Bitcoin PUMPS As U.S. Banks Finally Get Crypto Trading Approval! Is The Bottom In?

Summary

Episode Overview

In this episode of The Wolf Of All Streets, host Scott Melker welcomes back macro and crypto markets analyst Peter Cheer to unpack the whirlwind of developments driving Bitcoin’s latest surge past $94,000 (before settling around $92,000). The episode explores bullish industry catalysts—most notably, unprecedented crypto trading approval for U.S. banks and Argentina’s move to allow domestic crypto bank transfers. Scott and Peter dissect the macro landscape, bank adoption, crypto regulation, stablecoins, and shifting narratives around Bitcoin’s so-called four-year cycle. The result is a rapid-fire, insight-rich conversation perfect for traders, investors, and anyone trying to make sense of this new bullish macro-crypto alignment.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Macro Landscape, the Fed, and Political Interference

• Fed Rate Cut Anticipation

  • Over 90% chance of a rate cut, but debate persists about the pace (25 or 50 basis points) ([01:10–01:44]).
  • Peter Cheer expects 25bps, hawkish tone, but “within a day or two” markets will sense a shift and greater support for risk assets:

    “There’s going to be an entire new kind of mentality come the new year... very supportive for markets, bonds, equities, and crypto.” — Peter Cheer ([01:44])

  • Trump’s influence is increasingly relevant; he’s already attempting to steer Fed narrative and appointments ([02:11–02:38]).
  • Peter predicts:

    “I think [Trump] is going to make a wholehearted effort to get these rate cuts done long before the market's pricing. ...I think it's going to be much more aggressive than market does.” — Peter Cheer ([02:38])

• Why Is the Market Slow to Price These Dynamics?

  • There’s a lag, says Peter, due to continued belief in the Fed’s adherence to data, and underestimation of the administration’s willingness to push aggressively on rates for political gains.

    “If Trump and Bessant say they want rates at 3%, I think it’s foolish to bet against them…They want an extremely hot economy heading into elections.” — Peter Cheer ([03:23])

---

2. Historic Bullish News for Crypto: U.S. Bank Approval & Global Adoption

• U.S. Banks Get Green Light for Crypto

  • Scott describes this as “the stuff of dreams for the crypto industry.”

    “The US bank regulator says banks can act as crypto intermediaries… banks are clear to participate in crypto as long as they manage their risk.” — Scott Melker ([03:57])

  • The OCC’s new guidance allows banks to engage in crypto “riskless principal transactions” without extra scrutiny.
  • Coinbase, Gemini, and Kraken captured early ETF custody, but now mega-institutions (BNY Mellon, State Street, PNC) are rolling out native or partnered crypto services.

    “PNC Bank has launched spot Bitcoin trading for PNC Private Bank clients directly within its digital banking platform… They’re doing it with Coinbase.” — Scott Melker ([05:18])

• Impact on Wall Street & Trading

  • Peter views this as a new, lucrative market for Wall Street and predicts tighter, 24/7 rails for crypto settlement:

    “This will actually be very good for trading. It should make it more efficient… with all these new features, it's going to become easier and easier to make it a true 24/7 market.” — Peter Cheer ([06:47])

• Argentina’s Crypto Leap

  • Argentina’s move to enable interbank crypto transfers “disrupts the legacy system.”

    “This is basically a country finally disrupting the legacy system… instead of sending a wire or an ACH or SWIFT… you just sent crypto from bank to bank.” — Scott Melker ([07:32])

  • Peter frames global adoption as a rational “call to action” for Wall Street and policymakers:

    “The profit margins for trading this for Wall Street are probably much bigger than when you trade equities… the opportunity is there, it’s going to keep growing.” — Peter Cheer ([08:20])

---

3. Industry Growing Pains: ETFs/DATs, Forced Selling, and Opportunity

• On DATs/ETF Products: Disaster or Shift?

  • Skepticism about ETFs/DATs was warranted:

    “Free money rarely ever exists... So now you've seen these things come back to NAV.” — Peter Cheer ([09:47])

  • Forced selling concerns for bitcoin were overblown—larger players simply absorbed assets at a discount ([10:16–10:52]).
  • Structural similarity to closed-end funds:

    “You can trade the closed end funds… if they get to a 20% discount, you want to buy them. If they get to a 5% premium, you want to sell them.” — Peter Cheer ([10:52])

• Serious Operators vs. Weak Hands

  • MicroStrategy’s “buy the dip” strategies show who’s in a position of strength ([11:24]):

    “Saylor has continued to find ways to do that, including effectively a billion this week when people didn’t think he had pennies left in the couch cushions.”— Scott Melker ([11:24])

  • Preference for direct exposure or spot ETFs; skepticism on actively managed products ([12:00–12:37]).

---

4. Changing Regulation Debate: The SEC’s Profound Pivot

• SEC Attitude Is Bullish (Believe It or Not!)

  • SEC Chair Atkins now predicts, perhaps wildly, that “all markets will be on blockchain rails within two years” ([12:53]).

    “He thinks that all markets will be on blockchain rails within two years… I love to hear him say it. We just all know that that’s like a decade-long process.” — Scott Melker ([12:53])

  • Atkins asserts most digital assets aren’t securities except for tokenized actual securities—a major regulatory shift ([13:53]).

• National Security and Stablecoins

  • The administration sees stablecoins as crucial for exporting the dollar, funding the national deficit, and as a “national security element.”

    “If we can get those stable coins out there… they become part of the national security sort of mandate… tie them to T bills and help fund our deficit.” — Peter Cheer ([14:09])

  • This is also aimed at countering China’s de-dollarization push ([15:29]).
  • IMF’s warning: Stablecoins may undermine central bank control ([16:07]).

---

5. Market Narrative: Why Is Price Flat Despite So Much Good News?

• 2025: The ‘Lost Year’ for Bitcoin?

  • Scott jokes about bitcoin being up only 1% on the year despite endless positive headlines ([21:17]).

    “It really does blow my mind that we’re looking back on 2025 as a lost year for bitcoin after all of the positive catalysts.” — Scott Melker ([21:17])

• Altcoins: Little Hope for Widespread Revival

  • Select winners will emerge, but broad-based “alt seasons” may be over ([22:03–22:28]).

---

6. Bitcoin’s Cycle: The Four-Year Myth and New Maturity

• Cathie Wood: Four-Year Cycle Is Dead ([25:20–26:23])
  • “Bitcoin’s four-year cycle is going to be disrupted. …The move by institutions… is going to prevent much more of a decline. We may have seen the low a couple weeks ago.” — Cathie Wood ([25:26])
  • Peter and Scott agree—cycle dynamics are fading in importance.

    “It seems like a much more mature industry… moving beyond kind of a day trading sort of gambling mentality… into something that's a little bit more robust.” — Peter Cheer ([28:23])

  • Major institutional flows and policy changes matter far more than retail-driven cycles.

---

7. The Liquidity Question & Looking Ahead

• Will Bounce in Global Liquidity Sustain BTC?

  • Peter: “I think we’ll get some small bumps. I don’t think we’re going to get this massive debasement trade… The administration is cautious on prices… reluctant to truly add a lot of liquidity because they do not want an inflation spike.” ([32:28])

• Political Tightrope: Inflation vs. Growth

  • Difficult environment for the administration to satisfy all constituents—Stagflation risk looms large ([33:17–34:57]).

• Market Concentration

  • U.S. stock indices: “The whole market is like seven stocks.” — Scott Melker ([35:01])
  • Risks (and opportunities) from developments in geopolitics and tech/AI (esp. China on chips).

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Fed and Political Control

  “The new Fed is going to be what Trump says happens. That’s the new Fed.” — Scott Melker ([24:18])

• On Regulation Reversal

  “If you get something that’s coming almost from a national security/treasury level, that this is important for these reasons, it flows down quite well.” — Peter Cheer ([14:09])

• On ETF hype and cycles

  “I’m definitely not hugely afraid of that four year cycle. I think there may be another opportunity for sell off… but it’s a very different crowd that's invested…” — Peter Cheer ([26:27])

• On stablecoins and US monetary dominance

  “If we're just basically exporting stablecoins in our monetary policy to the rest of the world, what we end up is that the Fed is the central bank for the entire planet.” — Scott Melker ([16:54])

• On leverage persistence

  “I'm still trying to figure out who feels the need to own crypto with that high degree of leverage. That to me still blows me a little bit away.” — Peter Cheer ([27:36])

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 00:00–01:44: Macro conditions, Fed rate cut anticipation, market volatility
• 01:44–04:57: Trump, Fed Chair speculation, implications for risk assets
• 03:57–06:47: US banking approval for crypto, institutional adoption, new revenue streams
• 06:47–08:20: Argentina crypto transfers, global adoption narrative
• 10:16–12:37: ETF/DAT’s, forced sales, lessons from MicroStrategy & active management
• 12:53–14:09: SEC’s new crypto stance, future of regulation, national security angle
• 15:29–16:54: Stablecoins, IMF concerns, monetary policy exporting
• 21:17–22:03: “Lost year” narrative, BTC price stagnation vs. bullish news
• 25:20–26:23: Cathie Wood on the four-year cycle, institutional flows, Bitcoin’s maturity
• 28:23–29:32: Industry maturity, wealth dispersion, decline of the “cycle” as a driver
• 32:28–33:17: 2026 liquidity outlook, administration’s inflation concerns

---

Tone & Final Impressions

Scott and Peter maintain a direct, occasionally wry tone, blending contrarian skepticism with optimism about the structural shift in crypto’s integration into mainstream finance. Their rapport keeps the technical discussion accessible, punctuated by memorable analogies and the kind of grounded, market-tested wisdom listeners have come to expect from The Wolf of All Streets.

Essential Takeaway: The “crypto dream” of mainstream finance partnership is unfolding rapidly, thanks to both regulatory shifts and global developments. Nevertheless, macro forces and new political realities will determine the cycle from here—not the memes or models of the past.

---

For further exploration, revisit these segments:

• Big bank crypto integrations ([05:18])
• National security angle on stablecoins ([14:09])
• Cathie Wood’s “four-year cycle is dead” commentary ([25:20])
• Macro risks and global liquidity discussion ([32:28])

Transcript

[A]

Crypto made a nice move, pumping overnight.

[B]

To above $94,000 before settling back around $92,000 on a number of bullish catalysts, including the fact that banks are finally getting approval to do everything they want in the crypto industry. And this is not just in the United States. We also have news that Argentina is going to let domestic banks transfer using crypto between domestic banks, something we've never seen in anywhere. The tailwinds continue to increase. Will prices follow? And I want to unpack everything that's happening in this market and how it's operating in context of other markets. We bring in one of my favorite guests, of course. That is Peter Cheer, who we've got here today. Let's go. Let's do.

Good morning, everybody, and happy Wednesday. I hope you're all having a good one. We are going to bring on Peter right now and we're going to start to unpack everything that's happening here in the markets. Good morning, Peter. How are you?

[C]

Great. How are you doing, Scott?

[B]

I am doing wonderfully. All right, so first maybe we should talk about what's happening in the macro, because I don't think we can talk about crypto anymore without discussing that we've got a relatively big day. Here we go. Crypto markets today. Fed Rate cut hopes lift Bitcoin Eth As Traders brace for volatility. I'm not sure that it's the rate cut hopes that are moving crypto day to day right now. I think everybody knows that we have a over 90% chance of a rate cut coming today from Jerome Powell. I guess the question on some people's minds is whether it can actually be 50 bips instead of 25. But I'm putting my bets on 25.

[C]

Yeah, I'd be shocked if it's 50. I think he goes 25. I think he tries to sound hawkish. I think a couple of hawks try and you put their dots in such a way to create a hawkish message. If the market listens to that, I think they'll give up within a day or two and realize there's going to be an entire new kind of mentality come the new year. And I think it's going to affect how the Fed behaves. I think it's going to affect how the Treasury Department behaves. And I think it's going to be very supportive for markets, bonds, equities, and crypto.

[B]

Yeah, I mean, we kind of have Trump playing cute games by preempting Powell making announcements of his own on what's likely to come with the Fed chair. I think it's going to be hassle it. I don't know if we ever got the clarity on that, but I saw there was going to be an announcement either last night or today. It's pretty clear exactly what's coming when Powell is gone. So makes it hard to care much about Powell in the short term when you know that six months everything's going to change.

[C]

Yeah, exactly. And I think it's even going to start changing before that. I think Trump has been relatively quiet in terms of his, you know, annoyance with the Fed. I think all that picks back up in January. I think they try and do things with the Fed governors. Maybe they try and say some of the governors were, you know, there's now chatter that maybe they were signed by Auto Pen. I think he's going to make a wholehearted effort to get these rate cuts done long before the market's pricing. And the market doesn't have two rate cuts priced in next year until September. I think we get that by the May meeting, June at the latest. I think it's going to be much more aggressive than market does.

[B]

Why would the market be pricing in cuts in September when we know we're going to have a new Fed chair and you literally have the president saying we're going to cut and want to get this thing back down to zero. Why would there be that gap between May and September? How are people missing that?

[C]

You know, I think to some degree people are still stuck in this mindset that, oh, well, you know, the Fed's going to listen to this. They're going to be data dependent. And I don't think they completely understand how aggressive this administration will be. They were very aggressive in crypto. They've been very aggressive with Venezuela. Right. If Trump investants say they want rates at 3%, I think it's foolish to bet against them getting that long before, you know, they want it by the summer, too, because they want an extremely hot economy. They want an extremely hot stock market coming into the midterm elections. So that means everything's kind of got to be going July, August, September.

[B]

Yeah, I agree. So some of the catalysts, I guess that we have immediately in the market at this point, we have so many bullish news pieces that I just consider them all like stepping stones on a very long path. But we are getting all the things I think that we could have ever dreamed of for this market. I mean, the US bank regulator says banks can act as crypto intermediaries. I mean, this is just the stuff of dreams for the crypto industry. When you look back at the Gary Gensler and Elizabeth Warren days of what was happening. Choke point 2.0. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued new guidance saying that banks can engage in what are known as riskless principal transactions that involve crypto assets and would not receive scrutiny from the regulator. This is all systems go from one more federal regulator. Now we've had a lot of this news already, FDIC and elsewhere, but this is all systems go saying you can custody, you can offer these services, you can basically do whatever we want. Banks are clear to participate in crypto as long as they manage their risk.

[C]

Yeah, and I think banks certainly are. I know our bank, we're a small broker dealer, we're veteran owned firm, but we are starting to look how we can participate with these new rules. Right. It's an area that's exciting. Our senior management been involved in crypto for quite a while. One of our board members, Chris Perkins, I think, you know, is obviously very involved with this. So it's an exciting area and I think it's a potential new revenue stream for Wall street as well.

[B]

So we had this interesting situation obviously when we had SAB121 and the SEC was very anti crypto and we got the launch of the ETFs and basically by default Coinbase got to custody all of them because the banks were basically banned from being able to participate in these activities. And then they said, hey, what the hell? When the rules started to change, they said, we still can't participate in this. Actually the, I guess unintended effect was that the crypto industry got to capture all of that value. Basically Coinbase, Gemini themselves as well. Now we're going to see the BNY melons, the state streets, the everybody not only as custodians, of course, who don't have to keep that, you know, as a liability on their balance sheet. But now we're going to see other, I think, signs of adoption. I mean, we've got news today. PNC banks has launched spot Bitcoin trading for PNC private bank clients directly within its digital banking platform, making it the first major US bank to do so. I mean this is crazy. And they're doing it with Coinbase. Right. You've got Brian Armstrong here pointing that out. I think, you know, as I dig into it mentally and I've been saying this for a while, there's going to be two approaches. There's going to be either we approach it with speed and just use Coinbase or Gemini or Kraken or someone. We do a deal, we get this done, right? We can offer this, we just API it right in from a third party or we build it ourselves, right? And so I think some banks are going to take the approach where, hey, we're going to build some native crypto services. The others are going to say, hell, we got to win, we got to be fast. Let's just go to Coinbase.

[C]

Yeah, I think you've kind of nailed it, right? There's going to be kind of some of the early adopters who are going to try and take as much of the system as they can so they can get the trading flows and see that. And I think there are going to be ways that people look at, okay, how does a big bank, if you think how they trade bonds, right, they inventory the bonds, it's harder to do with crypto. Will they figure out ways where they can actually make it more seamless? They trade and maybe you only settle and get your crypto at the end of the day, but something that makes it faster, cheaper. I think all of this will actually be very good for the trading. It should make it more efficient. You know, the 247 that exists right now, you know, for those of us who are not deep in the weeds, and I'm kind of at the, you know, not deep in the weeds stage, it's harder to trade over the weekend all of a sudden. I think with all these new features, it's going to become easier and easier to make it a true 247 market. I think people get more comfortable. I think you'll see some of the costs go down as well.

[B]

So we're going to dive into why this hasn't moved price in a minute. But I just want to kind of cook through some of these stories before we do that, because I mentioned this one in the intro as well. Argentina weighs allowing domestic banks to offer crypto services. When you actually dig into that, it seems like pretty much a done, done deal. They're not actually necessarily weighing if there's something that's going to happen. I mean, this is bank to bank transfers, customers being able to move money between banks, all on crypto, Rails using crypto. This is basically a country finally disrupting the legacy system. This would be like in the United States if all of a sudden, instead of sending a wire or an ACH or swift from bank to bank, you just sent crypto from bank to bank, not from person to person. I mean, this is Argentina, obviously has been ahead of the curve. But like, these things are happening all over the world.

[C]

Yeah, it's, you know, the adoption rate's growing again. To me, when I look at this and why I kind of want to own this market is you have the President of the United States who's very involved, his family's very involved. They seem to back it, they seem to like it. I see. I don't think we're ever going to get this kind of big sovereign wealth fund, but I think there's going to be chatter about that. But all this, to me, you know, if you want to kind of almost go under a virtual signaling, right. You have a president who likes this, you're supposed to figure out ways to adopt it, take advantage of it. And by the way, the profit margins for trading this for Wall street are probably much bigger than when you trade equities, which are measured in fractions of a cent per thousand shares. So I think the opportunity is there, it's going to keep growing. I think there were some issues with the DATs that maybe were causing some of the pressure. I think that was a bit of a rude awakening that if they're not in the indices, you might get some forced selling. But as that gets out of the way, I think you come back to, okay, what's the adoption rate? The adoption rate is growing, so you're supposed to own this.

[B]

Yeah, I mean, let's talk about that, that topic because it obviously continues to be the hottest one. You and I have talked about this in the past. I was pretty vocal in the position that it was going to be a disaster. Right. They were going to launch. We saw them. I was not, I was not the most popular person in the industry when I was critical of it. I think we've seen that come true.

[C]

I think we had a conversation day and, you know, I tried to point out, I think free money rarely ever exists. So when you could issue something for.

A million dollars and suddenly you're worth 5 million, that tends not to last long. So now you've seen these things come back to nav. And I think there are going to be some that you can pick and choose from if you want to go that direction. Where, okay, what are they doing that you can't get your own? For me, right now, I'm primarily just going to invest directly. Though for me, I'll admit it's easier with my job and compliance to do it through the ETFs, because it's simple that way. So it's not direct ownership. But I don't feel the need to own the DATs. Right now, I'm still looking for the one that gives me some sort of real edge that I don't think I can get myself.

[B]

So you talked about that unwind being a potential headwind, I guess. What does that unwind look like to you? So obviously my initial skepticism or criticism was these things are going to blow up. They're going to dump their bitcoin, it's going to be a massive sell off. Now I just think that it's going to get shifted around from company to company. We'll see acquisitions like Strive, who's obviously looking at an acquisition of Semler. Maybe the bigger players absorb the smaller ones. Because who wouldn't want to buy bitcoin at a discount? Right. If you're capitalized, you're already a Treasury company. Just go buy the ones at a discount with some, you know, preferential terms and call it a day.

[C]

Yeah, and this is going to be a bit simplistic, but I almost view it a little bit like closed end funds. So you can trade the closed end funds, especially on the bond side, you know, if they get to a 20% discount, you want to buy them. If they get to a 5% premium, you want to sell them. So until you kind of find something that has a real nascent sort of extra value, I think it's a big gambling once you get outside that range. But having said that, I think MSDR clearly did a very good job not to become a forced seller. So I think those fears are overdone. I think we're kind of at this balance stage where let's get back to the other good news. And that other good news I think can outweigh what we've seen from the dax.

[B]

I mean, isn't there some clear signal there when you look at a microstrategy or even a bit mine with Tom Lee? There are companies that we've seen continue to be able to buy the dip just like you would want to. Right. Like, I'm a guy who likes cheaper bitcoin prices and I want to have some money on the side when bitcoin is trading at a cheaper price. That doesn't seem like such a complex idea to me. Saylor has continued to find ways to do that, including effectively a billion this week when people didn't think he had pennies left in the couch cushions. Right. So it really seems like you can see who the serious operators are right now and who's just hanging on for dear life and praying for the market.

[C]

To return Yeah, I would agree. Right. Again, you know, MSDR has a whole series of tools at their disposal. They've, you know, they figured out a lot out. Right. This is not a naive company who's well aware of the risks of being forced out of over collateralizing, of having payment due dates. So I think they've done a pretty good job. You look at the preferred shares and they're, they're pretty punitive if he doesn't pay the dividend. So he's going to be cautious about how much they issue because they have to pay that dividend, they can give up board seats. So I think it's a reasonable structure. I think there's growth. I just feel that I can manage my exposure fine directly rather than through a debt right now.

[B]

I think that's fair. I think we just have to be intellectually honest about what they are. And they're basically actively managed funds. Right. And so can you manage it better than them? I think that I can manage it better than the guys who all top blasted the top with every penny that they possibly had.

Call me crazy. Yeah. So we also continuing on and I do want to dig more into the market, but I think it's just important to note these kind of endless catalysts that we seem to have here in the narratives that we're getting. I mean, Atkins has been out there on an absolute crypto roadshow right now. The SEC chair says he looks to future proof overhaul of crypto regulation. I played a clip of him yesterday on the news where he said he thinks that all markets will be on blockchain rails within two years with tokenization, which I think is absurd, but I love to hear him say it. We just all know that that's like a decade long process. But him being very cognizant of the fact that if this SEC lo loses control or if we don't get legislation that there is very much a future where things just reverse, the pendulum swings back. So he's actively looking for ways to either set regulation in stone or get legislation that can't be changed just because we get a less favorable regime. And alongside that also he's out here saying that he doesn't think anything to security. He's basically saying unless you token. If you read what he said here, he's saying that digital collectibles, all these things are not securities. And the only thing that really is, is if you tokenize an actual security, that also becomes a security. I mean, this is bullish stuff.

[C]

Yeah, I think it's great. It's you know, well, wait and see. I'd like to see some of that all come to fruition. My business has been the credit derivative market and the SEC and the CFTC fought for years, if not decade over who controlled it. So hopefully successful in getting that. One thing we haven't really mentioned that I do think is important, right, is this administration is really trying to rely on stablecoins as a way to help fund the deficit. Right. They view that if we can get stable coins out there to other current countries, I think Argentina is probably a top priority. The people there will want to invest in US Dollar. Right. They, a lot of countries, especially Argentina. Right. They would rather have their exposure in dollars. It's difficult to do right now. If we can get those stable coins out there, those stable coins become part of the national security sort of mandate, the treasury mandate to tie people to the dollar, but more importantly through the stable coins, tie them to T bills and help fund our deficit. So I think there's a real push on that and that almost has a national security element, which is probably what's also helping push, you know, the SEC and all these. Right. If you, if you get something that's coming almost from a national security slash treasury level, that this is important for these reasons, it flows down quite well.

[B]

Yeah. Do you think they're sort of saying the quiet part out loud about stablecoins at this point when they're admitting that? Because at first it was, you know, superior way to move money faster, cheaper, whatever. Now it's like, who's going to buy our debt?

[C]

Oh yeah. And I think we are on, since all the trade war discussions, right. We are on full economic kind of confrontation or friction with China and. Right. China's done a lot to create trading in one away from the dollars. We all know, like the swift system is painful for people to use. It's always been viewed as fairly expensive, fairly awkward, takes time. So I think stable coins is kind of the US Government's attempt to derail China's progress that they've been making on the wand. So I think you can bring some of this really back to a national security level, which is why I get this comfort that it's going to go beyond just this administration. But I think we're going to jumpstart it so much it would be hard to reverse.

[B]

Anyways, yeah, I'm pulling up the article right now because I would love your opinion on it. We talked about it at length here, but it just matches well with this conversation. IMF warns stablecoins may Accelerate currency substitution, weaken central bank control. I'm sure that you saw this report recently from the IMF on stablecoins. I find this one so interesting because I see it from two sides like as a bitcoiner. Good. Like it was less central bank control of course like less games with monetary policy, especially in central banks that hyperinflate their currency and all this. But the flip side is that if we're just basically exporting stablecoins in our monetary policy to the rest of the world, what we end up is that the Fed is the central bank for the entire planet because of stablecoins. Right, right. And I'm not sure that that's the future that we want either.

[C]

I think that's definitely a risk. I do think other currencies, Euro, they're going to have to develop euro stable coins. Right.

[B]

And have them adopted. Right.

[A]

Just, I just don't see why people would use them.

[B]

If you have direct access to the dollar.

[C]

Right. And you're going to want to be competitive. Right. And you're going to look at monetary policy and again your stable coin, if you're invested in the wrong currency or country, it's going to do worse than if you were. Right. So it definitely in some ways kind of ties fiat back to you know, crypto because you've got that. I think the IMF is also a little bit, I look at. If we want to talk we can get to Fed policy in a sec. But you know we used to use the dollar in sanctions. Right. Sanctions haven't worked in decades because there's so many ways around sanctions. Cryptocurrencies certainly help but also the Juan helped and just the fact that countries don't even bother really listening to the sanctions. Right. Since Russia sanctions went on. Kazakhstan is a huge exporter. They put gasoline export, you know, they put issues on gas prom and Ross net their production dropped by 1.1 million barrels per day. But apparently some of the lesser companies.

Rose by a million barrels a day. So I, I think they overstate their control. And in the Fed we tinker around with the front end rates yet I believe 70 some percent of mortgages are all like under three and a half percent. So. So whatever we're doing at the front end is not affecting that because people were very smart unlocked in long term yields. I think monetary policy way behind the times.

[B]

Yeah, I tend to agree. I want to talk about the market a little more a few days ago now I can actually probably check the date. So it was Friday, November 21st. You and I had a DM conversation where you reached out to me and you said, thinking about buying, like, I'm finally. I don't have the exact words in front of you. It was basically, heck, I'm finally interested in buying this market. Right. I'm gonna go ahead and do that today. What do you think? I mean, you basically called the dead bottom, right? I mean, I think this was when.

[C]

Bitcoin, I failed to buy it at the dead.

[B]

And I was like, yeah, I failed.

[C]

To catch the dead bottom, but I did reasonably well. And I think I'm going to accumulate here again. I think this narrative feels like all that negativity played out. And you asked the question earlier. I don't. I think we talked, like, why spend? The selling pressure. I do think part of it, when I look, there's a community that tends to own arkk, so kind of the disruptive stocks, they tend to own tqqq. And I feel like those investors were all getting hit on the same thing, whether they were getting hit on their DATs, their crypto, ARKK, TQQQ. So that put some pressure on everything because, you know, people always wind up selling what they can, not necessarily what they should, when they feel pressure. And I think there's that leverage community that was really into what you call it disruption, but across all asset classes. Now that I think you're seeing these things stabilize, people can go back and reallocate their money more aggressively.

[B]

Right. But I love the fact that when I'm hearing the narrative that bitcoin's going to 75, then 65, then 55, by the way, totally possible. I'm not saying any of those things that you have seasoned investors reaching out to people they trust and saying, this feels overblown. Maybe this is a time to buy. And I was saying the same thing. I think right around that time and recently last week, I said, listen, I think the micro strategy hysteria is overblown. This seems like a glaring buy, at least for a trade that was in the 150s, I don't know where it is now, 180s, something like that. But. And that kind of signal is my favorite. I remember when Elon Musk smoked weed on Joe Rogan and Tesla dipped to 180. And I, very aggressively, with almost no followers, was screaming into the void. I was buying as much Tesla as I could because this is dumb. Like, the guy smoked weed. It's not going to zero. And people were saying, it's going to zero. He's irresponsible. This company will not exist. That's how I kind of felt when you were messaging me about this, about sentiment on crypto across the board and micro.

[C]

I tend to be a contrarian, so I think there was that element. And it also went from, you know, three months ago, if you tried to say anything about these navs being unsustainable at these premiums, everyone said you're an idiot. Then all of a sudden, if you said they were sustainable and they could do something, everyone's now, you're an idiot. The other direction. So it just felt like too many people became closet experts on how these things work, on the impacts of getting in or getting kicked out of the indices. And everyone seemed to be. Had the rest of the news flow not been so positive, maybe you don't buy that dip, but the rest of the news flow has been nothing but positive.

[B]

Yeah, it really does blow my mind that we're looking back on 2025 as a lost year for bitcoin after all of the positive catalysts. I mean, yesterday I sent a tweet, kind of joking, it was bitcoin breaking news. Bitcoin up 1% on the year. Right. Because at like 94,000 yesterday, we were up 1% on the exact price of bitcoin a year ago. I think obviously it's a bit disingenuous to peg prices to arbitrary dates. And I think if you want to peg the price of bitcoin to a real catalyst, we just go back to last November in the election, right. And we're obviously still massively up from then. I think that's when everything changed for this market. But it's crazy that we can pound through all of these stories about bank adoption, SEC legislation, and we're just at the same price.

[C]

It is a little shocking. And you know, that last.

Things that supposedly had a good story just get everything got kind of taken out. I do think there are going to be a limited number of cryptocurrencies that do well. I think a lot of the altcoins are going to, you know, that to me, I don't really even pay attention. I've lost track of what altcoins are interesting or not, as that's not going to be part of my core thesis going forward, certainly.

[B]

Yeah, I don't see how most of those come back. I think there will be some very select winners. I think there's going to be things created we haven't even heard of that will do exceptionally well on the altcoin side. But really hard to pin your hopes on an alt season or the across the board rallies on every single token that we've seen in the past. I didn't actually ask your opinion on this at the beginning. Do you think there's a chance we had a 50 bip cut?

[C]

I mean, no, I, I think, I think Powell is going to get forced to do the 25. I think you're going to get some dissenters who say they should not have cut. You might get some descenders who say they're going to go 50. None of the names would surprise us if we get the descent. I think he's going to try and send this hawkish message and that we're careful, we're data dependent, blah, blah, blah. I think we can just look through that. I do think it's going to be Kevin Hassett. I think he is going to work very closely with treasury and the admin to set policy and I think they're going to work very quickly. There's all this talk, well if we cut too much, long end yields are going to go higher, blah, blah blah, which in general would happen. But that's assuming the Fed does nothing. Howard Lutnick did control one of the biggest bond firms out there. They were primarily an interdealer broker besant bond market experience. I think they are going to jump to Operation Twist very quickly which is they would sell their short dated Treasuries to buy long dated Treasuries to support treasury yields. If that's not working, I think they would jump to QE next where they would actually just buy them outright. And if finally they might start going all the way down towards Yoko Control, where they will set ranges like Japan did on where the tenure is allowed to trade and they will just back it up with government money. So I think we just still aren't thinking enough out of the box on what the new Fed will look like. And I do think there will be a new Fed in terms of its mindset, in terms of how it works with the government. Whether I like it or not, that's not my job. My job is to try and figure out what's going to happen, what that means for markets. And again, I think that's going to be very aggressive for growth situations.

[B]

The new Fed is going to be what Trump says happens. That's the new Fed. I think there's definitely putting in a stooge like he's not putting in the guy who he wants to be a free thinker and challenge his ideas.

[C]

You know what, I will caveat that I'll say it's whatever Besson's thinking, so when Besant goes on TV he talks about 3%. He doesn't talk about 1% or 300 basis points cuts. He talks about 3%. So that seems reasonable. And he talks about keeping the 10 year under 4%. So a three handle that seems reasonable. So I listen to what Bessant says more than what Trump. I think Trump will say whatever. Besson's kind of the one who owns it to a message that's actually deliverable.

[B]

I like that. I think that that makes a lot of sense. So you mentioned obviously people being passionate about these disruptive stocks and indexes and that bitcoin to some degree was fitting into that. We do have a clip here from Cathie Wood that I brought up which was pretty explosive. I mean she basically went on TV and said Bitcoin four year cycle is completely dead. Something I tend to agree with. And institutional adoption is going to send it parabolic. We can just watch it. We've got it right here.

[D]

Is behaving more like a risk on that didn't work.

[B]

Did it say I'm not. This is what happens when I'm on my own.

[D]

Producer here is behaving more like a risk on asset. It has played the risk off role at different times during, during the European sovereign debt crisis, during our regional bank crisis. But right now it's risk on we this is, it is climbing another wall of worry and that is the four year cycle. We think the four year cycle is, is going to be disrupted. And what I mean by that is Bitcoin regularly dropped 75 to 90% in its early days. The volatility is going down. It's down about 30 some odd percent. And I think there's a fear of the four year cycle. We think that the move by institutions into this new asset class is going to prevent much more of a decline. We may have seen the low a couple of weeks ago.

[B]

Okay, so she kind of agrees with us.

[C]

Yeah. And I, I'm definitely not hugely afraid of that four year cycle. Again, I think there may be another opportunity for sell off.

[B]

We're having an issue here. Go ahead.

[C]

But I, I'm not immediately concerned about that. And again to me the, it's always about the leverage in the system. It's always about the leverage in the weird ways. And I think the dads trading at those high multiples to nav were kind of an inherent leverage that's been reduced. So I think we need to see the leverage build back into the system. And before you can get Another kind of sharp decline. Not to say that we can't go back down, but I think we need to rebuild leverage to get to a sharp decline. And I don't see that in the system right now. Too many people got shaken out.

[B]

I believe it's been pretty crazy, I think to see how much leverage there still is to some degree. After we saw that kind of 20 billion in a day in October 10th, I was like my prediction at that time totally wrong, was like we'll see small deleveraging and liquidations and it seems that now even if we get a small move, we still get these a billion and a random day, 2 billion like an average Tuesday now on a 4 or 5% bitcoin move is the same as FTX was years ago. Still, even after all that, I didn't think there was anything left in the system.

[C]

No, to me it's amazing. I'm still trying to figure out who feels the need to own crypto with that high degree of leverage. I just, that to me still blows me a little bit away.

[B]

Yeah.

Your thoughts on the four year cycle specifically? I mean I think that it was one of those things if it ain't broke, don't try to fix it and then it broke. So you kind of move on. I'll believe it as long as it seems to be playing out. I think when we preempted the all time high by so far because of the ETFs, it was already broken and altcoins never moved. Which people seem to forget was a part of the four year cycle was that if bitcoin actually made a bullish move, went somewhere consolidated, altcoins would go absolutely nuts. Besides Tom Lee screaming about Ethereum on tv, we haven't seen much of that. Right, right.

[C]

It's been a much more focused and again it seems like a much more mature industry that I think I would agree with Kathy that you know, this is moving beyond kind of a day trading sort of gambling mentality that it might have had eight years ago or 12 years ago into something that's a little bit more robust again. I do think there's potential downside, but it's a very different crowd that's invested how it's trading the number of vehicles you can trade in. I think the ease of moving it around to the extent you want to is much more difficult and we're nowhere near as dependent on any one or two entities. Right. Back four years ago you could look at ftx, you could look at a couple of the hedge funds that were Very involved and there was this kind of very dominant group. If you looked at Bitcoin, my understanding this has improved a lot. But it's the Julie coefficients. You look at how much wealth is concentrated. Crypto at one time was incredibly concentrated. The wealth was.

As disparate as it was in North Korea. That's shifting. Right. You're getting more people, more types of people involved. I think that helps change that cycle sort of mentality. So to be honest, I don't even really think about the cycle.

[B]

Yeah, well, that's good. I think that that's the right frame because there's so many people. She's right in this regard. I think if you're crypto native, there's a mentality that the top has to be in because a Reddit post said October 6th is the right date and it happened and here we are. Right. But I don't think 90% of the money that's participating in this market at this point even knows there was a four year cycle. I think it's just such a crypto bubble narrative. She's probably on TV and that anchor is probably like, what is a four year cycle? What the hell is she talking about?

[C]

Right. I get the having more than the, you know, the having to me is always more interesting, I think than the four year cycle. That seems more of a coincidence than anything to trade on.

[B]

Yeah. I was talking to Dave Weisberger yesterday on Crypto Town hall and I haven't seen the tweet, but I know he wrote a basically long thread on this very idea that people think now because the top is in or that we are in the four year cycle, that we have to get a 75 to 90% drawdown. The usual bear market, that we have three years of pain. That seems to be the consensus for those who believe in the four year cycle. But he pointed out very wisely that if we didn't get the explosive upside, why would you expect the explosive downside?

[A]

So even if you believe that the.

[B]

4 year cycle is real, we didn't even 2x the previous all time high. Right. So why would you get a 75% drawdown? Maybe you're just. The 35% drawdown is the bear market because it's commensurate with the limited upside and the lack of volatility.

[C]

And I'll go back, this goes back all the way to 2007, 2008 GFC and one of the biggest funds in the world, you know, trillions of dollars under Aum at the time was talking to Me. And what they said they had the most difficulty dealing with was government policy shifts. Right. They were very quant in many ways. They could do a lot of quant things, but they're like nothing we do with government policy works because government policy can be so big that it just drives all other factors. And to be honest, I think that's where we are in crypto. Right. The government policy change is so much that you are now fighting the Fed. You are fighting this kind of machine that is bigger than crypto itself. So that's kind of how I would tie it. I think people underestimate now that you have this entity, the US Government caring deeply. It's changed the game, I think. And yet. And that's without money coming in directly. That's just rule changes everything else.

[B]

Yeah, I mean, I think that most people now are viewing crypto as a function of global liquidity. Right. Or maybe that that's what those cycles were in the first place. But we talk about that liquidity. We already talked about the Fed, obviously, which is the hot button topic today and I guess moving forward with the new chair. But I think many would argue that we're still in a fiscally dominant environment and actually be sent to you shouted out before is much more important than Powell right now. So do you think that we're going to see a significant bump in liquidity? Are you seeing signs of that? I mean, how are you viewing 2026 from a liquidity perspective?

[C]

I think we'll get some small bumps. I don't think we're going to get this massive debasement trade. I do think this administration is cautious on prices. I think we're finally starting to realize too right we can all talk about inflation and the rate of change. I think what's hitting everyone is this realization price levels are so high they are painful. Whether your cup of coffee is now $4 almost no matter where you go, all these things are hitting. So I think the administration is a little bit cautious about cost of living. So I think they're going to be somewhat careful, if they can, about providing too much liquidity. I don't think they want to spark inflation. I think they're comfortable with tax cuts, they're comfortable with policy that's aggressive. But I think they're going to be really reluctant to truly add a lot of liquidity to the market because they do not want an inflation spike coming into the election.

[B]

Yeah, this is going to be a really good, interesting year and a very difficult needle to thread, I think for the administration Politically, because this dance between inflation and the cost of goods and stock market remaining up, there's a lot of evidence that we're in a bit of a stagflationary environment. And if things keep getting more expensive and the stock market drops, it's over for this administration at the midterms.

[C]

Yeah, I think that's one of the reasons they had to start coming out dovish. You saw the major averages on the stock side reach the 200 day moving average. Then they kind of started getting a little bit more dovish. And we have a very ambitious plan I think as a country in terms of what we've been calling prosec or production for security. Right. We need to build out the chip industry, we need to build out electricity production. All those things are going to put some pressure on commodity prices upwards as the demand for that goes. It's going to create a lot of need for debt financing from the AI, from the data centers, from the electricity production. You know, I think the big beautiful bill and things like that help, but it is really what it's designed in such a way to actually increase the budget this year. So it is going to be a very difficult tightrope to, to walk maybe. And listen, I do think some of the, there are some tariff pressures creeping through on some prices. So you're starting to see some of that. I think companies have been very reluctant to pass any of it on. So there's a lot going on behind the scenes. And to me we're still in what I've been calling this little eye shaped economy where you have this dot that's doing phenomenally well and the stick that's doing okay. So I like the I shaped better than the K. I like, I'm kind of sick of the K. So I'm like, I think it's lowercase.

[B]

Lowercase. I shaped economy.

[C]

Yeah. So the dot's doing great. Everything else is like.

[B]

Yeah, I just don't see how that plays out favorably. The whole market is like seven stocks. Right. I mean it's pretty crazy.

[C]

Yes. And there's a circularity in some of those stocks it seems. And who's investing in who, how the growth occurs. I still think we are heavily underestimating the chance that China has some interesting chip developments that shake how we're thinking about AI to the core.

[B]

Yeah, it's going to be a crazy year. Peter, anything else on your radar I might have missed?

[C]

No, I think that's about it. It's, you know, again, I think we'll see a bit more focus on the Fed, sovereign wealth funds, all those things come the New Year. I think we're kind of in this breathing part where Trump wants to, you know, relax, try and close down Russia, Ukraine, if he can fix Venezuela or deal with that, and then we'll move back to markets come January, February, because I think he knows now's not the best time to talk about markets when half of Wall street just wants to be on vacation.

[B]

Yeah, everybody's going to celebrate Christmas and heading to their lodge in Aspen. This is not the time. I agree. Peter, thank you so much as always. Incredible insight, incredible guest. Everybody else, obviously we'll be back tomorrow for another show and then Friday for the Friday 5. We will see you all soon. Thanks again. Peter.

[C]

Thanks again for having me.

[A]

Today's video is sponsored by Rain Protocol, a decentralized platform for prediction markets where you can wager on future events without a central authority. It's built on arbitrum and supports markets for everything from major global news to niche topics. The platform uses an automated market maker to dynamically adjust prices and maintain liquidity as participants place wagers, ensuring markets remain balanced and active. Anyone can create a market with a minimum of $10 in liquidity, choosing between public markets open to everyone, or private ones that require a code to access. A standout feature is the resolution process. Public markets can be settled by Delphi, an AI oracle that draws consensus from multiple data sources for impartial decisions, or by the market create creator. If a participant disputes the result, they post collateral 0.1% of the market volume or up to $1,000, and the case escalates to human oracles for final review. Whether you're forecasting events, hedging risk, or creating incentives for specific outcomes, Rain offers transparent fees, no refunds on wagers, and a Rain government's token with a buyback and burn mechanism tied to trading volume. Visit their site or click the link right below to explore Rain Protocol.