. I would rather than like deal with the self custody and just deal with it because you, you think about there's like multiple levels of risk there, which is there not risk, but loss. You have the, the taxable events and then you have naturally you're giving up completely that to multiple layer levels of counterparty risk. So it's real, you know, I have some other thoughts, but I just want to share like there's just real version because in the reason why they did that was because of just natural security risk. As you were saying, Jackson and the guy was very it was an older gentleman and maybe he's going to start listening to the pod, but he was, he was referencing, you know, already thinking, you know, about, you know, all the data's out there and all this. I was like, no, it's, it's like 10X the level of sophistication. When you think about is explaining on the dark web, some of the most, if not most expensive credentials are Coinbase credentials. And it's always been the theme that like people probably inside Coinbase sell that data. It's not just hacks that happen because like if you have a 5000 person company and you get access to the data, why wouldn't you just download a CSV and ship that? And so you take that data along with, you know, the chain analysis tools and now AI models and every other CRM and, and you know, data has been leaked. You can pretty much discern almost anybody's allocation or balance. And the problem is that the bad actors in today's world that are physical, that have, you know, guns and shoved to people's houses are really looking for goal or like gold. And, you know, phones and, and, and watches and Rolexes and then the sophisticated people that Jackson just referenced their online. But that's going to converge at a certain point because it's just an ROI, right? As the number goes up in Bitcoin, there's more awareness with it. There's more awareness that a large percentage, you know, over half sits in self custody. It's just something that the market is not fully appreciated or talked about. And it's also really crazy because this is fundamentally kind of where gold failed as people realize this with gold and that's where Goldsmith started and then that's how bank started. And that's ultimately where kind of like Fiat it got inserted is because of the centralization problem. And so we've already seen this how this plays out. It's always been kind of a crazy thing to me that some of the smartest people in the Bitcoin space just they never like logically played it out. It's similar to the allocation stuff that we talk about Dalio and Groman, and people always say a smaller percentage than they feel comfortable. It's almost like they know that it doesn't scale, but they don't have a solution And they write to say it shouldn't go to Coinbase or Mount Gox, right? Because that ends up in 0. But they don't give a logical solution on how does it play out? Because if it's everyone holding their money, that doesn't work. We we know that doesn't work. I think over time we'll probably see folks have like a diversity of custody with like the bulk of their holdings being in multi sig vaults, like the multi institutional vaults. I, I kind of think though, right now we're in kind of a trusting phase and a lot of people trust Fidelity and trust BlackRock and trust these treasury companies. And to some degree, I think that we need, things need to kind of get worse or we need to have these sort of cleansing blow UPS in order for people to be reminded of the importance of self custody and the risks of centralization. I thought it was really interesting what Luke brought up on, you know, reminding us on gold's trajectory and the issues of centralization and derivatives, of course. So I think that there might be kind of a pendulum swing that occurs as as kind of that it naturally does because I think eventually we're going to have a custodian or a a company or an ETF run into issues just from human risk. Yeah, I I would agree with that. I think there's probably some amount of forcing function that will occur based on an existing single custodian having issues. I think in some ways that's almost preferable against what the alternative would be in my mind is that like the digital and physical threats accelerate rapidly and that would be a separate forcing function, which would be worse because that's just like, you know, people's lives and health in danger as opposed to, you know, a custodian blowing up, which would be terrible for people financially, but maybe a little less scary on a personal level. But I think that's right. I, I do think we're in a period where Coinbase has sort of been blessed by the US government to some extent, you know, being the issuer of nine out of the 11 ETFs. We're in a phase where people are sort of just ignoring that centralization risk and to your point, trusting that it's going to be OK. And that can only happen for so long. Like Michael, you say this all the time like that. That's the one way that you screw this asset up, like is just picking the wrong custodian. You throw a dart at the wall and you hit one that that has failed. And yes, Coinbase hasn't failed yet, but the other, the crazy part about the, the sort of people ignoring the centralization risk there is like if you have material exposure of Bitcoin, it's a large percentage of your net worth. It's kind of crazy to say I'm going, I'm going to trust a company unilaterally that like doesn't even focus on Bitcoin like that. Like Coinbase is the degenerate casino. Like that is where their focus has has been over the past decade. It hasn't been on Bitcoin now more recently, they've sort of slightly pivoted because they realize how insane that is. And I think they bought a little bit more Bitcoin for the balance sheet. But all that's to say, like you, you want a domain expert, you want someone who has the same philosophical values as you to if you're going to trust a custodian or set up custodians, you want the values to be aligned for the long term because that it also speaks to the longevity of the business. Like if, if Coinbase continues to be levered to the all coin space, pushing people at the risk curve, getting the trade, all these other tokens like I, I question the long term sustainability of that business model. They should be more focused on Bitcoin and they're not today. And so like you're, you're making an active decision to, yeah, you buy the BlackRock ETF. You think you're trusting BlackRock, you're really trusting Coinbase, and you're making an active decision to trust a what I would consider not really a a Bitcoin company in the purest sense to custody your Bitcoin. I also, I also think that lending solutions around Bitcoin improving is going to make people less inclined to use the Coinbase is less inclined to kind of move their Bitcoin to an ETF so that they can get margin loans. I think that as those kind of the the difference in rates that you can earn or obtain through those sources converge, you'll see more people preferring to use hard Bitcoin and keep their Bitcoin versus kind of exchanging it for for paper Bitcoin or something that's more easily marginable. I know there's a lot of companies that are doing interesting things on that front and I think it's kind of inevitable that we'll see that. Yeah, If I can just jump in real quick, I mean to kind of work backwards. So the example that Michael gave as well about someone who already had a very sizeable position of Bitcoin and then chose, so they already understood the inherent risk of working with a single custodian. And I presume based on the context of that conversation you shared, Michael, that they were doing self custody, they had a sizeable allocation, and then they were uncomfortable with the risks of managing it themselves, whether I wasn't in the room for the conversation. But I know a lot of the common concerns are just user error of people managing this on a long enough time horizon, their spouses or children being able to access it from an inheritance perspective, it's typically a nightmare for most people. They don't actually have any sort of plan and then you kind of work into other things that people are concerned about, especially if you're a larger holder. And Michael, to your point, a lot of data are is already out there and it's not, it's not hard to find. So then you're concerned about people actually showing up to your home and harming you or your family. And so when you start to think about this, it's kind of like, you know, you don't have a cost necessarily of self custody. You pay de minimis cost to purchase a hardware wallet and then you don't really have any carry cost on the asset. But all that cost exists on your mental burden. And it it it kind of creeps away. It eats away at your Peace of Mind. And ultimately that was enough for Michael in that conversation for these people to just be like, you know what, I'm, I don't really care about all the self sovereignty of Bitcoin anymore. I'd rather still own the asset, but I don't want to own it in a way that I can just mess this up, lose all of my money or, you know, someone show up to my house and and harm my family. So I think this is ultimately the next 5 to 10 years. What people who've already made the leap of having a sizeable allocation of Bitcoin, maybe making it their families, you know, reserve asset, right? And now they have to, to actually grapple with that reality. It was, it was a different, it was a different story five years ago when the price was $10,000, but the price is $100,000. And you know, people expected to go higher this year, maybe into next as well. And at some point it corrects, but it's probably not correcting back to 10K or I'm going to have some, some big problems on my hand. But this isn't really what people have to start, you know, figuring out over the next 5 to 10 years. Like, you don't just like you don't just deal with this one time and forget about it. And now you actually have to like proactively manage this allocation. Yeah, I think like this is a difficult one to chat about because personally is where I get so excited is that we're this early we don't we didn't I don't think we figured out custody and so that's a big opportunity. I caveat what about to say because the the problem where they're, I believe, mutually exclusive is we get trapped with we talk about the the treasury company or somebody selling a hardware device. Like everyone is always talking their own buck, right? Like everyone. That's just the nature of humanity and you have what you have and you you want it to be looked at in a positive light. Sometimes it's true and you just put yourself on that right side and other times you didn't. And so we feel like multi institution, the opportunity set is what democratizes access for people of all shapes and sizes to get real material exposure and preserve their wealth. Now that's up to the market to decide. But if it is the the vehicle for that, well. What we know when. We talk about all these podcasts is actually the easy part that this is an investment I want. There's only 21 million. It's the best performing asset. That's not the hard part. The hard part is how the hell do you buy it and hold real sizable amounts of it? And that's why you see the majority of people that have material balances sit in self custody because that's been the best solution and the only solution to credibly know that you have to sever that Internet connection and put yourself in control. But that's ultimately becoming untenable as the price rises. And so that's just like the where we're at today. And it's embedded in the substrate of like why people think this whole industry speculative because they're concerned with like counterparties, because every couple of years you get this deleveraging because people mess with the underlying custodians, you know, lose the assets and everything that happens. And that's where nobody's feels confident even today and saying over 2 to 3% because nobody wants to be on the hook for somebody allocating and they get the wrong custodian. And so it's just like a chicken or egg problem because custody's not figured out. Nobody can materially allocate because nobody can materially allocate. You don't have this price. And so like, that's where we get excited for the first time. You don't have a single point of failure because again, in the same way there's no risk free rate, there is actually no trustless version. You're just trust minimizing because you're trusting yourself. If you hold all the Bitcoin and you're trusting that you don't lose your mind or you don't get hit by a bus or you and your wife don't go down in a plane and you're trusting Coinbase, you're trusting ETFs, you're always trusting somebody. And so that's really what's most exciting. And I have to figure out better how to talk about it because it sounds like we're just talking our book, which we are, but it doesn't matter. Even if everything closed today, it's like I don't see how on the long time horizon, if Bitcoin wins to be money in a global settlement layer, how multi institution isn't the way because the main theme is where gold failed, Bitcoin picks up. And it's not the 21 million hard cap because you can do 19 or 22 and it's not even, I'm not calling for inflation, but it's not even that. Like gold is money for thousands of years and it had some form of inflation on an annual basis. It's the fact that the underlying asset is programmatic. And so you can basically put governance at the asset layer, whether it's 3 custodians or five to move and have eyes on that. That's where gold failed. And for the first time in human history, you can put governance at that asset layer that never been done before. And the fact that it's this, it's this early, it's that, right? Like that's indisputable. That means there's an insane opportunity not only for what we're building, the things we're investing in, but also for people to pick that up and then say, oh, maybe I can get off 1 to 10% and 10 to 50 and 50 to 100, especially with the insurance that we're wrapping and all these other things. So that's personally where like I think that it's the the closest we've seen to how do you actually commercialize this space and get people out of all the craziness and the pub co's and the Dats and the ETFs and like they can get the same exposure, pensions, endowments, large clients that have hundreds of millions of dollars with us for, you know, 100K they have, it's open to them as well. Yeah. You hit on one thing and they're worth reiterating. I think there's always trust assumptions with any custody model. I think what most people discount on the self custody side is. Certain people. Are just OK with trusting themselves basically and putting that burden on themselves and, and for those people that are OK and comfortable with that, that's totally fine. I think the reality that most people on that side of the campus have not grappled with is that the average person actually doesn't want that responsibility. If it's going to be a material allocation, if it's going to be a material percentage of their net worth, they actually don't want that responsibility and burden. And I think that that I think you could very easily make the argument that that dogmatic thinking has stunted Bitcoin adoption. Like just generally speaking, over the past 15 years, I think there would be more adoption if multi institution existed earlier than it did or if there were just other options that weren't so forceful in saying you need to take on this responsibility and this burden. Because the reality is, is someone on zero is it? That's a big ask. It's a big ask in terms of the learning curve. And then it's a big ask in terms of the responsibility and the burden. And so if we want more people to be able to benefit from, you know, bitcoins properties as better money, there needs to be better solutions that aren't just saying, let's let's let all the coins go to Coinbase. Like that's a sub optimal outcome as well. And so, yeah, we think that obviously multi institutions fits that sort of elegant hybrid middle ground where, yes, you're still technically trusting counterparties, but you're doing it in a distributed fashion where you're not unilaterally trusting any counterparty, which is actually super elegant. And I think still sort of underappreciated that like that is the core of the model. Like you as the end client retain some amount of control because none of the entities in the quorum have unilateral control. Like that is that is that does kind of break some brains because again, like this is only possible with Bitcoin. Like you can't do this with cold. To Michael's point, that's part of why it failed. If you could multi sig gold, maybe it wouldn't have become so centralized and have, you know, the 100 to one ratio of of claims to underlying. And so that, you know, we do think that this is the way things evolve and and the reality is we just need better solutions because if you want everyone on on earth to to benefit from the technology that is Bitcoin can't force everybody to hold it themselves. Yeah. And I think the other thing that's worth calling out is. They said this for. A while but like if you're ever out there investing and looking at the space or wanting to jump in like this is the perfect time like risky adjusted to build the biggest businesses because the people historically in this industry don't really know much like because you can talk about monetary theory or got Bitcoin in 2012 doesn't give you the like. Is it make you validate to understand A, how this is going to play out or B, you understood it and you've kind of seen this play out like there was always screws a little loose and getting Bitcoin even, you know, depending on how early you were. But the notion of individuals just assume when they came in, they learned about Bitcoin. And then there's never been a second or third over thinking of play out. Not your keys, not your coins forever. And it's not to say one or the other is right for anything. It's I don't know how we even got to this place of explaining to people how they should hold their money because nobody would ever tell somebody hold all the 100 if you were 100% in gold, put it all in your house. Like nobody would be like, get the hell out of my house. Or like you put all your money in the duffel bag and bury it. Like that doesn't make any sense. But we feel confident that we can tell people what to do with their Bitcoin. And then the other side of it is it's just really a bearish take on humanity if you can't trust anybody. It was said with Brad Chambers early on, one of the, I think on the pods, but he referenced it also behind the closed doors. It was such a simple distillation of everything we're talking about. It's like, do we plan to live in a world where we have to test our food every time we take our family out to eat? Like, like, it doesn't make any sense. And now it's not to say you don't just go all in and trust anybody with anything in your wealth and you have to do diligence. There's all these things, but it's just never been fully like explained. And so individuals have taken tropes and they never really got to the root of it. And it's gonna actually hurt a lot of people. Like to Jacksons point, that person lost whatever thousand BTC and people are like shamed into like, well, I got to do it this way and they feel like there's no shortage. And this is part of founding this business because I'm bored of thousands of clients, billions of dollars into collaborative custody. And I started to realize like at a certain level, people don't know how to reconstitute the wallet. They don't even know what they put all the seeds and the hardware devices underneath their like desk and they don't realize you could take two pictures of each one and never move any of that and move all the assets, let alone if the house burns down, wives throw away stuff like there's just no shortage that nobody's been incentivized to tell this story or explain it because nobody's had a solution for it. It doesn't make it wrong and it doesn't even make it right. Everyone has to do their own research, but it doesn't make it wrong because like we also have a solution for it. And that's the beauty of being right and having a product is if you're if if you are right, you're going to, you know, be able to reap the rewards from it. I'm sort of surprised that every company and kind of every board that has a fiduciary duty to their shareholders doesn't use multi institutional custody. Because it seems like from a like if you're a director looking at the liability you're facing that you have to at least hold a portion of your Bitcoin in that form versus kind of handing it all over to Fidelity or whoever it may be. And maybe it, and you know, maybe it'll take litigation or something like that to force the issue, but it just seems very, if I were a director sitting in a company looking to, or trust a trustee, trustee of a trust or something like that, I would be thinking I need multi institutional custody because it's, it's kind of the most secure way that doesn't involve or doesn't require our company or trust to rely on a couple individuals alone. Yeah, I was actually just having this conversation. I don't think this is killing any confidence. But Hester, Commissioner Hester Purse is out there really pounding pavement, doing like good work, meeting with people in the space. And she put something out and we we got in touch and in Dallas and was explaining that exactly. It was kind of like the founding of this business was realizing on a long enough time horizon from an ETF perspective, it's the only way. If these assets continue to grow and they are and we're going to be at multiple trillions of these ETF's, it makes zero sense from a consumer protection perspective. And so we're seeing this with sophisticated treasury companies all morning with us. But to your point, sadly it's going to really take a big deleveraging where I think where it becomes part of like just natural audit and like processes where you can't park clients capital in something that because at the end of the day it's just three coin bases or three anchorages. Like if somebody on boards today, we have multiple qualified custodians, they don't even need on ramp to participate. We can coordinate, provide all the thing, have a unified experience, but we're that early that nobody gets fired for going to coin base B, the status quo sticky. This is the same reason where we do these pods every week because people listen and they tell us, okay, finally I got it. Finally I got it. Like I'm doing my diligence, I'm listening, I'm picking up, I'm getting it. And the reality is it just takes time because custody is ultra sticky. And it really takes a jolting, whether it's a family member getting sick, somebody getting sick, realizing I got to get my own affairs in order, the neighbor getting their house broken into, the wildfires, the floods, like all these things naturally because at the certain time you feel good about it. But then market forces in the thing I tell our team is independent of anything the market does or anything we do, we're doing things at the margins for adoption of what we're talking about here because I've seen this first hand. The market will do everything for us, meaning the price will rise and people will get uncomfortable and then we'll be ready with open arms for them. Because I saw this happen in 21 and 22 when the price went from those bands of 17 to 20, everyone was fine with their custody. Second, Sailor and Ross and everyone aped into Q4. That's when we added billions of dollars. And similarly here we're still in this weird band of 70 to 100 where people still feel confident what they have set up. The sad part is that's when mistakes happen because they haven't thought through, well, who, where is it sitting, what's happening in the underline? But as it goes to 1415180, now they get concerned. But the problem is on the other side of that that's also in counterparty risk is being inserted into the market because all this liquidity is coming in. The animal spirits are at its highest peak. And so people are just blowing up left and right. And then that's when everyone seeks fault tolerant, decentralized redundant solutions. And so that's if anybody's curious of our, our strategy is like we just keep talking about this and we'll be here when you're ready. So I really enjoyed my work here at Onramp, and the reason is because I get to work with people like you, get to spend a lot of my time having conversations with individuals, businesses and so on that are looking to navigate Bitcoin. And I find it rewarding because of everything we discuss on this show. You know, Bitcoin is really a way to protect your time, your energy, your wealth, and it is fulfilling to be able to help people do so. And so the latest part in doing that here at Onramp is launching Onramp Guardian, which we discussed at the end of the episode. And really the way I would distill that is enhancements around our multi institution custody solution so that you can protect yourself, you can protect your family against digital threats, physical threats. This is only going to get worse. And it's it's really not fun. I mean, it's objective as Bitcoin continues to appreciate, there's more awareness around it, the stakes are higher. So unfortunately, attacks are just going to become more sophisticated and more common. And I feel confident that we have the best solution to mitigate as many attacks as possible, eliminate a lot of threat factors. So if you're not familiar already, can go to our website and check out on Ramp Guardian. It's included in all of our client accounts. And I think you'll get a lot of value out of it. Before. We let you off the hook, Jesse is, Michael said. When the price is higher, people come to, you know, come to their senses and understand multi institution. Is the price going higher or IS124K the top for this year? Oh man, you're going to put me on the spot. I think it's the price is going higher. I have no idea over what time frame or how high, but much higher. Good answer. That's my prediction. So this isn't the top of a cycle though basically. There is no. Talk, Michael, I'm. Sticking. I'm sticking with my answer. I don't. I don't need you pressuring me here. Yeah, I I respected Jesse cuz one time. What's the phrase people? Like there's there's no top cuz Fiat has no bottom. Just get that one that's. The that's that's a good answer. I like that. Perfect. We we might need to find a new host if Brian says that again on the last trade. Next. Time he's going to pull up the neo what is the matrix line of like what is it like? Are you telling me I can exchange these for dollars? No, I mean maybe before you're at curious Jackson and Brian, because I think like this is something we haven't talked about. There's a lot of discussion around you know from the thought leaders like there's a top and you know over there and whatever like what are your guys where do you guys see this going? You don't have to call like your price, but where do you see the extension of I think we'd all agree like there is some cycle. It doesn't just like it's not going to it is obviously going to go forever, but there's going to be natural business like crypto Bitcoin cycles. Where do you have long do you think this kind of like bull market goes? I kind of, I kind of think at this point like in my mind the market structure has has changed meaningfully in the sense that over the past call it 6 to 12 months, we've seen this sort of sideways chop to abbreviated upside to again sideways chop to abbreviate upside. Like that is pretty different than than prior cycles in terms of what we are calling a bull market. And so my sort of base case at this point is like, that's what is going to continue to happen as all of these channels and the plumbing of institutions getting allocated continues to increase. Like we've talked about this in the past, like yes, while the ETFs are the most successful products, like the plumbing and and people's access to these things is still limited and restricted in, in many cases. And so that's only going to continue to widen. And so I kind of expect to see this same sort of chop solidation slightly upwards until if and until like in my mind, what causes the end of a cycle per SE is actually probably not related to crypto necessarily or even Bitcoin. Like to me, it's some sort of Black Swan or broader market like macro deleveraging that, you know, in a, in a certain short time frame, correlations go to 1 and Bitcoin delevers as well. But then it's the fastest horse out of whatever that looks like. That's kind of my base case like I don't and maybe it's the treasury company stuff, maybe it's you know real all season leverage that does contribute to more of an internal deleveraging event. I could see that happening as well. But my sort of base case at least through the end of the year is like we see more of the same of what we saw for the past 6 to 12. Yeah. I would just add as well that we really haven't seen a bull market because if we if we're men of our word and we stick to our guns with earlier in the conversation with gold and using gold as the denominator for the Bitcoin price. We we're actually at, not. At all time highs right now. And so if you look, I believe it was December of 2024 where Bitcoin did set a new all time high-priced in gold. Now we're down about 15 or 20% and that's a combination of Bitcoin being down and gold being up big time this year. So I don't know, I think we we have much higher to go. And then you guys may recall as well, last cycle all the Bitcoin naysayers were very confident that Bitcoin was going to be crushed under higher interest rate policy. It was, you know, it was only an asset that could survive under Zerp that existed post GFC. And so I mean that's all been dispelled. We're pretty much at pretty much in a bear market right now for Bitcoin and we haven't even seen, you know, rates come lower. We have the tensions building between the government and the central bank. They, they actually are one, you know, 1 entity for people who are not convinced of that, but they, they like to pretend that they're two different things. But we're starting to see in real time that there's an acknowledgement that these are one entity and that because of the fiscal situation of the US government, the hand will be forced of monetary policy. So yeah, I mean, I think it goes higher, but considerably a dollar price and I wonder what happens if you denominated in gold, but I think also new all time highs priced in gold this year as well. Yeah, at the risk of being insanely wrong, I I'm beginning to believe with a 20 to 30% chance, if not greater, this is what people would talk about as a super cycle and let's go. And the reason, the reason, the reason why I think it's a confluence of things and Jackson hit on some of them. But the, the base case that we've talked about before about super cycle would be if sovereign stepped in to bid and then there would be a natural because that's just persistent. And then also, you know, what are they selling for? And I think gold being the Canary, sovereigns are already bidding BTC. They're bidding gold 1st and they will naturally step in to BTC. And if we believe bitcoins going to 1 to $10 million in dollar terms, obviously 1,000,000 from 100K is not like the hard part is getting from zero to 1 and one to 10 or one to 100 KA 100K to a million is not, is not the hard part. And what leads me to say that as well is because to Jackson's point, from the retail setup where we've been in a bear market, there's very few retail investors stepping in. You can see it on on chain when everyone's like screaming, which is a different story about like the the fees, like that's not an issue, but like the fact that these flows have been in the ETFs and the digital asset treasury companies. But I think that's part of market mechanics at play because people have been the same way. Gold was kind of like messed with and everyone understood it and it's kind of like broken out of that is Bitcoin somewhat like, I don't want to say paper Bitcoin, but there's just a notion of the, the, the Bitcoin price is staying in bands because people are accumulating and when the reflexivity comes, that's when retail comes. That's ultimately right because the time cycle should be, they should be here based on like halvings and where the demand is, but it hasn't come in because retail is ultimately A proxy for the price movement and they naturally step in. So we're still haven't even seen that. And so you take all that together along with Sovereign jet crisis, the cat's out of the bag because gold's already showing it. The, the theme and the zeitgeist of gold being at play. Bitcoin already with the ETFs, I do see it as a completely different ball game. We step in and at a very minimum would make the bet that this extends deep into 26 and 27 as far as Bitcoins price appreciation. But the other side of that will be very bearish because though you're going to be a lot of Bitcoin lost and we'll all call it, Oh, the animal spirits. And it's not it will be something else. And I won't go into it here. But yeah, it's just place your bets accordingly. But also protect your asset because protect your ass and your because you know, like it's just. My my. My case that I've been running with is 2021 and 2 was the dry run for whatever we're seeing here. So the exuberance and the price appreciation was just like the the test test run. And everything's been set in place, whether it's legislation, we talk about offshore derivatives getting pushed back in tethered. You know, we got Larry, not Larry. What is it, Lutnick? You know, deep inside Tether, we got like everything's in place to really let this thing eventually, finally RIP, and it's gonna RIP. What you're saying Michael, if I can parse, if I can parse that monologue, if if the sovereigns step in in size, they prevent any top from happening. Basically, if the sovereigns. Step in in size, we go higher than anybody's expecting and we don't go low. We don't go as low as people are expecting, which is a traditional like 80% drawdown in like 170 top. It's going to be fundamentally different than that and Bitcoin becomes angled or just back to like what we talked about here, Gromans conservative end up as 10 to 20% of people's portfolio because of the persistent inflation. Just become part of the narrative that you protect your assets with hard money. And that is the definition, at least in my mind, of a super cycle because you're not like trading Bitcoin and institutions aren't exit liquidity. They're literally coming in to protect. And it just becomes part of like the sovereign, like Harvard buying their $100 million allocation. What like Harvard buying their $100 million allocation is really interesting because now you have them looking at the asset at least an objective way, theoretically they should be. And then it's like, well, what are you going to sell it for? You're going to go buy like some more venture or you're going to go buy some like private credit that's insolvent. Like, what are you going into? And I think that's what's come out of the bag in the past 12 months and has more of this proliferates and permeates like these institutional walls and just general investors. It's like, well, where, why, what are you going to sell for more dollars to like, that's what I think the definition of a super cycle is. You're just like, there's no, it's, it's funny because that chart in like the Weimar stuff and the BTC, they all like mimic the same thing. It's like you see the volatility and then eventually you just kind of like go parabolic. No one told us that the Super cycle would be so boring. It, it's funny because it what I think the last piece where I, I shared that was I was looking at the price chart as, as one does. And it was a little bit before this little retrace. But it kind of starts to look like you're kind of just like staring like the stairway to heaven. Because here, like when you look at these other bull markets, you kind of go and then you kind of retrace and even here, but this is like just fundamentally different and the time scale is different. And so to your point, that looks boring because you're just watching. It's just, it's in, it's in our version of slow motion. So Jackson's .100 years is pretty like short time horizon. But when you can watch a TikTok video to learn about, you know, whatever crazy conspiracy you want in 15 seconds, like, you know, three months or six months into this, this trend feels like ages. Can I give a plug for guardian in this context? So I really think the biggest guardian. Jesse No, you tell. Me, Michael, What are Jackson? Why don't you guys? Yeah, I mean. I can. I can jump in real quick. I I'm supposed to join a client call right now. I'm supposed to pick up the I'm supposed to pick up the paint roller and actually do some work, but you guys can carry on without me. The the short of it is Guardian is really just additional protections around multi institution custody that I think really do a great job of protecting people against digital and physical threats. So really just giving people more Peace of Mind and confidence really ties into, you know, if Michael's right, super cycle. I was already laughing because I could picture like the thumbnail of this podcast is just like Michael, like pointed to like super cycle with this mouth open. But if he's right, you're gonna need some better protection for for your your better money. But all right, guys, carry on without me. Please. Am I, am I able to join or leave with you guys still recording? You should, yeah, just leave without ending it, all right? And. We haven't really actually discussed it deeply, but at the the very concise level, Garden was created in the same way. What we look at his broken market structure when we go to a family office, like I referenced yesterday, and they say that three people have to sell their Bitcoin to go into an interfer solution because they're afraid that their kids are going to get kidnapped. Like in our view, that's just a broken sign of the market because ultimately nobody's worried about their stock portfolio, their bonds getting liquidated. So being kidnapped get in a duffel bag like you're the person's caught by then. And so while multi institution is world class segregated institutions, video verification, offline sharded keys, you naturally want additional provisions in place, whether there's inherent weekly annual time locks, additional authentications to FAA, using AI to combat AI in the sense of liveliness checks to make sure that it's a real person along with some other features. But the real point is not only do clients have the ability to turn that on, but you start to has on ramp in multi institution. We won't be the only people doing this and we know of others building it will proliferate. Bad actors and individuals will realize, well, if Jesse's a client of on ramp and he has guardian, uh, turned on and there'll be even things we haven't launched it, but where you'll send emails to them and explain like your provisions or if they lock into the account, you can make it available. So if a bad actor, because that's usually how people get access first it's through social engineering of your e-mail or your just your credentials, they'll just realize like I can't do anything like physically I can't it's a seven day whatever the periods are. And then that ultimately becomes part of the market understanding that I just don't kidnap people that have Bitcoin because it's not in their direct control to do it. So that's in a in a summary Guardian and why we launched that a few weeks ago. Yeah, that's. Great. I think, and I think you hit on like the the most beneficial use of it, which is to protect from kind of outside threats, third party threats. But I think there's also protection from investor psychology and protection in a bull run. If you can't wait seven days to like pull the trigger and sell your Bitcoin, let's say you think it's a top, then you shouldn't be selling your Bitcoin in my opinion. And so I think I think that's an added benefit because I think the biggest risk in a bull market to underperformance is actually the individual just screwing up and making a mistake and getting staying spending too much time on Twitter and looking at the M2 chart relative to Bitcoin and screwing themselves out of of generational wealth. It's so. Funny you say that because I don't know how like there's something there in a deep cold storage and there's a time to move the asset versus if it just sits on an exchange. Definitely right. Like if it's in any kind of self custody, it takes time without killing any confidence. And this is partially why I was excited about the show launching 2 years ago was where I really liked All in was those guys are operators. They might be dip shits in some respects, but they like actually operate businesses. They're in the market, they're in the quote UN quote arena. Like so when they, when they show up, you're hearing insights generally from like boardrooms and how people are thinking. And you don't really get that a lot because you usually get either outside of the spectrum. You get people that are pure pontificators and they're they're podcasters, but they're not actually building like in the weeds. So then it's like what they're saying is not necessarily kind of like, you know, has the best lens. And then the other side is you don't have Jamie Dimon or Abby Johnson on podcast. You really never get a peek into their deal. So point being is just this past week, this what you just shared, Jesse actually happened how to move money sizable allocation. You know, it is what it is going into the trade desk and price reverted came back right, because everything out there is telling the story of top is in and you have to think about it through the lens. There's plenty of people listening there like, well, how can somebody think like that? But the reality is people have stepped into this market at 60708090K. They're sitting on some decent gains, maybe 100. It's their wealth, it's material wealth allocated to Bitcoin. They're seeing all the global macro stuff. They're seeing all the trends. They're hearing everybody on Twitter dads, blah, blah, blah. And it's like, oh, maybe I want to realize, I think, and that time that it took to move into, to get it to the signing process, all that's like, hey, I wanna cancel this cuz I kind of assume that's what it was. Cuz never seen. Yeah, because we have a very sticky product. So it's always weird when you see large amounts moving and you're whatever. But it's in investors. They can do whatever. It's their money, but you just hit the nail on the head. It's a very interesting dynamic on psychology. And the sad part is like it's still not hard to move the money. It may take an extra day or two. But to your point, it's very different if it's just sitting on Gemini. Because part of the biggest thing that I've enjoyed being just all in for a while is like, I remember when I first got in, I was like trading around the market and not really trading around the market. But you're like kind of get a better entry price. You know, some of the most stressful time in my life of like, for a year, just moving in and then out and like, you see it and then you lost some Bitcoin because you thought it is going to retrace. It's like you just got to, like, protect it and then just go away. And I think that's where you're hinting at there, yeah. Exactly. And that's where I see like the downside of ETFs, to be honest. Like I love that it has opened up provided access to Bitcoin to some people that wouldn't otherwise buy Bitcoin. But it also is just like a click of a button to in when someone gets scared to to sell and have kind of no fundamental basis or no kind of plan for what they're doing over the long term. You'll love a we, we should wrap, but you'll love like, so we have this like 365 daytime lock where somebody says like for three or 65 days you can't move the assets out of the vault. And that actually stemmed partially from, I think somebody came out. It was like some third party where it was a product that was like you can never get access to the Bitcoin, but it can never leave the like vault. It was like some Tranfi product. I forgot what it was. It was like one of the IRA companies, but it was like. You can only move if you basically sell it to dollars and then the dollars show up in your bank account. So it's to prevent. Move like losses from hacks. So theoretically the Bitcoin should never leave the solution. It should only go to dollars. And I was like, that's interesting because in the in the perception of the client, I can see how that's super valuable because you're basically downside protecting any Bitcoin being lost. And then people that are, you know, want dollars. And so that's kind of where they stem from is like you can lock up for 365, but the kicker is that you can unlock it. But we have branches across the country and whoever is in whatever geographical reason region they would meet somebody from on ramp, validate that it's them, they're not addressed, they would be able to unlock it. What you just made me think of, we should do that is also for trading. It's like you have to go meet so you have time, you have get on a flight and think about your decision. And so, yeah, there's a lot of interesting things. Yeah, you should. Make them do something. They have to do something super embarrassing before they can unlock it. Like yeah, jump on the last. Trade in it, jump on the last trade right and explain exactly how they're. Selling. In a chicken costume or something like that, that's. Actually great. Well, Jesse, you very much appreciate you joining us. Anything you want to plug, follow you looking for new clients, anything like that? No, no, you're, you're trying to get in and you want to pump. I'm trying to. Pump look, I got yeah, I got early entry into all the dats, so just buy them all. Just kidding, don't clip that anybody. No, thank you guys. I enjoyed the conversation and I always enjoy hearing you guys hearing your thoughts. Awesome. Well, thanks for. Joining us and I'll do Jackson's job for him here at the end please like subscribe, leave a comment yell at Jackson if you want Oh yeah if. You made it this far and Jackson's not on you. Should we should tell folks to do something cuz they listen. They like to to leave comments. Should we start a GoFundMe for his house purchase? Yeah, maybe that's the comment. If you listen to this far, just comment and say we're glad the guys set up a GoFundMe and you want to contribute. And if more than five people do that, I promise I will set up the GoFundMe and next week I will post the link and I'll maybe match any contributions to Jackson. 'S go back all. Right, guys. Well, appreciate it. We'll see you next week. Thanks, Jesse. Thanks for listening to this week's episode of the show. If you found the information valuable, please share the episode with a friend or leave a rating on your favorite podcast app. All the links we discussed in today's show will be in the show notes inside your podcast app. Before we finish, a quick reminder that Onramp Media is for informational and entertainment purposes only, and nothing should be construed as investment or legal advice. Regardless of where you are in your Bitcoin journey, we'd love to hear from you. Visit onrampbitcoin.com contact to schedule a consultation with one of our private client advisors.