A (3:40)

Yeah, that, that makes perfect sense. So this is the one that I think, as you said, something caught my eye in the latest 13F filings. Obviously you're tracking Ibid and what's happening, who's buying, who's selling. Well, this one I think went very viral. Instead of me reading it, maybe you can just give us the quick TLDR and unpack what's going on here.

B (3:59)

Yeah, absolutely. I love 13F. It's like a birthday present that comes four times a year. I think every hedge fund analyst follows it very closely. They want to know what their friends are holding, they want to know what their peers are doing. And of course it's not the perfect picture because it only represents generally longs. There's no shorts. Also, derivative overlays can be complex to navigate, so it's not perfect, but it does give you some impression, especially towards long term holding patterns over a period of time. So listen, what is really interesting about this particular 13F is we saw a brand new name come in. It's always exciting when there's a brand new name name because you want to find out who is the bid. And this brand new name was actually the largest buyer of IBIT through 4Q through December 31 last year. This entity is called Loror. I'm probably mispronouncing it because it sounds to me that it has a French origin. But the key here is that it is a Hong Kong based filer. The entity however, is an ltd, which signifies it's got some offshore components to it. It's most likely, in my opinion, a BVI or a Cayman entity. It could also be a Hong Kong entity at some level, but my guess is 99% it's a Cayman or a BVI offshore feeder. So maybe worth remembering that Hong Kong is a really interesting jurisdiction because in a way, it has the advantage of being the entry for Chinese capital, but also is highly regulated to work within kind of the Western financial systems and be a bridge essentially to the onshore market. Now, it's not perfect, and they are bifurcated markets. You know that. Because the Chinese renminbi also has two exchange rates, one onshore and one offshore. But the key is Hong Kong plays this incredible conduit role. So anytime there's a Hong Kong filer, it's particularly interesting. Now, what else is interesting is that this SPV only owns ibit. It actually doesn't own anything else. It is a Bitcoin access vehicle and it is the biggest buyer of ibit. And now it owns a fair amount of the shares. It's over 50 bips as a single filer. So that's pretty interesting. What else I would say is, for me, at least the name was interesting. Just because it's the kind of name that makes you think, like, what is this person? Because imagine you saw 13F filing that had the name like Jane Doe or John Smith and you'd be like, that's a little like, strange. And that's kind of the impression that made me go down this rabbit hole a little bit further, which is like, who is this guy? And can we find out any more information about it? By the way, just reminding this is as of December 31, we will see the March 31 filing, whether this entity is building, selling or out. And we'll need one more data point, given that we're living through this cycle right now in January and February. But that's something I just want to share as an overlay to avoid misunderstandings. One other thing I will point out is the speculation that I made is that it could potentially be entry of Chinese capital. Right? And I just want to be careful in my qualification of what I mean by Chinese capital, because again, you can't really move money out of China very easily. There's a lot of friction for capital control. But one of the ways that there is actually a lot of Chinese wealth, especially in the financial services sector, is there's actually a bunch of hedge fund managers that are Chinese, as in they're Chinese citizens, they're onshore Chinese, but they do run funds in Hong Kong. And because they do run funds in Hong Kong, they have capital that they are leveraging with external to generate their own money. And that complex is fairly big. There's a lot of money in Chinese hedge funds and there's a lot of wealthy Chinese billionaires as a result. Just like the same way we have it in the US the other thread I will now connect here and it's not in my post so this will be new information but one that Parker has been pointing me towards and I failed to appreciate it from the very first time he had basically connected the dots with the address of the location being similar to another entity called How Advisors. I misunderstood the first time that when he was connecting the dot he was talking about the office address being 2 Exchange Square, which is a huge office complex. So there's hundreds of thousands of funds. It doesn't mean anything if they're together. But actually he corrected me, they share the same office suite. Now we're talking about like the same actual physical space in that building that's a little more interesting. So then I went down the rabbit hole a little bit with Parker and I actually happen to know how advisors. I know how advisors from my hedge fund days and what how Zhang does is he's a Chinese long short equities PM and he actually was extremely successful at another fund prior called Prime. Prime Capital for those who don't know is probably the closest thing that would be like the tiger capital management of China. It is the grandfather of all the greatest money makers in the hedge fund universe. There's many prime cubs the same way there are tiger cubs. And how is a prime cub? So if you are then thinking about this access vehicle, the possibility that would now connect here is there's a lot of Chinese people who again are onshore Chinese that have money it's in Hong Kong and they want bitcoin exposure. And the way that you might be able to get through that is a conduit SPV like this. And so to me, anytime there's capital flight types of dynamics, it's not the institutions, the sovereigns that move first, it's the families, it's the high net worths, it's the billion. That's the first sign. And if we're all connecting the stock carefully in the right way, my instinct is that as now corroborated with the addition of new insights from Parker who I'm thankful for, I think this entity represents ultra high net worth assets that are onshore Chinese people, but they have offshore capital and they divesting and diversifying into bitcoin exposure, which I is an extremely interesting phenomenon and we should keep an eye on it.

A (10:11)

Yeah. And as I listened to you talk about this, at least in the United States, the narrative, and you obviously run the investment side of one, has been Bitcoin treasury companies, but nobody really talks about IBIT treasury companies, even though it's the same thing, or entities that might be stacking bitcoin through institutional product exposure rather than directly through spot Bitcoin. Right. And I would imagine that there's nuance there. Maybe this is easier for a Chinese family office equivalent that's trying to get capital flight. But is this something you think that we'll see a lot more of or that actually we're not tracking that already exists? So I was imagining these 13F filings. There's probably a lot of these entities. And I've heard rumor that there are a lot of IBIT only entities that we don't even lump into the bitcoin treasury space.

B (11:01)

That's right. There are a lot of IBIT only entities. But historically, these IBIT only entities came from crypto wealth. So there are a few names that I've seen being thrown around and I'm familiar with some of them. They were former touch points that I had at Bitwise and ongoing today. And it's more likely that it's crypto wealth that is looking to access traditional banking rails to find leverage or convenience towards actually getting private wealth management services. That's generally been the common theme. It is less common.

A (11:34)

Not. Sorry to interrupt, but that could also mean just like novel ways to hedge. Right. I mean, things that you just can't. Couldn't do in the spot market necessarily that they can do on ibit.

B (11:43)

Yeah, that's right. That's right. My suspicion is though, if they were doing overlays in this spv, you would see the overlay positions together. So I'm not totally sure yet if you would want to segregate again, because the capital efficiency comes from being able to pledge those assets to do those overlays. But one thing you could imagine it does is it gives you credibility to have a balance sheet that a financial advisor can affirm. So if you're trying to take out a big loan or something and you want to show, hey, I have like $400 million worth of Bitcoin, but the financial advisor or the bank is not recognizing it because it's owned in an asset format that Hong Kong can't read. Hey, ibit, you know how to read ibit, that's pretty easy. Here's my bank statement. And they can then give you a haircut on that collateral. So I think there are some like, financial gains to be had for being part of the actual traditional capital market systems. And especially I think in Asia where you kind of always want to air on the side of compliance, especially when it comes to like the ambiguity with the China kind of directives, you want to at least be like very surgical about being compliant in the exposures that you're seeking. And I think there's a little bit of that that also could be a little bit different from the US's mind share.

A (13:03)

Yeah. Okay, that makes perfect sense. I want to talk more specifically now about the Bitcoin treasury space. Obviously people remember you fondly as the bit wise guy on the show and now you're the pro cap guy. You're working with Pomp on Treasury company. We've seen a bit of, I would say some shakes and quakes in the bitcoin treasury market. How do you kind of view that market now and moving forward? Obviously a lot of trading at a discount. Some have done well, some have had poor strategies. Do you think it's a merger and acquisition situation? I know that Bitcoin treasury companies aren't going anywhere.

B (13:43)

Yeah, it's a loaded question and there's a lot of threads we can pull on. I think first and foremost it's obviously been a little disappointing. We obviously would have wanted to see the reflexive ability to support Bitcoin price action through the conduits of the institutional investors that would choose to access Bitcoin treasury as a way to be in the bitcoin space. And sometimes I think on the other side I see the visible kind of annoyance or distrust towards treasury companies in what they're doing. And some of them is warranted. But at another level, at maybe the highest level, they are the only buyers of bitcoin today in a substantial size strategy is doing God's work to imagine where Bitcoin actually would be if they were not in the space to be in the market. So I just want everyone to remember the bullish case that we've always had for Treasuries is that they are long term positive for bitcoin adoption because essentially it's bitcoin being acquired in permanent capital vehicles, hopefully in a format that is locked up forever, where they will never sell it, hence increasing its scarcity value over a long period of time and financializing that. That being said, bitcoin price has been awful. But the treasury companies too, I think have all demonstrated value capture in the ways that we could hope for. And we are probably at that stage of dispersion where people are going to suss through the winners and losers. And I think there will be winners and losers as there are in all alpha driven markets. And the last point I would mention is in the very beginning when I was at Bitwise, the case I made for Treasuries long term is going to be three pronged. One is you buy Bitcoin, that's valuable. Two is managing the liabilities to allow more capital efficient way of buying Bitcoin. That's the version of course Saylor has exceptionally executed on. And the third is the roe. Right. Actually forget the assets, forget the liabilities. The third component of the balance sheet is equity. How can you create ROE that is beneficial to them by Bitcoin? And that's the operating business. And I think you're seeing some treasury companies recognizing they need an operating business that generates real revenue, real cash flow and that can be repurposed towards them potentially buying more Bitcoin as a defensive play towards the basement. But the point is we need a mechanism to acquire Bitcoin that is still orthogonal to just the financialization of the liability wrapper. And I think that's what we've always said at Procat we would attempt by building an operating business. We've seen Nakamoto essentially go through with their promise of doing that through BTC Inc. And I think you will probably see more of those operating revenue type of endeavors come through. Now I'd also mention in that construct Tom Lee, what he's done with acquiring a stake in Mr. Beast's Industries and enterprises is similar. It's, it's actually widening the net tam of the investor types to be a bigger than just, you know, RV traders of Bitcoin Treasuries. Right. Like they're great. You need capital allocators come in who are playing the arb. But long term you want your best shareholders to be the ones that are actually fundamentally long term holders of your corporate thesis and shareholder value creation techniques.

A (17:00)

Yeah, I mean the last time I had Bailey on the podcast two months ago, he basically said look, we deployed a lot at the top. We thought just holding Bitcoin was going to be enough. Now we're looking for cash flowing businesses and ways to actually earn money and put it into Bitcoin. Sort of the classic way that an individual would do it. As you said, they I guess purchased Bitcoin Inc. And utxo management, which are his companies or previously a lot of people had a problem with that. But as far as I remember that was disclosed as part of the plan from the very beginning to my memory. I didn't really dig so deeply into it. I just saw that there was the obvious FUD or arguments about whether it was right or wrong. But I remember that that was always going to be part of the.

B (17:46)

Yeah, yeah, that's right. It was disclosed. And this is the upside and downside of public markets. The public markets is very good at ensuring that there's transparency and disclosure. And it is probably the exceptional feature of the US capital markets in which capital therefore comes to play in this arena. That is the best part of being a publicly traded company in the United States. However, that does not mean that strange things does not happen. I mean it happens all the time. You just have to read, look, think, study and make up your own decision. And that is ultimately up to the end fiduciary investor as to how they're assessing the risks of the underlying transactions. There's a lot of guardrails, I think that's placed generally in the public markets needing to have different controls, processes. If there's dynamics of affiliate transactions and all the things that I know people are focused on with laser eyes to imagine incentive alignment and I think everyone is correct to do that work. That's why it's all in the public space. But history will have shown lots of strange things happen in the public markets and lots of values can get created in the public markets doing strange things. I will highlight Elon Musk as a great example. Many people don't recognize, but Elon Musk has unconventionally done things in the public markets that many traditional investors have either said it's at best immoral and at worst criminal with his own sister companies. People might remember SolarCity and how SolarCity went down in the transactional relationship he had there with I believe it was his cousin. And there's all kinds of things, but they're all public. And you know, my opinion has always been the same in crypto as it is in the public life of politics and, and personhood. Everything. If it's public, then that is information that is being shared for anyone to make up their own mind with their high agenc should exercise.

A (19:38)

Yeah, I agree. And so we, we talked obviously about potential capital flight from China or at least Chinese. Chinese investors looking for exposure to the industry. Well, the UAE is making some big moves too that seemingly just doesn't move the price because no good news can move price right now. But Abu Dhabi Investment Council says it's building an allocation of Bitcoin because it's a store of value similar to gold. And then you move on. The UAE is mined 450 million in Bitcoin and they haven't actually moved any of that. There's no outflows in four months. Like when we talk about massive buyers quietly accumulating bitcoin. And do they know something? Well, I don't think they have inside information, but I think they know that you can't hold this beach ball underwater forever.

B (20:15)

That's right. That's right. No. And I think you have to recognize the fundamental ideology of Bitcoin and why sometimes this whole IBIT integration and synergy can be distracting is Bitcoin has always meant to be outside money. Right. It's meant to be an outsider's outside money, even as a sovereign reserve. And so when you see countries like China basically disallowing bitcoin ownership, you should really think about why that is from an autocratic institution and then see how also there are other wealth creators that are investing and the ideologies they exercise and how they think about outside money to create a new system outside of the current dollar hegemony as it might sit today. And so Bitcoin will not be a bilateral trade between China and the US. It will not be a bilateral trade between the Middle east and the US either. It is part of a very dynamic system in which people are going to leverage it to be in control of what we've always called outside money. And I think it's important that we keep that as the long term thesis. And in that sense I've always been bullish that the distrust of institutions that continue to escalate in ways that is so incredibly sad but also realistic. Bitcoin will be around for a long time.

A (21:28)

So literally this just hit sort of as we're talking, or at least I was just sent and it aligns so well with the IBIT options conversation we were having. Justin. CME Group will launch 24. 7 crypto futures and options trading starting May 29th pending approval.

B (21:44)

Boom. The hyper financialization must go on. The retardification of society will continue. This is where the markets are going to okay.

A (21:54)

The retard ification of society. Now I have to bring up now somehow I think I got rid of it. I'll find it in a minute. But you had the incredible post about everything that's happening with Kalshi and Polymarket and predictive markets. I'm going to bring it up, but I, you know, I think it's the mass adoption of gambling, in my humble opinion. I don't know that you agree or disagree, but, man, you can gamble on literally everything and anything. 247 and we've obviously had Trump say that the feds are not going to regulate that. CFTC now has it under their blanket, but a lot of states not loving that idea and are pushing back hard. So I'm going to bring this up in a second somehow, Kat, but you can kind of talk about that because I think all this 24 7, 365, everything that you can bet on is a sign of something.

B (22:47)

It is, it's crazy and it's alarming, but it's also in many ways really exhilarating for what we can expect the price of information to be. I agree with you that there's a line to navigate very carefully, which is there's, there's kind of two questions there. One is like substantialness of the thing that is of the information that society finds it valuable. And two is the scale in which people bet, if it's small or large, and ways in which that that kind of transactional element morphs from information discovery into, you know, an investing activity that could really lead to more kind of dire outcomes. So, and on that point, I think if you study the history of predictions, market, the number one starting point has always been presidential elections. And that's where my article starts. It starts at iem, which was an exchange that was created out of an academic study in Iowa in 1988. And it was really to find out whether the wisdom of the crowd was better than polling. And they found out it is absolutely true, that it was better in every sense of the word. And that was the birth and it was about presidential elections. The problem is presidential elections and policies in general is in a special category that the cftc, through some rulemaking by enforcement, I don't know whether accidentally or by purpose and deliberation that is considered violations of what they broadly define public interest. So I think it's important to keep in mind the vagueness and the ambiguity that exists by enforcement when the CFTC talks about markets that are best serving public interest. I think you and I would agree that a market that helps us understand better the probability of what the president is going to be is absolutely of public interest. So the question is, where is that line? And the line can be really fast moving, amorphous. Right? And I'm of the belief, and I don't know if I'VE made up my own mind on this. There are some like frivolous markets out there, right? You might see the markets on polymarket like is Taylor Swift going to show up to the Super Bowl? And like should people bet on that? And what kind of information exists in the inside versus the outside. But the reality is even something as trivial as that there always has been a financial market. And I think this is the part that sometimes escapes us. There's a whole cottage industry that actually is trying to find out whether Taylor Swift is going to be at the super bowl anyway. And they're probably paying somebody, they're probably paying the paparazzi, they're probably paying some. There's always some kind of things around information on the edge, always. And I think that's always been my starting point. There's always money at play for information discovery, no matter how trivial, no matter how substantial. And what polymarket and Kashi and these open markets can do is actually try to bring it more to the public disclosure with the possibility of fair price discovery for that information. And so, you know, I think there are some things I hold in higher views towards like yes, this is absolutely in the green. Then there are some things where I'm like, I don't know if this is net good or bad. But the thing that is probably most dangerous, and this is what you're alluding to when you talk about gambling, Scott, is you know, we shouldn't let people bet massive sums of monies on things that like they probably have no insight into no edge.

A (26:20)

Then it's just gambling.

B (26:22)

Yeah, yeah, yeah. And that's where I think some of the spirit around the senators come in in wanting to ban these types of gambling style activities. But the other issue, and my article talks about this, is that a lot of the precedence has been set around this for sports betting. And so the other kind of, kind of legal technical issue is what constitutes gaming in the ways that we are now betting on information that isn't strictly sports betting but has a lot of the same elements of maybe speculative behaviors that pose no information insights for the individual investors. I think that's why it's a very multi sided conversation and there's lots of ways that the noise can get lost. But for those who haven't read it, I would urge everyone to just take five minutes to take a quick skim because I've tried my best to distill the history of predictions market in the United States and the rulemakings around it as to why we are here today and why we have this onshore versus offshore market still today. And it all goes back to how these predictions markets were once upon a time enforced. And crypto enthusiasts will recognize a lot of harrowing similarities between why we have something like an FTX and a Coinbase or why Coinbase has an international operation but that's distinct from US operation. And it really comes down to the CFTC's role here.

A (27:46)

Yeah, I know you got to go in one second because the markets are about to open. I just want to say it's just going to be, it's early and it's going to take a lot of time to play out and figure out where people are gaming the system. Like, I agree that there's a market for whether Taylor Swift will show up at the Super Bowl. I'm not sure that Taylor Swift's travel agent should be able to put a million dollars on whether Taylor Swift is going to show up to the Super Bowl. Right. And clearly that's happening. Right. And you're going to have politicians that can place bets through family members, all on Nancy Pelosi on whether certain legislation that they know is going to pass or is not. Because all of those markets are now available.

B (28:22)

But here's the thing, here's the thing, Scott. People pay for that information already, right? There are literally lobbyists who basically get those information. And hedge funds paid lots of money to get an edge on any of these things. So when I say there's already a cottage industry of inside information that is financialized, I really mean that's the baseline we have to compare it to. So like what you said is incredibly legitimate and accurate and we should be concerned. But the question is, does this market enable that in a way that is not already enabled? And that's what we need to kind of reassess what the trade offs that we're making in these.

A (28:57)

I'm going to let you know, I guess the other side, the only nuance there is that there's a retail. The person on the other side is going to lose money when somebody has inside information. So they just have to apply the same inside information laws that they do in other markets. You got to go. Markets opening in one minute, everybody. Amazing. Jeff Park. Thank you, Jeff.

B (29:15)

Nice to have you always here.

A (29:17)

Thanks. I brought Jeff into Minecraft with me today. He actually has a job. We forget that people just show up to this show at like 9 o' clock in the morning when they legitimately have to go to work. But that's what our amazing guests do. There were a couple more stories that I just wanted to ping and so we can go ahead and do them ourselves. We got the time and we're in Minecraft, so we have no limitations here. Literally do anything we want. We have A new third stablecoin Yield meeting is set to take place at the White house tomorrow at 9am Eastern Standard Time. A small group representing crypto and banks is expected to attend. More in the a.m. it feels to me like we've had a lot of these meetings. I can't say whether they have or have not gone anywhere as of yet, but it doesn't feel like they have. It's going to be really interesting to see the next markups on the Clarity act and whether we actually have any consensus from the crypto industry, specifically Coinbase and the bank lobby and the legal side. To me it still feels like the Clarity act is very unlikely to happen, but I'm willing to be pleasantly surprised. All of those same people, by the way, were at Mar a Lago yesterday for the World Liberty Financial Conference. Hooray. Seems like every leader in our country has to go down to Mar a Lago and at least like kiss the family's ring once a year or else they, I don't know, turn into a pumpkin or something. The next story that I wanted to quickly show you is Bitcoin Going to Zero Searches Peak this month Google Trends saw global interest in bitcoin going to zero hit a peak score of 100 on February 13th. Spike comes with bitcoin trading roughly 50 below its all time high amid rising economic and geopolitical uncertainty. Can I ask you guys a question? Do you think that a signal like this and the Crypto Fear Greed index hitting I don't know 5 think that those are bottom signals or top signals? I call me crazy but when everybody's giving up it seems like a really good time to buy bitcoin. I continue to buy bitcoin. I think it could go lower because I'm smart and I am not a boltard and I don't believe that things only go up. But I really think that long term if you can buy bitcoin in the 60 thousands, even if you get the opportunity to buy it lower that this is probably a really good time to enter bitcoin over the long term and seeing things like that, I mean this is just despair, desperation time based capitulation, is it going to zero literally? Not like will bitcoin go down into a deeper bear market? Is it going to literal zero? Is the search? I don't know. I remember when Elon Musk went on Joe Rogan and started smoking weed. And you know, people were like, this guy is unserious. Tesla is going to zero. That was Tesla was 180 bucks pre split. I bought a bunch. I went on social media. I was like, I'm buying the hell out of Tesla here. People are like, you're nuts. It's going to zero. It's like one of the best trades that I ever made in my entire life. Pulled many, many multiples and X's from there because it's irrational. It's irrational to search for Bitcoin. Going to zero. That's literally stupid. And then if you think that that's even possible, I don't care who's searching it, then you are your own best counter indicator. But meanwhile, on the other side, we have Senator SEC Chair Paul Atkins says regulators should not panic over falling crypto prices. Whoa, whoa, whoa, guys, calm down. I don't really like it when people have to assure you like I am, I guess, right now. But people in the government have to assure you that everything's going to be okay. But I think that Paul Atkins here has a very good take, to be quite honest, and that things are going to be just peachy and fine. And meanwhile, other bullish signals. Federal Reserve has injected 18.5 billion into the US banking system for overnight repos. That's fourth largest liquidity injection since COVID QT is officially over. QE is back on the books, baby. And there is fresh liquidity coming into the market. Just wanted to ping those few stories before I exit Minecraft and return back to the real world. Tomorrow we're actually going to try something a little different. I'm doing the solo show as usual, but we just had the opportunity to book Haseeb Qureshi from Dragonfly. He's one of my favorite people. So I'm going to do the first, you know, 20, 25 minutes, the solo show, and then we're going to have him come on, kind of testing a new format where you get me before you get somebody else who's much smarter than me. Like, what if today I just hung out in Minecraft for 20 minutes to build up the suspense? Kind of as Jeff Park's fluffer, as they would say in the industry, is getting it ready, warming it up. In the DJ industry, they'd call me an opening act. Maybe that was more appropriate to say now right at the end of the show. And it was so clean and perfect then to say fluffer. But I'm gonna say Fluffer, fluffer, Fluffer. That's all I've got for you guys today. You know what, Actually, there's one more thing I want to tell you about. I've done it in the past, and I forget about it because, you know, I just don't share stuff. Do you guys remember? You guys might not know this, but I am a partial owner of a company called Defi Spirits with Bitcoin bourbon and Defi Vodka. Bitcoin Bourbon, before I stop drinking entirely, was my favorite drink. It is absolutely incredible and amazing, and the bottle makes for a great gift. And there were some issues with it being available in certain states and whatever, but defispirits.com I highly recommend that you drink this heavily, and if you're not going to drink it heavily, that you maybe gift it to a friend who enjoys drinking heavily. I don't know if I'm allowed to say these things. I don't know. Man, am I going to get in trouble. Seriously, though, look at the bottle. Like, the bottle. And it's a crazy story because Ryan who, like, reached out to me, it's gotta be five years, and he, like, sent it to me. Like, he was, we're doing this. And then there was Covid, and you couldn't get the glass for the bottle. And I actually, like, just as, like, I didn't even know him. He was just emailing me. He was like, what do you think of the bottle design? I was like, cool. And then eventually he got me a bottle and I drank some, and I was like, wow, this won, like, the biggest award possible in San Francisco. It's legit. It's so good. And the bottle looks amazing on your shelf. So I think even if you don't drink, if you don't drink, it looks really good as art. So buy it for a friend who likes bottle art, not your drunk uncle who this might be enabling. That's all I've got for you guys today. Hope you had a good one. I know I did. Jeff park is an absolute legend. The guy is brilliant. You know, I remember when guys like Jeff park and Matt Hogan, they were like the new bitwise guys and bitwise blowing up. And I him on the show, I was like, wow, these guys are really smart. And then like a year later, they're hard to book because they're, like, in the mainstream media and on every show in the world every day. Love to see it. Glad to have Jeff back. I will see you guys soon.

B (36:29)

Let's do.

A (36:39)

Baby,

B (36:43)

that's dope.