Hivemind: Ceasefire In Iran, Is AI a Bubble & Drift Exploited For $280M

Nothing said on The Hive Mind is a recommendation to buy or sell securities or tokens. This podcast is strictly for informational purposes only, and any views expressed by anyone on the show are solely our own opinions, not financial advice.

All right, welcome back everybody to The Hive Mind. I'm Kevin Kelly, one of the co-founders of Delphi, a longtime listener but first-time host of the show. Really excited to be here with the usual cast of the Delphi Hive Mind. Quick announcement before we get into things, we've got a bunch to get into. This will actually be the last and final episode of the Hive Mind on the Blockworks Empire channel. Going forward, you can find the Hive Mind on Delphi's own media channels like the Delphi Digital YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcast feeds. We'll try and get all those links added to the, to the show notes. But if you're a fan of the show, subscribe to those channels. Do it now so you don't miss a single episode. We got a bunch that's planned for this show ahead. Got a couple of new ones that we're going to be announcing soon. So you're definitely not going to want to miss that. Want to give a quick shout out and a huge thanks to Blockworks for partnering with us to really get this show off the ground over the last year. We're big fans of their whole team, owe them a lot of gratitude for everything that they've done. And, uh, looking forward to hopefully maybe doing something with them in the future. Now on to the main event. As I mentioned, joined by the usual hive mind suspects here. We've got Yan, our managing partner of Delphi Ventures, Jose, who is our head of Delphi Labs, Ceteris, head of research at Delphi, and Jason Yanowitz, head of markets. Gents, great to be here. Excited to do this first one with you, and what a day to do it on. How's everybody feeling? It's ceasefire day, at least for now.

Yeah, we've had 12 hours of ceasefire or something. Um, it's, uh, everyone's kind of on edge. It feels like, um, I'm, I'm pretty long into it. I think positioning is favorable to be long right now. Um, I'm not super optimistic on this all playing out smoothly from here. I think my base case is basically that you you have a breakdown, uh, in negotiations, maybe before the 14-day window or at the end of it. But it just seems like the, um, the requests are too far apart and, and basically kind of diametrically opposed. There's, there's some elements that they're just completely mutually exclusive. So, um, I mean, there's always the world where things get delayed even more. And I think that will be pretty favorable for markets. You know, the big concern is obviously this backlog of fertilizer, oil, and other shipments. And so the longer you have to undo the damage, the, uh, I think the better off everyone is. And I think that's kind of what I think the rationale for the negotiations has been and, and why it was pretty, I think, favorable for the US at least to do that. I think it gives them a bit more leverage if the economy isn't being squeezed as— or the global economy isn't being squeezed as much. So they're not, they're not feeling as much pressure. Obviously, the pressure isn't isolated to them. And so you hear whispers of China getting involved on the Iran side to push for resolution. It's kind of hard to say what's really happening, but generally seems like there's opportunity for some short-term optimism around, um, world trade kind of resuming, obviously with tolls and, or however else these, uh, tankers are getting through. Hearing rumors of BTC or yuan being used. But, um, yeah, overall it seems like market's in a good spot. I think the positioning is honestly the big part, um, where, where, you know, most people rightfully so were kind of sidelined and there's too much unexpected turbulence. And, you know, there's also just a contingent that's happy to wait until it resolves, which is totally fair as well. And so it doesn't seem like there is that much long positioning. The question is basically, you know, will you get enough follow-through to make these markets move and make the payoff in the short term worthwhile?

Jason Yanowitz, how are you feeling?

Um, yeah, I think, uh, I think Jan's like base case is kind of where I'm at in that, um, obviously this is very nice in the short term. Nobody wanted to see, you know, Power Plant Day and Bridge Day happen. Um, that would not be good for markets and just anything generally. But yeah, I, I don't know, I just don't see how this actually resolves anything because to Jan's point, both, I guess, you know, lists of things people want are just, they're just they're just opposites. And, um, it just doesn't seem like the, the outcome that the US is looking for. Um, so to me, like, I don't think it really, like, changes much. Like, I think, um, I think the outlook is still really precarious. Like, I still think it— like, unless you're, like, actively trading and really good at it and have, like, a track record of, like, trading volatile environments well, like, I think it probably just pays to, to be cautious and either play defense or just you know, not play, not play the game. Um, I think there's still a lot of downside risk. And like, actually, like, that kind of recession report that Scott wrote, uh, 2 to 3 weeks ago, like, markets are pretty much like back to that level right now, right? Um, we're a few percent off all-time highs even though things are as bad as they've ever been generally over there. So I don't know, like, I'm, um, obviously happy that we get a little bit of a relief bounce, but I'm, I'm very cautious over the next 2 weeks. Like, I, I think, I think things kind of break down further before they get better, in my opinion. I'm, I'm very cautious.

Yeah, Cetera, say, I definitely want to get your guys' thoughts. Maybe another question, like, how is everybody like roughly positioned or allocated right now? Because I feel like that tells a lot about what just sentiment looks like.

Yeah, I'm not a good person to ask this because I'm always just long assets. Like, I just I don't know.

Yeah, outside of Bitcoin and hype, for me, like, for my, like, crypto holdings that I'm just holding, like, long-term, uh, I'm, I'm very much in cash. Like, I'm very tactical, very, very, very much in cash, just kind of, um, trying to buy, like, washouts from headlines or fade things, you know, just very short-term stuff. Like, I'm not—

is that it, just BTC and hype in crypto?

Yeah, that's all I own.

Yeah, yeah.

And Zcash, but it's not big enough for me to like care yet. And of course it's pumped 30% in the last day, so I'm just like, all right, fuck. Yeah, but yeah, pretty much, um, equities, like I'm, I'm not touching equities right now. I think equities probably come down. So yeah, I'm just like very, very cashed up.

Yeah, I didn't change my, um my portfolio that much. I'm mostly long, long equities. Uh, I did take out some hedges like before the, the— this, this all happened, uh, or like at the beginning of the Operation Epic Fury. And I'm probably like break-even on those, or maybe even slightly down at this point. I have to check. But, um, yeah, pretty— yeah, I'm mostly long equities. I'm long some crypto. Yeah, like Hype, Bitcoin, Zcash, ENA, and I might be missing, and Pump, basically. Something like that. And have been buying, and obviously, yeah, I've been buying more Bitcoin and started nibbling on alts actually recently, but have been mostly buying Bitcoin over the last month or so. Yeah, in general, I think the it's like pretty good for— I mean, the— I think in general, the macro situation, I've been saying this for a few episodes, is like really good for Bitcoin because it's becoming clear now that the US isn't the world's dominant power. Like, the world's more multipolar than ever, you know. And like, I think Iran has just like really clearly illustrated that. Like, you kind of saw it with the Citrine piece too, right, which I know you want to jump into. But before, it used to be that everyone treated the US as someone you could rely on, right? And they basically secured the world order. And that's not the case anymore, right? Countries are basically flying out to Iran and making their own deals. China is still getting shipments through the Strait of Hormuz. And I think a lot of countries are going to end up negotiating their own independent deals. Europe's making their own deals with China. And today we saw this headline that that Iran's going to charge for the tolls in Bitcoin or yuan, which I think is like just huge. To me, that's like one of the biggest fundamental developments in Bitcoin in a while. Like, I feel like we've all been waiting for this moment for, for, for like—

I don't know if like any real dollars is going to use Bitcoin. Yeah, I think it's more of like a headline thing.

Same.

I think it's a really good headline though. Like, I just think it's the— like, this is what you need. For Bitcoin to actually fulfill its purpose as a global neutral store of value in this increasingly multipolar world. But yeah, obviously there's some quantum fears and some Michael Saylor fears as well. But yeah, overall I'm pretty long still.

I think when it comes to the crypto market, it honestly hasn't looked too bad over the past few weeks. And not just like Bitcoin, um, like Bitcoin has looked pretty good during the war, all things considered. Um, and then there have been pockets of some alts doing well, right? Like TAO has done well. Um, Monad recently, Zcash. Zcash is down a lot this year, but like over the past month or so, it's done well. HYPE obviously has done quite well this year. Um, you've seen some real weakness in like stuff like SOL. Obviously the Drift hack didn't help that recently. I also am kind of wondering if Samani leaving Multicoin is also weighing on SOL. Um, because like a lot of, maybe, maybe Multicoin is getting a lot of like, uh, LP redemptions too. And SOL is just such a big position for them that they're kind of forced to sell it. Uh, but SOL has been like noticeably pretty weak, uh, compared to other stuff. Um, but there's been, you know, the, a bunch of the AI tokens, right? Like Venice is doing well this year. Um, ZRO has done pretty well this year. So there's been like, you know, it's, it's been healthier than— we did go through a period of like just DCA down only for like everything. Um, and it's like people are starting to nibble at like some things now. Yeah, which I think is good.

I'm pretty long. I have some BTC and I'm deep in alts. Um, You're muted, Jason.

Oh, I just laughed. I was like, what do you, what are you deep in?

Uh, yeah, so I, I got— I started buying late Feb. Those were decent buys, and I bought some more in March, and I was up and then round-tripped a bunch. And then, uh, when Trump had that speech, I, I remember messaging Jason. I was like— and the market puked on it. I, I was just like, I don't think it's that bearish because the most notable part being that he gave a deadline, right? And so I think there, that gives some element of certainty. You mentioned, you know, 2 to 3 weeks, and obviously there's no reason he might stick to it, but I think you don't throw that out with zero intention of trying to have some kind of, um, uh, approach and, and implementing, you know, or working around it. So I thought that certain that gave the market some certainty. So I loaded up a decent amount on that puke. Um, but I, yeah, I, some BTC, uh, I think HypeLighter, uh, will do well as RWA, uh, becomes a bigger share of their, um, OI. Plus you see commodities, and, and, and I think there's a lot of positive headlines around the price discovery and just the amount of volume that they're having. And, and You know, part of the idea is that these things will become everything exchanges. And I think this is a great step in that direction. But some, some ENA, particularly after kind of the announcement, I think it's insanely under-owned, super beaten down. USDE supply has hit a floor.

Right.

And so now you have the potential for growth there. You want to jump in real quick?

Yeah.

Yeah.

I just said, you want to talk about what that announcement was?

Yeah, so basically they are looking to diversify outside of the carry trade in when it comes to yield. So RWAs, um, they're already diversified outside of the treasuries mostly though. Yeah, they're trying to add additional sources of yield though. So now it's like prime lending, uh, like non-treasury yielding assets, uh, so it could be other forms of debt. I think it's a biz dev plus ability to find creative opportunities game. And I think that team and Guy are really good at that, as evidenced by kind of how quickly and deeply they became integrated into every exchange and custody provider. So I think that then on the AI front, yeah, those, those, those have been pretty interesting. So you kind of have to look at you know, which teams are still building, right? There aren't many. And so if you can kind of focus on those, I think that it becomes a bit more clear. And that's kind of, I guess, the benefit of bear markets that lead to attrition, because, you know, the ones that stand out, um, make— become clearer bets. So I think, uh, I like NEAR, Grass, uh, and, um, and Venice. I think Venice is probably one of the more interesting ones just in terms of its size relative to the amount of growth that's had. They haven't really— they like, you kind of have to like piece together the growth based on Eric's tweets and, and other points, but it seems like it's been through the roof. Um, and I think it'll probably pick up even more with, uh, the, the— with Claude's adjustment away from, um, allowing for people to use Open Call with subscriptions. And so you're going to dig into more of these frontier models because paying for APIs is pretty cost prohibitive for a lot of people. So, um, yeah, I think, uh, for me it's basically a combination of exchanges, um, ENA and, and the AI coins.

Yeah, I thought the, uh, speaking of AI, the, the Claude announcement, or Anthropic's announcement around Claude pushing people to API instead of the subscription. It's, it's hard to see, like, how is that not going to be extremely bullish? Because a lot of that was because it's very compute— it's based on compute capacity, right? They're basically getting strapped for that. So how is that not, like, potentially one of the next big legs where you've got all this talk about the AI bubble? And one of the things I wanted to get your guys' take on is like the disconnect we're seeing a bit between public markets, private markets. I know especially like Zeyan's where you guys spend a bunch of your time. It seems like some of this is Iran war volatility in public markets, which just weighs down big tech heavy names, Mag 7. But then the private side, you've still got crazy valuations, fundraising rounds that seem to only be accelerating. Like, I don't know, I, I, I, this concept of an AI bubble, I've never really believed in or that we're anywhere close to the top of it, but I'm just curious to get your guys' take on like where you see this going forward. Is the Claude type news super bullish, like reinforce that, hey, there's just so much demand for compute that this has, this infrastructure has to get built out, this has to continue. And any insights you guys are seeing on the private side, because underwriting AI right now is, is definitely a challenge.

Yeah, one, one bubbly component, um, so that you have your SpaceX IPO later this year, and then you're gonna have— it's this kind of ticking time bomb, right, where, I mean, the SpaceX one is just going to be monstrous, and there's only so much dry powder out there. So you probably have SpaceX, Anthropic, and, and OpenAI going, and then after that it becomes a bit trickier. And so there's, there's, it can go like one of two ways, right? You can have just continued progress and revenue continues to ramp and these things just start doing really well. And then that enhances their ability to borrow cheaply and, you know, sell stock or raise debt. And then the the flywheel keeps going. You also have this world where, you know, whatever happens in, in broader economy causes a bit of a downturn. And then you have all of this new liquidity coming. There's, there's going to be so much selling of this stock from, from insiders, because it's all like instis that they're just gonna sell, and it makes sense. And then so there's a world where some of this stuff trades down, and then that hinders the ability to keep funding the growth. Um, uh, yeah, so I, I'm not sure how that plays out, but like, you can make an argument both ways.

Yeah, it's like this race between capital markets being able to actually fund the build-out of this that is necessary, but whether or not that capital is going to be there— I think these companies, they're probably going to launch, or they're going to IPO, they're going to have relatively low floats, right? Because they're going to try and juice at least early-day returns Um, and it's going to be a lot of these companies at this point in the private market, you're looking for— investors are looking for some type of exit, and they're, they're too big at this point to get acquired. Most of them are gonna have to go public, and you have to kind of see how the public markets react, because IPOs still haven't largely done well, right? A lot of ones that have gone public in the last 12, 18 months are, are down, right? You've even seen some big AI companies potentially even looking at discounts on their latest rounds just to go public, just to give investors liquidity. So yeah, I'm not sure how that's going to pan out. But I mean, on the AI side, there's still, I guess, a ton of stuff we're looking at on the private side that's interesting enough, right? It's like your hyperscalers or infrastructure side. And then, Zey, I think you become more, I'll say, bearish on like the software application layer. Is that still— I assume that's still the case.

Yeah, on the public markets, there's definitely a big difference between how private markets are pricing things and public markets. And obviously the go-to example people use is Stripe and Adyen, but there's a bunch of other examples like Databricks. And, and yeah, like Databricks and Snowflake basically are the best direct comps, and they're both like $5 billion ARR, but one's trading at like 150 billion, and the other one's trading at like 50 billion. And there's like many examples like this, um, on private markets, like Chime and SoFi and a bunch of these, like, where they're basically trading at like anywhere from half to lower on public markets. And so, yeah, it's a weird one. Uh, it's kind of like what happens in crypto too, honestly, where, you know, the private marks are just, uh, yeah, like way higher than what can be sustained on public markets, and it just takes a while to adjust. Um, it's interesting to— yeah, it's going to be interesting to see the SpaceX IPO because like you said, there's, there's a lot of, a lot of people who have been holding that stock for a long time. There's been like— they've raised a lot of money. I think they've raised $12 billion overall. Um, and yeah, it's hard to— I couldn't find like how much insiders, like how much investors own, but I think Elon owns 42% of the company still. and then a bunch of, uh, and then obviously there's, there's employees I think have had a bunch of tender offers. But yeah, there's clearly a lot of investment capital in there, and it's going to be hard to find— like, you need to find a lot of buyers, right, in public markets, like a few hundred billion really of, of net buyers to, to offset that. And obviously SpaceX is like an insane company, but it's, it's, it's doing about $20 billion in, in revenue.

Yeah, I think it's like $15 or something.

Yeah. Yeah, it's like, it's like Meta's trading at $1.5 trillion, right? And it does like $200 billion in revenue. Like, it's, it's, it's kind of silly. Like, it's literally trading at 100x revenue. I don't know. I'm, uh, but a lot of the growth rounds for, for like private market growth rounds are pricing in these, these multiples. But, but yeah, interesting. It's like way more expensive than Anthropic or OpenAI on a, on a revenue multiples basis. So yeah, I don't know. It's going to be interesting to see how it goes. Space. Yeah.

Yeah.

And on the application side, sorry, Kevin, do you want to jump in?

I was just going to say, I know I agree. And I think public markets are the, in some ways, like sometimes the ultimate like arbiter of, like, it seems like public markets when it comes to AI are very, is very focused on. Asking questions around ROI and like, show me the money today, in a sense. Whereas a lot of these private rounds are based on, to your point, Zay, future growth and growing into these valuations, which, again, if you looked at OpenAI 2 or 3 years ago, a lot of people would have said it never would have gotten to maybe even like $20 or $25 billion in ARR, right? So it's a little bit more of like subjectivity, I guess you'd say, or like you can't really plug in a DCF. Like, your models are only as good as your assumptions. Whereas once you go public, public market investors and institutions, like, it's a very different mindset. It's kind of almost like guilty until proven innocent right now.

Yeah, I think there's a high probability SpaceX trades below their recent vals. They're like the last round. If you get a puke— wow, that's gonna—

last round, it was a trillion, I think. So that would be—

and they're going out at 1.7. I guess below IPO round then. I'm sorry, not last round, below, like trades down from IPO for sure. It's like if you get any kind of market downturn, that's going to be one of the earlier ones that gets puked, I think.

I mean, yeah, just the, the, the gold IPO at a $2 trillion valuation is just— but it's a question like, is that the new— is this the new normal, right? Again, 5 years ago, like NVIDIA becoming the world's most valuable company on the planet at $4 trillion was just an insane or almost like asinine idea. But here we are.

Did you see NASDAQ's like— there's like been some pressure to change the rules of index inclusion to basically allow companies that get listed to, to get like to basically get included sooner. So and the idea like a lot of people are saying this is basically to get SpaceX included sooner. So that the passive index buyers can buy the private investors' bags or whatever.

Right. So when it goes public on— yeah, on like NYSE too, like NYSE is incentivized to have this thing do well.

Yeah.

Yeah. And then, I mean, you could— there was a lot of like gesturing that with the Fundrise Innovation Fund, right? VCX, that ticker. That went— I guess not technically public because it's a fund, but basically was like launched to the public— what was that, last week or two weeks ago? And it traded— I mean, its NAV is like $19. It holds like Anthropic, SpaceX, you know, private shares, all these companies, but its NAV's like $19. And I wound up trading up to like $550, $560. And people pointed to that as like, here's so much pent-up retail demand to get access to these names because they can't they can't get access to them really in any other way. I don't know, I just think there's— it's a very big uphill battle to climb. And it's almost like the companies that go public first, are they, are they the ones that benefit most because the dry powder that is there, they want to get exposure to these names? Or does it make more sense to just wait and see if you're, if you're in the queue, you know, to go public? I don't know.

You probably want to go public first, for sure.

I mean, for sure. There's just only, like, it's the euthanasia roller coaster.

Yeah. On the, uh, you were going to say something, Zay, on the application side? Is there anything interesting?

Um, no, I just, well, just recently, like, I've never changed my mind so often as I have recently. With investment, like, in the last 1 or 2 years. I think I kind of said this last time, just like, feels like if you, if you change your mind, you have like a chance to be right, but if you, if you don't change your mind, you're almost definitely wrong, just based on how fast things are moving. Um, and so I— there was a moment there where I was very bullish, like, verticalized software. I kind of talked about it on this podcast as well, like, um, just the idea that AI is way more powerful than what people are using it for in order to unlock that power, really what's missing is sort of context, like being able to have data pipelines to input your specific context and then like a good UI to unlock that and make it easy for people. And that we'd have those sort of across all sectors. Yeah, I'm not sure anymore, basically. I don't even know if we sort of, if agents get good enough, I don't even know if we have UIs, you know, like Maybe you just say what you want and it just happens. And if you need a UI to see the data, it just sort of gets generated for you. So yeah, it's really hard to say. I think one thing I'm pretty sure about is that there's like more alpha than ever in public markets. Like, I think for people who are paying attention in specific sectors and things like this, there's just like, I think, never been more alpha because I think for sort of two decades, like it was sort of nothing ever happens, right? Like the big just got bigger. Mag Seven just took up, just carried sort of the S&P and passive investors did really well. I think now there's so much happening and it's so hard to sort of play out all the consequences of it that I do think like some of these active managers, because all the SaaS names got pretty much like indiscriminately dumped, you know, sort of 50 to 60% or even more for some names, there's definitely going to be value there. But I also think like in energy, there's people and people that are working out the supply chain for, for AI chips and electrification, right? The people who got into the memory stocks early, who now— I met a kid yesterday who's, who thinks, you know, it's, it's actually like not, uh, yeah, anyway, there's all sorts of different theses of the people who are playing with this stuff that I think Yeah, it's a more interesting game than it ever was before and really hard to play part-time because things just move and reprice so quickly.

I think this mindset and the increase in active investors is just going to make passive that much better because passive, you're just basically coattailing on the amount of active investor capital that's like in the market, and it just is going to make it even more benefit— like, passive investing has always been this free lunch, like the only free lunch in the world, basically. And I think it's only—

how are you coattailing? I think the opposite, like the active managers coattail on how much passive capital there is that's basically not making investment decisions.

Passive just tails active, right?

But passive tails flow more than active. Uh, like passive is just, there's, you know, money, a constant bid every 2 weeks. And, uh, so I think that's what benefits passive. But on the other hand, if you look you know, uh, S&P hasn't really done that much, but there's been an insane amount of movement under the hood, which I think is more of an argument for active over passive.

Yeah, I still think S&P will do, will do well because AI is like, you know, net just value.

Yeah, I mean, most people should just own the index, right? Like, if you're not doing it full-time, you're not going to be able to do— yeah, just most people should just own the index. But like, I agree with you, Jose, and I think Kevin, we, we kind of mentioned that in the year ahead that we thought like, especially within like crypto, but like more broadly speaking, that like, um, we, we kind of just said what Jose was saying. We're like, active people who are active in the market, like essentially like stock pickers market, will probably be like the ideal way to kind of treat the market going forward given all the opportunities. Obviously we didn't have a lot of the things that have happened between then and now happened, but it kind of only, you know, builds on that case. So like, yeah, I fully agree. And like, um, I just don't think a lot of people can play the active game well. That's, that's like the only thing. Like, I think it's very hard to play it, to play it well.

Um, aren't you kind of like contradicting yourself then?

No, like, I think, I think the good active managers will do very well over the next like 12 to 24 months relative to how they've done over the past like 5 to 10 years. But I don't think there will be that many because by definition outperforming the market is hard and most people don't do it right. So like for most people, just own the index, I think, like, right? Like if you're not doing it full time and if you are doing it full time, it's still hard, but like it's a It's as good of a market as any to do it.

Yeah, I think the comparison would just be, um, the spread between active hedge funds and passive 401k investors, basically. Whereas before, yeah, it wasn't— I'd say right now the spread is wider where hedge funds can outperform just passive 401k peeps versus what it was before when you just had this rising tide. And, and, and basically, if you, if you missed a name, you really underperformed. And so by being an index investor, you never missed the Apples of the world.

Yeah. And one way to— I guess what you said before, right, it's like probably there's going to be way bigger dispersion in the underlying makeup of the S&P 500, right? If before everything just like mostly went up and maybe the Mag 7 went up more I think now you're going to have like some things get absolutely destroyed and then other things just come out of nowhere, right? And I think that dispersion is where you can capture the big performance as a long-short manager right now in a way that you just haven't been able to in the last two decades. So yeah, I would just, I would take that bet. You know, like Buffett made that bet with whoever it was, the active manager in 2000, right? That like the S&P would outperform like this basket of active managers and it did. I think now is a better time for, for active managers, basically, is my only point. I'm gonna start.

Yeah, in particular, like, when you— when these big guys IPO, you know, there's, there's gonna be some fresh capital, but I think it's a lot of it's just gonna be rotated rotations, right? So which names are gonna get decimated in that, in that situation? I don't know what the ratio of fresh capital to rotation is, and— but I, I do imagine there's going to be quite a bit of it. Um, because it's, it's kind of a reallocation of, of, of exposure from institutional managers saying, I still want to be long this sector this weight, and in order to get exposure to that, I have to rebalance that as something else. And then, you know, you layer in who are the biggest losers from the growth of these other firms, and so you kind of— you're going to get some, some really big volatility around those IPOs.

By the way, on the topic of, um, you know, private investments and IPOing late and everything, did you guys see this yesterday? I don't— so like, I don't know the type of like liquidity that, uh, there is on this, but I was pretty surprised. Like, um, someone was able to buy like half a million dollars of Anthropic on Solana on-chain a few months ago. Um, I've been like pretty skeptical of these pre-stock things because a lot of times they're like, they're kind of just like synthetics or like cash forwards and, and all this. Um, is this a spot thing? Yeah, yeah, it's by pre-stocks. I need to look into them more because I don't understand how this guy was able to buy $500K. It must all be direct with like the issuer because I don't understand.

It's definitely not directly the issuer.

No, no, not with Anthropic, with like this. Pre-stocks or whoever's tokenizing these, right?

Yeah. I mean, I spoke to— we spoke to someone that's got an interesting design for this. It's actually based on the original FTX design from back in the day. So like FTX, I don't know if you remember, they listed like Coinbase and Robinhood back in the day. And it was apparently this Swiss law firm that they ended up acquiring that had this super interesting design.

It's—

I mean, it's very simple. It's like a trust. You put the You put the asset in it, and then you can sort of like, it's a trust that sort of is cash settled on IPO or exit. And you put the asset in it, and then you can like issue, like, yeah, I guess I was just kind of shocked.

Like, I knew these things kind of existed over the last few months. But I didn't realize that like, because most of them, it's like, oh, you can buy Tesla stock. And it's like, you buy $1,000 and you move the price 2%.

Right.

Um, but I don't know, interesting space to like watch, especially as we— there's like more and more tokenization over the next few years.

Yeah, I was pretty shocked he was able to get that size because even moving some of these, you're— it's messy, right? These vehicles have carry fees, broker fees, like all these elements. Um, and, and so makes even just secondary market transactions pretty brutal. So I'm impressed that that worked.

Yeah, I gotta look into it more, but I saw some people that, like, I respect their opinion, like, tweeting it, that it was, like, legit and stuff.

So, um, I definitely think this is gonna happen though. There's gonna be some way to bring private stocks on, like, private markets on-chain. I think it's kind of like a perfect fit. Um, I just don't know what the winning design is going to be.

Let me just look at the explosion in secondary sales. I mean, that's, that's the market right now.

Yeah, that plus when, uh, if some of these IPOs go south, everyone who's in late-stage privates is like, holy shit, how do we run for the door?

That's the thing, right? There's just so many— the private market is just so big right now.

Like, yeah, it's also going to be interesting how they get around, because for certain companies and certain privates, like, there's a good amount of secondary supply on like basically any of these platforms. But then there's others that are arguably like the most highly coveted where the, the team themselves, right, like puts restrictions on secondary sales or like who's wanting to know like who's on the cap table. Like, I don't know how you get around that if you don't have the team sign off, or like the, the docs are structured that way.

SPVs, um, right.

So you're on the cap table because you're approved, or like you, and then you're basically just tokenizing, or yeah, my SPV is on the cap table, right?

And I'm just selling that thing around, and then somebody else, or your SPV is on the cap table of an SPV, which is on the cap table of another SPV. Which hopefully is on the cap table of the underlying.

The Chinese dolls.

I mean, the Russian dolls. Which hopefully the underlying is somewhere in one of those.

Yeah, yeah, exactly. That's going to be really interesting with SpaceX too. I think a lot of people are going to realize that these things did not have access to the underlying, or you were paying so many layers of fees that you basically are making like way less money than you thought on some of these things.

Yeah, I know like a buddy who was in Anthropic at, I think, the $18 mil round, and he recently sold, and after all the fees, it was like an 8x.

What would it— whoa. And yeah, wow, $18 mil.

Well, because, uh, there was the big round that came in that was a 50% dilution. Um, the round after that was the big one. I forget who led that, but that was like a 50% dilution round, basically. So there's that, and then there's the fees. And yeah, these things are super capital intensive, so like getting diluted pretty heavily each round.

Yeah, it's a tough world when you, when you're getting disappointed by an 8x too, on what could have, what could have been. I also saw, I saw an interesting chart, like kind of going back to disconnects and markets, uh, around like prediction markets. We can get into some of the Polymarket stuff because I know they had a couple announcements this week. But it's just been interesting to see like the rise of prediction markets. I saw a great chart that was basically the volumes of prediction markets overlaid with like the volumes on crypto, and they were just like the inverse of one another, right? Like prediction markets just stealing a bunch of attention. I, and I still feel like the crypto market suffers from that. Like, it seems like, yes, we talked about some names that have done decently well, especially in the last 3-4 weeks, but I don't know, I feel like the attention is still shifted shifted elsewhere. The attention from prediction markets, the attention just in general, like within, within crypto, like you got Bitcoin, it's got its own narrative around it. But I don't know, I think just like prediction markets are going to be an interesting one we can dig into because I know they, they've had some news this week. Polymarket itself seems like it's had a week, took down some of the markets that were tracking like the fate of US pilots that were downed. They had one that resolved. Jason Yanowitz on the ground, which, Ceteris, I know you've had some thoughts around or some debate around the usefulness of these things.

But yeah, I think prediction markets have been— I mean, they have a lot of work to do to be like useful. I think a lot of times you get these markets that resolve, that they resolve around like technicalities and wording. And so if you're like somebody— and I'm stealing some of this from like a Matt Levine call the other day, but I totally agreed with it. The, the boots on the ground thing, right? Like that market, the intention of that market is like, is the US going to send troops to like for an operation in Iran, like to as an attack, right? It's not the intention of that market is not like they're going to go rescue a pilot, right? It's like some, it's like some outlier technicality. And so it's like if you're really good at prediction markets right now, or in this phase where like you've had so many markets resolve, around like these weird nuances that kind of get away from the point that the market is really supposed to be about. And so if you're somebody that like spends a lot of time like figuring out these nuances, you can like make a lot of money in this, but it's like, it's kind of, there's no, it's like not useful, right? If prediction markets are going to be like, their whole selling feature is that like they make information more accurate and they surface information, all this kind of stuff, then you do want markets that are measured by their true intention.

Yeah, I'll take the other side of that though. I think you need to have— you need to remove subjectivity, um, otherwise it can get very messy. So I think if you, if you take every market in a literal way and, and treat that as a feature, not a bug, then it just becomes more about the prompts and conditions for the market. And so you don't repeat previous mistakes, right? The next one will say, it doesn't matter. Like if somebody gets shot down, it's not boots on the ground. Like you, I think you become more specific about what triggers the parameters. And so there's kind of a learning curve there, but I think you kind of want to remove subjectivity, although, you know, at the same time, these guys just rely on UMA, which has been less than honest sometimes with kind of whale manipulation, etc. And so, well, yeah, like minus the separate piece, the UMA thing, right?

Like, I mean, ceteris, like, there really isn't like a solution other than what Jan said, right? Just like make a better market that's more explicit on what the resolution criteria is, right? Like, that's—

well, no, that's what I think they should do. I think that they've been sloppy with like the way they've talked about designing these and measuring these markets. Like, a lot of markets, you look at the measuring criteria and kind of like, I don't know, it's kind of weak. And so they have a lot of work to do, I think, in that respect. You're going to have this come up a lot until they get better at it, because there's obviously money to be made here in figuring out what the flaw in the market is, right?

Um, what do you think of the— they dropped like, uh, Polymarket did like the, like, exchange upgrade thing with like their, their own USD PolyMarket thing. What do you think about that, Satoru? How do you—

I don't remember that.

Well, what was it?

Didn't they announce something like that?

They're going full exchange upgrade.

Yeah, like they're going to have a native stablecoin for like PolyMarket USD, that kind of—

this is it like yield bearing? Is that part of it so that you don't like the opportunity cost?

Other way they internalize the yield.

Yeah.

Oh, really?

When you don't charge fees, you gotta make some money somehow.

But it kind of, yeah, just like everything's now directly controlled by Polymarket versus—

Everybody, I mean, every successful— it's like, I know Athena's done this with like MegaETH, right? A lot of these, like, people come to the conclusion that like, oh wait, what's like the good solid fundamental revenue in crypto? And a lot of it is the treasury yields behind the stablecoins, right? And so if you're an application and you're like, oh, look at all these stablecoins I have on my platform, I should get paid for that. Like Solana, for instance. Solana has like $15 billion and like, I don't know, half or more than half of that is USDC and they don't even freeze fucking $200 million when there's an exploit. Like, and they get nothing for that. It's like, why? What is that relationship getting Solana? Like, they have an issuer who shares no economics. And leaves their DeFi ecosystem out to dry when they have the ability to like stop damage. So I think this is like a point that a lot of just like blockchains, applications in general are just going to get into more and more.

Yeah, it'll be interesting to see what that— what the endgame is on that because, yeah, I think we talked about this Nick Carter post a while ago, but I thought it was really interesting. He said, you know, it used to be that everyone thought a few giant stablecoins would win because liquidity and network effects. But his argument was that actually maybe the endgame was like a bunch of different stablecoins. And I think his arguments were just that the float is sort of too valuable to give away and everyone's going to want to launch their own stablecoin, every app, like we've seen with Polymarket and with others. And then launching your stablecoin has never been easier. Right. Before it was super hard. Now you have like all these white label providers that let you do it super easy. And then users might just not care what stablecoin is underneath because the front ends will sort of abstract it away as just like USD. Right. And so it doesn't really matter. And then swaps interoperability are getting so cheap that it's enough that the network effects aren't as big as they used to be. Right. And yeah, with the yield sharing, it just means that there's just like a lot more incentive for these things to be adopted. And we're kind of seeing it. Yeah, Athena did really well with that, with MegaETH and a bunch of others. But it's an interesting argument, I think. I still think there's a lot of sort of— yeah, I'm curious what you think, Jan, actually.

Yeah, I was going to say, it's when your app doesn't really need the network effects of your stable where all the activity is contained to it. And you're able to just do it on the backend where it's like, yeah, deposit your USDC or USDT and we'll just convert it on the backend, then there's like, there's, there's really few trade-offs for the app to, to, to use an existing one. They might as well just go with their own. Yeah, I'm very much on the same board. I think the, the alternative is basically when you're, when you need the network effect, which is just becoming a smaller surface area. Is when you'd rationalize not doing it.

Which is then, yeah, it's kind of bearish Tether and USDC, right? And maybe there's not really a way to express this bet other than just on the applications themselves, or if an Athena or like other white label provider ends up being very dominant here, basically.

Tether might be insulated because it kind of exists as just this monster way to transact. Like, you're never going to see US Polymarkets USD or any of these other specific ones, I think, take over the primary utility of Tether, for example. But on USDC, which relies more so on these integrations, more so than Tether at least, I do think that like it definitely hurts their business.

From a user standpoint, though, like, wouldn't you if interoperability and swaps become in the, in the back, on the backend, are essentially like frictionless, can you still make an argument that like network effects would matter? Like you're going to basically try and default to the stable where you can get the highest yields if you're, if it's just sitting idle, even if it's within like an application or within an ecosystem? Like, I don't know, I'm, I'm trying to square that with like also the dispersion of many, many stables versus just a small handful.

Yeah, I mean, most stables don't share yield. So I think you bucket it, you bucket it into stables that share yield and then stables that are just kind of lubricant for the app. And if it's lubricant for the app, then you can internalize because they're not there for the yield. And then if it's a yield product specifically, then I think that's where the demand for the stable comes from.

Yeah, it's a good way to put it. It's a really good way to put it.

Yeah, I do think being the highest yield, I mean, that was the initial, that was like pretty much my Athena thesis, but just like being the highest yield, you, you, I'm like, as much as possible, you want to be sitting on one of the vertices, right? You want to be like the most liquid or the highest yield or have some other differentiator because everyone in the middle is just going to get eaten, right? And like internalized by the applications. I do think, yeah, the, the changes they made are kind of important there. And yeah, and it's kind of like, uh, I don't know if you guys noticed, like, SKY, um, has anyone checked USDS supply recently? Like, uh, the DAI supply?

No.

Well, nearly.

It's what, 12 billion? Yeah, but like, I, I've dug into the loop and I just haven't put enough time into fully understanding, uh, how it works, but it seems like they can just— they just chose, I think it was like 21 billion or some, some arbitrary amount that they can just mint, and then they have this kind of tiered security apparatus behind it. Um, with, with Maker? Yeah, and like Spark and all that.

I think it's just been up since— it's, it's sort of like absorbed most of the Athena, uh, because they had— they just had better bear market yield sources. Like, they had— they'd already integrated the Apollo, you know, credit funds and all the, like, all the things that they already integrated with. And so they managed to keep, like— I think their USDS base yield is like 3.75%, but then they've got higher on the, on the, like, if you, if you stake it, and, and stuff that have like 3 different yield sources. But that was enough to sort of absorb— it seems like a lot of the USD supply basically went there, kind of what USD did to USDS initially, right, when they went live and it was like 60% yield. Um, and it's sort of interesting also that like USD has this— seems to have this floor at like $5 billion, even though the yield is, is lower than what you could get with, with USDS and, and, and even like treasuries, right? Yeah, it's like this huge advantage that I think stablecoins have that have been in the market for a while and had a lot of holders is that there just seems to be like forgotten supply that's just willing to accept like lower yield. And yeah, I'm one of them, honestly. Like, so there's just like people who just won't get rid of their USD for whatever reason, for laziness or something like that. But it's a huge advantage going forward because it just means your yield for stakers is inherently higher, right? It's inherently leveraged. But I thought it was really— I checked USDS the other day and I was like, damn, I did not realize they, you know, USDS supply was like $11.5 billion. It's crazy. Like more than doubled since, like, yeah, October, November 2024. So yeah, that's why I think if the changes that you need to make are enough to raise the yield like 100 basis points, it'll be enough to steal back a bunch of supply, um, from, from, from SKY.

Yeah, I saw the other element, them talking about how much there's like a decent amount of DAI that's lost that's effectively like free buffer to the protocol since that collateral will never be redeemed.

Yeah, I haven't even looked at DAI supply. Um, wow, there's still 4.4 billion of DAI too, so I guess cumulative, it's like, assuming that's right, it's like $16 billion or something. Yeah, that's like, I think that's the biggest decentralized stablecoin ever at this point, or non-big. Yeah, I don't know if you can call Maker decentralized anymore, but all right, so we've obviously covered a ton of stuff.

I want to end this with a final question, all you guys. We've talked about a bunch. But I'm always curious to, uh, because I chat with you guys about this stuff a bunch, but for everybody out there, is there anything we haven't talked about that you either want to hit on, or I'm curious what has got all of you nerd sniped right now?

I think not nerd snipe, but just like reassessing risk after the Drift thing. Like, I'm kind of nerd sniped, I guess, by these hacks. Like, the way that they're doing them now, um, like the Drift exploit was a 6-month in-person operation where North Korea hired this, like, external team. They're like these quant traders, and they became close with the Drift team over 6 months, you know, made a vault on Drift that people could deposit in. And then eventually made some like, uh, TestFlight app, got the Drift team to download it, did all this other stuff, but it was like super sophisticated, right? And you're seeing these, you're seeing these kind of attacks, the social engineering ones happen way more than like the smart contract hacks, right? Like in the past, hacks were always smart contract hacks, just some shitty code. Right. But now the code has honestly gotten pretty good for a lot of DeFi because it's been around so long and it's been so battle-tested that like, you know, this hack, the Bybit hack, the, the Radiant hack, all of these were social engineering. Right. I think like my main takeaway, like, first of all, when this happened, I withdrew everything from any Solana DeFi protocol because it's like an admin key thing. Right. And it just got me thinking, like, do I really want to have money in these admin— in these protocols with admin keys where, like, we've kind of just seen this complete, like, rug here? Um, one thing I think we need to do better as an industry is, um, I mean, I don't want to I mean, the Drift team needed to be better in this. Like, if you're, if you're on a multisig, like, the Drift team's mistake was they thought that they had cold, they had cold signing keys for the multisig. So like, they used hardware wallets, but they were signing on their main computers, right? And if you're using like a hardware wallet, hardware wallet on your main computer, that's not like a cold key anymore because your machine is hot, right? Like you need to be at like, individuals should be using separate machines to sign transactions. Okay. But that might be overkill for a lot of individuals, but like, if you're in a multisig on a $200 billion, $200 million plus like TVL protocol, and you're not using like a separate machine to do the signing, right. Where you don't download anything on it. It's like, to me, that's just lazy. And I, I think there is a lot of laziness when it comes to this. And the fact that we've seen like, you know, 3 insane hacks now with, with, with Bybit, Radiant, Drift that are all of the similar variety to do with admin keys, um, like, you know, and then what? And then what? Uh, Anthropic released the model yesterday that can just find all these vulnerabilities too. So that goes back to smart contracts. Now maybe the smart contracts aren't as safe they were, right? So it's just like, I don't know, I— the day after the exploit, I, I wrote in the Delphi, in our internal chat, and this is like, you know, a chat with people who have been around forever. Like, we all know how to use DeFi, we all are like pretty sophisticated with everything. Um, but, uh, sorry, what was I gonna say? Um, oh yeah, so the first 10 response, as I said, do you have 25% more? Of your crypto portfolio in DeFi? And maybe that number was too high, but the first 10 respondents were all no, right? And this is like people who work in the industry, and we don't even have a quarter of our capital in DeFi protocols right now. Some people came in after and said yes, but like, it just— and like with all the points programs that have been enticing people for years and nothing's come out of it, it's like you're taking all this risk. Um, I don't know. Yan, you want to say something?

No, no, I was gonna— I, I fully agree with what you're saying. Yeah, the— I mean, the admin key stuff it's, it's one of those where the, the second it happens to one of these, everyone should kind of have their ears perk up and, and make some adjustments.

It's—

and then if this happens to a second one, it's even more nuts that this happens. And, you know, I guess like the main hope is just that adjustments are made on a go-forward basis. Um, on the, the share in DeFi, I think I wonder how much of that is risk versus just lack of compelling things to do at the moment.

I also think DeFi has kind of been hijacked though, like the term DeFi. I don't know who tweeted this, but it's kind of been hijacked where something with an admin key or even a multisig, I think, is like explicitly not DeFi, you know, like, or at least the way DeFi is supposed to be.

Yeah, it's like on-chain. It's on-chain.

It's on-chain. It's supposed to be like non-custodial, you know, permissionless, etc. I just think that, and I also think no hate to the Drift team because I actually think they, like Cindy crushes it. But the risk profile for like these C-DeFi things where it's a DeFi protocol with an admin key is actually like the worst of both worlds because you have smart contract exploits and just like the slowness of being able to react on chain with a multisig. But then also the risks of key management for admin keys and most of the risks you'd have of centralized platforms. So I really think it's kind of the worst of both worlds. And I think the— yeah, I mean, it's kind of a problem that DeFi has been hijacked so much because even I think both of these hacks, I wouldn't consider DeFi hacks. Both of these things were basically custodial, right? Resolve and Drift. So yeah, it's sort of unfortunate that it ends up spilling over to the rest of the DeFi brand.

Yeah, last DeFi one was Balancer, right?

Yeah. What was that? I don't even remember what the hack was, actually.

I don't know, but it was in like their— they might have been their V2 contracts, which have been around for so long. That's the, the scariest stuff. Yeah, it's just like this honeypot that's been there. And then that ties into, um, yeah, Claude's Mythos getting released, or I mean the release of what it can do and what that means for a lot of these longstanding large honeypot setups.

I mean, dude, like doomsday scenario is bug in like the actual L1, right? And then like Ledger, can you imagine undercover North Korea? It's been like Ledger this whole time.

It's just like, plot will find the bugs. On a more positive note, something— I'm not like nerd sniped by it, but clearly Hype being one of my only positions is something I'm clearly invested in. Uh, and obviously everybody's talking about prediction markets a lot, clearly one of the, you know, winning use cases of, of the cycle. Uh, so HIP4 is like in testnet, which is effectively just, you know, they're launching predict— prediction markets, unified spot margin accounts, everything like that, uh, through HIP4. So, um, it's their first real movement beyond like perps, right? Perp trading and, you know, just trading like we, we know it. So I'm kind of curious to see how it plays out, see if there's actual traction there, see if they steal away any kind of, you know, market share, especially on like the crypto-native side of things from like Polymarket or Kalshi.

Um, to bring the vibe back down, to bring the vibe back down, what, how did you feel as a Hype Holder with the, with the key management stuff? Because I think Hype is one of the things that I wouldn't really consider DeFi, honestly.

No, no, I agree with you. Like, that's always been, that's always been like the big risk, right? Even since hype was like super new and before it had all of this growth and success, um, it's always been the big risk. Um, so yeah, I mean, hopefully, like, I don't know, dude, like, hopefully my hype is, is not all in hype, right? Like, I have some of it in my wallet, but like, again, like, if they steal a bunch of money or something happens, like Clearly it's gonna go down a lot, but, um, I don't know, like, I just gotta, gotta trust that they're doing the right things and hopefully, uh, learning from all of these mistakes. Um, I believe Tay, who was super critical initially, has been working with them over the last year, so maybe that's good. I don't know, I, I have no, no insight into it.

I saw something on Twitter that, like, they have some migration going on, but I don't know how true this is. I need to look into that more, but they might be updating the bridge a little bit to get away from the current structure that they have.

But yeah, yeah, Jose, that's clearly the biggest risk. Everything else is going great, right? So like that would be— Yeah, by far.

And how do you guys feel about LIT, like Litter here? I got a pretty— I got shilled and ended up buying a buying a bag while I was in China, but I'm curious how you guys are feeling about it.

Uh, I'm, I'm bullish. I think you're gonna have— I mean, it's trading a little cheaper than hype, even with the, uh, FDV adjustments, uh, for investors. It depends on how you adjust the FDV. If you don't adjust it, then, then like, yeah. But if you adjust that kind of hypes and do all that, what are you adjusting hypes for?

The supply and treasury?

Or to normalize the two, basically, like, you know, hype isn't— you don't have the investor, like there's an ecosystem, there's no investors that are going to sell.

And so, you know, you kind of, kind of do what, just like do apples to apples? Sold out for the rest?

Yeah.

And just what share of like overall supply is investor versus community kind of thing. Stuff that, that's been, you know, pretty broadly talked about. So the, the gap converges. It's still, it's still there. Um, uh, it seems like the— they had— they're like going down the licensing route path and, and just deeper U.S. integrations, which, um, should be bullish. I think there's a lot of open space on the, the RWA front, and, and I think there's— you're seeing growth on, on both of those. So I mean, I'm buying the number 2.

When is buying the number 2 in crypto that looks cheap ever worked out? That was my main worry. Yeah, I do think it's differentiated in a way that not many people talk about, like with the way they built it with ZK. I think it actually has an eject button, although I don't know if it's working right now. They weren't really able to. And I think if it was, they'd probably make more of a big deal about it. But, and it also allows them to do like cross-collateral more easily, apparently. But it sounds like HIP4 is going to bring that out anyway. Yeah, I don't know.

On the Tae front, did you guys see that viral tweet that went around when they basically listed every protocol that had North Korean involvement?

Like every half of them. Yeah. Well, did you see yesterday this— there is this protocol in Solana called Stable, okay? Not stable, it's like S-T-A-B-L-E. And they were, and they were tweeting yesterday, everybody withdraw your liquidity ASAP. And they were quote tweeting a Zach tweet that said that he was like, this, this North Korean— this guy is like a North Korean dev that's worked at protocols. And they're like, withdraw, this guy worked here. And they were like tweeting it out. But the thing is, they could also— that could— the thing that is, it's so hard in this industry is like that tweet itself could have actually been a hack. Like they could have hijacked the front end of Stabl and then get everybody to panic withdraw from the protocol, and then that was the hack, right? And so that's why this shit is just so like, man.

Did you see the other viral tweet of, uh, this interview uh, where they're like, we found a way to detect if, if the candidate is from North Korea, and they basically ask him to publicly defame Kim.

Yeah, that is— no, no, that— if people think— listen, that's the long game that they're gonna play. Like, there's no way— you cannot, you cannot, you cannot trust that process, man. Like, they're gonna just start— they're just gonna be like, you can, you can denounce him, and then people will get a false sense of security that they're not North Korea, and then it's, you know, take a recording of them denouncing him, hack North Korea, and play it on the TVs there. Boom, checkmate.

And do that for every single one.

Gotta fight fire with fire, bro.

Come on.

This was— I'm gonna share my screen. It was so ridiculous. I was like, what is going on? Okay, this tweet looks like it's a hack. Itself.

Okay.

Emergency, guys, please temporarily withdraw your liquidity instantly. Temporarily. Better safe than sorry. The new Stable team.

Spell temporarily like they spell stable.

But then basically the worst crisis com I've ever seen.

Basically, this is what they retweeted.

Panic now.

You need to panic.

They're like, yeah, they quote tweeted this, better safe than sorry.

I don't know, it was just like so funny, the team itself saying that, better safe than sorry.

Seems we had one year ago, we have a new team that took over 4 weeks ago. It's like, that's, that's good.

Our values, better safe than sorry.

Yeah, so I don't know. Uh, anyways, funny. Good times, always, always entertaining, you know.

Crypto.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, dude. Never, never a down week. Well, 2 weeks when we do the next one of these, it'll be right after the, uh, the ceasefire ends. So that'll be— I mean, we're gonna have fireworks along the way, I think.

Global peace.

Yeah, we'll have global peace next time we all hop on. Which is super exciting, something to look forward to. Uh, really appreciate you guys as always jumping on doing this. Again, just the, uh, the announcement from the top. This is fortunately the last time we'll be doing this on, um, Block Wars Empire feed. Huge thanks to them, it's been awesome partnering with them to get this, this off the ground. If you guys like the show, subscribe over at the Delphi Media channels that we mentioned. We'll try and get those links in the show notes and, uh, we'll be, we'll be back at this with a, with a bunch of new content, you know, over the next couple months. So thanks, guys, for joining. Never, never ceases to entertain.

Thanks, guys.

Thank you.