Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Michael Saylor gave me a two-word model for Bitcoin that explains this entire year: "Risk capital squared." Whatever is good for risk assets is really good for #Bitcoin. Whatever is bad for risk is really bad for it. Simple. But then he walked me through what's actually happening inside...

CryptoMichNL's profile picture

Michaël van de Poppe

820,284 subscribers

32,100 Aufrufe • vor 2 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

Finanzen#Bitcoin
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Everyone's asking why Bitcoin is lagging while the S&P prints all-time highs. Michael Saylor gave me the cleanest answer in Prague: "We're living right now in the summer of the AI bubble... $500 billion of capital is being lurped into the AI complex right now." His framing: a "massive AI black hole spinning through the system," pulling the marginal dollar into every hot AI deal instead of crypto. Nothing broke — the capital just found somewhere louder to go. What I respect is that he didn't leave it vague. He put a clock on it: "I think a lot of that hot money will come back into Bitcoin because Bitcoin is now undervalued" — capital rotating back around Q3, and by Q4 "things will be normalizing to our benefit." That's his call, not mine — but it's dated and testable, which is exactly why it's worth writing down. In six months we either see the rotation or we don't. His yardstick for "undervalued," for what it's worth, is the discount to the 200-week moving average — what he calls the "book value" of Bitcoin. A cleaner lens than the daily candle, whatever you make of the timing. Do you buy the AI-drain thesis — or is the lag telling us something more structural?
0:26

Everyone's asking why Bitcoin is lagging while the S&P prints all-time highs. Michael Saylor gave me the cleanest answer in Prague: "We're living right now in the summer of the AI bubble... $500 billion of capital is being lurped into the AI complex right now." His framing: a "massive AI black hole spinning through the system," pulling the marginal dollar into every hot AI deal instead of crypto. Nothing broke — the capital just found somewhere louder to go. What I respect is that he didn't leave it vague. He put a clock on it: "I think a lot of that hot money will come back into Bitcoin because Bitcoin is now undervalued" — capital rotating back around Q3, and by Q4 "things will be normalizing to our benefit." That's his call, not mine — but it's dated and testable, which is exactly why it's worth writing down. In six months we either see the rotation or we don't. His yardstick for "undervalued," for what it's worth, is the discount to the 200-week moving average — what he calls the "book value" of Bitcoin. A cleaner lens than the daily candle, whatever you make of the timing. Do you buy the AI-drain thesis — or is the lag telling us something more structural?

Michaël van de Poppe

74,081 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

. Michael Saylor explains why Strategy's real business isn't Bitcoin - it's selling credit to people who want the upside without the bumpy ride "We're like a reserve bank. We have a reserve asset - Bitcoin. We will sell credit. We are stripping the performance and the risk off of the bitcoin." "Bitcoin's got 40 vol and it's got high performance. But most of the world wants zero vol. What they want is a bank account that pays them 10 or 11%." "For every dollar of equity capital of Bitcoin that we have - digital capital - you can create 10 to $0.20 of credit. We've sold about $10 billion of credit. We'll create $20 billion of digital credit over the next year, then grow that 30 to 50% a year."
2:38

. Michael Saylor explains why Strategy's real business isn't Bitcoin - it's selling credit to people who want the upside without the bumpy ride "We're like a reserve bank. We have a reserve asset - Bitcoin. We will sell credit. We are stripping the performance and the risk off of the bitcoin." "Bitcoin's got 40 vol and it's got high performance. But most of the world wants zero vol. What they want is a bank account that pays them 10 or 11%." "For every dollar of equity capital of Bitcoin that we have - digital capital - you can create 10 to $0.20 of credit. We've sold about $10 billion of credit. We'll create $20 billion of digital credit over the next year, then grow that 30 to 50% a year."

MR SHIFT 🦁

34,055 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

“What I think SPX is, is a wake-up call. And I think for the normie, the average person, it literally is best described as being the next Bitcoin, because that's literally what it is. Bitcoin was a wake-up call to show people that value is subjective. And SPX is the next iteration of that. And once you get enough people to understand that the value of the dollar is subjective. It only has value because people believe in it. Bitcoin only has value because people believe in it. SPX has value because people believe in it. And the next step is Well, it's not just money that is subjective in value. It is literally everything is subjective. The entire universe is this subjective entity that is created from our own consciousness. And that's what Like, the purpose of this vehicle, yes, it's going to make a lot of people a lot of money, but the point of that is to wake people up to the fact that the entire universe is this subjective entity. It is not just this, like, empirical machine with interlocking gears and like this orderly machine that proceeds from just like the sum of its parts like no like we are literally the universe creating the universe and that's what spx is meant to wake people up to.” — Crypto Maxi 💹🧲
1:36

“What I think SPX is, is a wake-up call. And I think for the normie, the average person, it literally is best described as being the next Bitcoin, because that's literally what it is. Bitcoin was a wake-up call to show people that value is subjective. And SPX is the next iteration of that. And once you get enough people to understand that the value of the dollar is subjective. It only has value because people believe in it. Bitcoin only has value because people believe in it. SPX has value because people believe in it. And the next step is Well, it's not just money that is subjective in value. It is literally everything is subjective. The entire universe is this subjective entity that is created from our own consciousness. And that's what Like, the purpose of this vehicle, yes, it's going to make a lot of people a lot of money, but the point of that is to wake people up to the fact that the entire universe is this subjective entity. It is not just this, like, empirical machine with interlocking gears and like this orderly machine that proceeds from just like the sum of its parts like no like we are literally the universe creating the universe and that's what spx is meant to wake people up to.” — Crypto Maxi 💹🧲

Tanz Cho 💹🧲

12,294 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

.Rep. Anna Paulina Luna says that that based on internal conversations, she believes a historic peace deal between Russia and Ukraine is on the horizon: “Some people didn't want the peace deal in Iran to work. That's too bad for them. It's going to hold up. And we're going to get the peace deal with Russia and Ukraine and that will be President Trump's legacy. A lot of people are going to be upset about that in Congress because they're not going to be making too much money anymore on their stock portfolios. But that's too bad. That's not what the plan is. And so, I'm happy that President Trump is at the helm, and what I will say is that a lot of people can speculate, but they don’t actually know what's happening with internal conversations.”
1:55

.Rep. Anna Paulina Luna says that that based on internal conversations, she believes a historic peace deal between Russia and Ukraine is on the horizon: “Some people didn't want the peace deal in Iran to work. That's too bad for them. It's going to hold up. And we're going to get the peace deal with Russia and Ukraine and that will be President Trump's legacy. A lot of people are going to be upset about that in Congress because they're not going to be making too much money anymore on their stock portfolios. But that's too bad. That's not what the plan is. And so, I'm happy that President Trump is at the helm, and what I will say is that a lot of people can speculate, but they don’t actually know what's happening with internal conversations.”

Glenn Beck

78,328 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Threadguy explains why everyone will pretend they didn't see the Saylor blowup coming "Let's say this thing really does blow up. Saylor death spirals, the whole thing comes apart. Economists are going to look back years from now and say, wow, the people of the 2020s were so retarded, how did they not see this coming? And the answer is everybody did." "People thought it was a good investment, but the ones who thought that took the stance of, they have enough cash for a year or two and then we get out. It's going to end terrible, it's a bad idea, but for six, maybe twelve months it's going to be great. It's free money for a year and then it blows up, and by then it's not my problem." "So they'll look back and ask how these guys were dumb enough to fund the whole stretch thing, but in reality everybody knew. The people buying it knew, the people selling it knew, the people on the sidelines knew, the people that wanted to buy it knew. I feel like everybody had the same stance on this. It was more or less, I don't know how it's going to blow up, but it's not going to end well. It's going to be fine for six months. To me, that was the perspective."
1:24

Threadguy explains why everyone will pretend they didn't see the Saylor blowup coming "Let's say this thing really does blow up. Saylor death spirals, the whole thing comes apart. Economists are going to look back years from now and say, wow, the people of the 2020s were so retarded, how did they not see this coming? And the answer is everybody did." "People thought it was a good investment, but the ones who thought that took the stance of, they have enough cash for a year or two and then we get out. It's going to end terrible, it's a bad idea, but for six, maybe twelve months it's going to be great. It's free money for a year and then it blows up, and by then it's not my problem." "So they'll look back and ask how these guys were dumb enough to fund the whole stretch thing, but in reality everybody knew. The people buying it knew, the people selling it knew, the people on the sidelines knew, the people that wanted to buy it knew. I feel like everybody had the same stance on this. It was more or less, I don't know how it's going to blow up, but it's not going to end well. It's going to be fine for six months. To me, that was the perspective."

Kai

32,114 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Ken Griffin was asked if AI could tell you which stocks to buy, before he bought the entire book of Leopold Aschenbrenner: "there are people that have a fantasy that LLMs are going to tell you which stocks to buy - and it's just a fantasy, just a fantasy" "but wouldn't they be smart enough to tell you which stocks to buy?" - "no, because they're not smart, they're just programmed - they are very good at thoughtfully regurgitating" this is him explaining why he thinks the productivity gains everyone is pricing in are still years away, why Nvidia reminds him of the California gold rush, and what he says is the one risk the market is completely missing "it's not clear to me that we're going to get the productivity gains out of AI that the market's broadly hoping for - they're not about to happen in the next 12 or 24 or 36 months" "this is like the gold mining in California - those that sold the picks made a lot of money - and Nvidia right now sells one of the most important ingredients in the AI story" "the question with every investment is whether or not it's the right price - that's the fundamental of investing" bookmark & watch the full conversation ↓
14:09

Ken Griffin was asked if AI could tell you which stocks to buy, before he bought the entire book of Leopold Aschenbrenner: "there are people that have a fantasy that LLMs are going to tell you which stocks to buy - and it's just a fantasy, just a fantasy" "but wouldn't they be smart enough to tell you which stocks to buy?" - "no, because they're not smart, they're just programmed - they are very good at thoughtfully regurgitating" this is him explaining why he thinks the productivity gains everyone is pricing in are still years away, why Nvidia reminds him of the California gold rush, and what he says is the one risk the market is completely missing "it's not clear to me that we're going to get the productivity gains out of AI that the market's broadly hoping for - they're not about to happen in the next 12 or 24 or 36 months" "this is like the gold mining in California - those that sold the picks made a lot of money - and Nvidia right now sells one of the most important ingredients in the AI story" "the question with every investment is whether or not it's the right price - that's the fundamental of investing" bookmark & watch the full conversation ↓

Сarm1ne

214,872 Aufrufe • vor 23 Tagen

Ben Thompson says Nvidia has already cut prices, they just show up as backstops and neocloud equity instead of margins "They're actually not maintaining their margins, because who is buying?" "This whole question of circular financing, people talk about Lucent and things like that. This whole deal and Nvidia's providing 25% backstop." "But if you actually ascribe a value to Nvidia's taking equity in the Neoclouds or whatever, they guarantee they're going to buy all their compute to 2030. And why do they do that? So that the entity in question can get a lower cost of capital, so they can buy more GPUs." "But implicit in that, why do they get a lower cost of capital? They get a lower cost of capital because Nvidia assumed risk." "This is my point before. Risk never disappears. It just appears somewhere else. Taking on risk has a price." "Now there is a world where AI takes off, it never stops, and everything is fine, and Nvidia captured all the upside of their risk." "But there's also a world where, say, this Neocloud they backed, a ton of compute comes to market, the hyperscalers have plenty of compute, they don't have enough demand, Nvidia is paying for a computer that no one wants. They just lost a bunch of money." "So if you think about it, there's an expected value of that investment. It's not zero. It's not 100%. It's somewhere in the middle." "But that is a diminution of Nvidia's profitability. If you actually look at their business holistically, what that is is a price cut."
1:31

Ben Thompson says Nvidia has already cut prices, they just show up as backstops and neocloud equity instead of margins "They're actually not maintaining their margins, because who is buying?" "This whole question of circular financing, people talk about Lucent and things like that. This whole deal and Nvidia's providing 25% backstop." "But if you actually ascribe a value to Nvidia's taking equity in the Neoclouds or whatever, they guarantee they're going to buy all their compute to 2030. And why do they do that? So that the entity in question can get a lower cost of capital, so they can buy more GPUs." "But implicit in that, why do they get a lower cost of capital? They get a lower cost of capital because Nvidia assumed risk." "This is my point before. Risk never disappears. It just appears somewhere else. Taking on risk has a price." "Now there is a world where AI takes off, it never stops, and everything is fine, and Nvidia captured all the upside of their risk." "But there's also a world where, say, this Neocloud they backed, a ton of compute comes to market, the hyperscalers have plenty of compute, they don't have enough demand, Nvidia is paying for a computer that no one wants. They just lost a bunch of money." "So if you think about it, there's an expected value of that investment. It's not zero. It's not 100%. It's somewhere in the middle." "But that is a diminution of Nvidia's profitability. If you actually look at their business holistically, what that is is a price cut."

Fireside Alpha

56,613 Aufrufe • vor 5 Tagen

“The President has exactly two choices. He can pay Iran to open the Strait, or he can suffer the indignity of continuing this quagmire longer and longer. And because I listen to the Scott Jennings radio show religiously, I know that the White House has no intention of paying them to open up the Strait. A senior administration official told Scott Jennings exclusively, you should check it out, that they’re only going to pay them at the end of the process, not at the beginning of the process. The Iranians, by the way, are not going to go for that.” “That means this deal that they’ve been bragging about, which usually they brag about right before the markets open. It’s usually right before the markets open that there’s a lot of good news, and then somehow the markets go up. And then over the course of a couple of days, we find out that it was all BS. It turns out that that’s all BS because what’s going to happen is that they’re not going to want to strike this horrible deal, according to Scott Jennings’s top level sources. And that means that the deal is not going to be struck, and the war is going to go on, quite sadly, actually.”
0:55

“The President has exactly two choices. He can pay Iran to open the Strait, or he can suffer the indignity of continuing this quagmire longer and longer. And because I listen to the Scott Jennings radio show religiously, I know that the White House has no intention of paying them to open up the Strait. A senior administration official told Scott Jennings exclusively, you should check it out, that they’re only going to pay them at the end of the process, not at the beginning of the process. The Iranians, by the way, are not going to go for that.” “That means this deal that they’ve been bragging about, which usually they brag about right before the markets open. It’s usually right before the markets open that there’s a lot of good news, and then somehow the markets go up. And then over the course of a couple of days, we find out that it was all BS. It turns out that that’s all BS because what’s going to happen is that they’re not going to want to strike this horrible deal, according to Scott Jennings’s top level sources. And that means that the deal is not going to be struck, and the war is going to go on, quite sadly, actually.”

Josh Rogin

595,654 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🚨 THIS IS NOT NORMAL Look at the chart. Gold dumping. Silver dumping. Both rolling over at the exact same moment - **2026**, the year a 150-year-old cycle map marked as *"high prices, time to sell."* Everyone's screaming "collapse." They're wrong. This isn't the system dying it's capital *moving,* right on schedule. Here's what most people miss: in a liquidity crunch, the *safe* stuff sells first. Not because it failed because it's what funds *can* sell to cover margin calls. Gold and silver get used as ATMs. Dumped at any price. We've seen this movie: → 2008 - silver cut nearly in half mid-crisis… then gold ran to records. → 2020 - everything red in one week, metals included… then they exploded to new highs. The pattern never changes: **first liquidation, then rotation.** Capital doesn't vanish - it moves to wherever the rules change next. And the same chart points the arrow down to **2032–2039**: the cycle's "time to *buy*" window. So ask the real question - when trust in banks fades and currencies get diluted to save the system, where does the money go? Not into paper. Not into anything that can be frozen, seized, or printed. Gold *used* to be the only exit. But gold is heavy, centralized, sitting in vaults run by the same institutions now under stress. **Bitcoin isn't.** No issuer. No counterparty. No permission. That's why it gets sold hardest in the panic - and bought hardest once liquidity stabilizes. The crash of old finance isn't bearish for the exit asset. It's the entire reason it exists. The rotation won't be gradual. It never is. One moment it's "just another risk asset." The next, it's the only neutral one left standing - and by then the move is already done. Don't follow narratives. Follow liquidity. I've called every major top and bottom for 10+ years. When I make my next move, it goes here first. Follow and turn notifications on. A lot of people are going to wish they'd listened sooner.
0:36

🚨 THIS IS NOT NORMAL Look at the chart. Gold dumping. Silver dumping. Both rolling over at the exact same moment - **2026**, the year a 150-year-old cycle map marked as *"high prices, time to sell."* Everyone's screaming "collapse." They're wrong. This isn't the system dying it's capital *moving,* right on schedule. Here's what most people miss: in a liquidity crunch, the *safe* stuff sells first. Not because it failed because it's what funds *can* sell to cover margin calls. Gold and silver get used as ATMs. Dumped at any price. We've seen this movie: → 2008 - silver cut nearly in half mid-crisis… then gold ran to records. → 2020 - everything red in one week, metals included… then they exploded to new highs. The pattern never changes: **first liquidation, then rotation.** Capital doesn't vanish - it moves to wherever the rules change next. And the same chart points the arrow down to **2032–2039**: the cycle's "time to *buy*" window. So ask the real question - when trust in banks fades and currencies get diluted to save the system, where does the money go? Not into paper. Not into anything that can be frozen, seized, or printed. Gold *used* to be the only exit. But gold is heavy, centralized, sitting in vaults run by the same institutions now under stress. **Bitcoin isn't.** No issuer. No counterparty. No permission. That's why it gets sold hardest in the panic - and bought hardest once liquidity stabilizes. The crash of old finance isn't bearish for the exit asset. It's the entire reason it exists. The rotation won't be gradual. It never is. One moment it's "just another risk asset." The next, it's the only neutral one left standing - and by then the move is already done. Don't follow narratives. Follow liquidity. I've called every major top and bottom for 10+ years. When I make my next move, it goes here first. Follow and turn notifications on. A lot of people are going to wish they'd listened sooner.

Shelpid.WI3M

136,775 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Hitmaka explains to Shannon Sharpe that money isn't in streaming when he brings that Drake has already done over a billion streams (2) this year. "The money is in radio, it's in performance. This is what the real deal is, I can compare Spotify, Apple and everyone for you where you can get a real idea about it. They're TV networks, NFL got a deal with them, did you get a cheque from ABC? That's how hard it is to get a cheque from streaming. It's only a few companies in this business, Universal pretty much owns the whole music business. If Universal goes and does a deal with Spotify/Apple Music for their artists, they received a large lump sum, they ain't worried about that trickle down effect." "The top artists are going to make their money. The Taylor Swifts, the Drakes, they going to get good money."
2:09

Hitmaka explains to Shannon Sharpe that money isn't in streaming when he brings that Drake has already done over a billion streams (2) this year. "The money is in radio, it's in performance. This is what the real deal is, I can compare Spotify, Apple and everyone for you where you can get a real idea about it. They're TV networks, NFL got a deal with them, did you get a cheque from ABC? That's how hard it is to get a cheque from streaming. It's only a few companies in this business, Universal pretty much owns the whole music business. If Universal goes and does a deal with Spotify/Apple Music for their artists, they received a large lump sum, they ain't worried about that trickle down effect." "The top artists are going to make their money. The Taylor Swifts, the Drakes, they going to get good money."

ZADCOZZY

94,014 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

The $250,000 ETH Productive Money Price Target Explained "You just have to look at the monetary premium that currently exists in gold and Bitcoin. If ETH is better money than gold and Bitcoin, it should capture the monetary premium of those two assets. Today gold has a market cap of ~$30 trillion and Bitcoin has a market cap of ~$1.5 trillion. If you divide that by 121 million ETH, you get a price somewhere between $250,000 and $300,000." Michael McGuiness continues: "I view Bitcoin and gold as the rough TAMs for scarce assets without counterparty risk. That's what gold is and that's what Bitcoin is... and I actually think that could end up being low because it doesn't include other TAMs like the broader money supply -- M2 is ~$22 trillion. There's a monetary premium in asset classes like luxury real estate -- you're not buying an apartment in NYC for the cap rate; it's more of a store of value. If the world converged on ETH as its store of value, it might win that monetary premium as well." Vivek Raman adds: "It sounds audacious but Ethereum is audacious. It's a new technology and people need to start thinking in exponentials... Institutional investors are starting to realize too that it's not just a discounted cash flow model -- Ethereum is not a software company. It's going for money. The repricing from an asset that's not well-understood yet to a productive money that's the global reserve asset is not something that's going to stop at a 10x... And that's what the opportunity is. There aren't many assets out there that have an intrinsic value floor with actual fundamental value plus a monetary premium -- and you have the ability to capture the growth of an entire network that's kind of like owning a piece of the Internet early on. That's what ETH is. It's one of the greatest assets I've ever seen." Mike adds: "I know the number can sound crazy on the surface, but one sanity check I like to do is: there's ~60 million millionaires and there's ~121 million ETH. If every millionaire globally tried to buy some ETH, they'd each be able to own ~2. Obviously there are people out there who own a lot more than 2 ETH, so it'd be less than that. So that's another way of thinking about these few-hundred-thousand-dollar price targets. I used to think about Bitcoin the same way. It's just a nice sanity check: If this is the global reserve asset and the world converges on it, and everyone tries to buy it, how much is left to go around?" Read the full report and watch the full The Edge Podcast interview with Vivek Raman and Michael McGuiness in the links below.
3:36

The $250,000 ETH Productive Money Price Target Explained "You just have to look at the monetary premium that currently exists in gold and Bitcoin. If ETH is better money than gold and Bitcoin, it should capture the monetary premium of those two assets. Today gold has a market cap of ~$30 trillion and Bitcoin has a market cap of ~$1.5 trillion. If you divide that by 121 million ETH, you get a price somewhere between $250,000 and $300,000." Michael McGuiness continues: "I view Bitcoin and gold as the rough TAMs for scarce assets without counterparty risk. That's what gold is and that's what Bitcoin is... and I actually think that could end up being low because it doesn't include other TAMs like the broader money supply -- M2 is ~$22 trillion. There's a monetary premium in asset classes like luxury real estate -- you're not buying an apartment in NYC for the cap rate; it's more of a store of value. If the world converged on ETH as its store of value, it might win that monetary premium as well." Vivek Raman adds: "It sounds audacious but Ethereum is audacious. It's a new technology and people need to start thinking in exponentials... Institutional investors are starting to realize too that it's not just a discounted cash flow model -- Ethereum is not a software company. It's going for money. The repricing from an asset that's not well-understood yet to a productive money that's the global reserve asset is not something that's going to stop at a 10x... And that's what the opportunity is. There aren't many assets out there that have an intrinsic value floor with actual fundamental value plus a monetary premium -- and you have the ability to capture the growth of an entire network that's kind of like owning a piece of the Internet early on. That's what ETH is. It's one of the greatest assets I've ever seen." Mike adds: "I know the number can sound crazy on the surface, but one sanity check I like to do is: there's ~60 million millionaires and there's ~121 million ETH. If every millionaire globally tried to buy some ETH, they'd each be able to own ~2. Obviously there are people out there who own a lot more than 2 ETH, so it'd be less than that. So that's another way of thinking about these few-hundred-thousand-dollar price targets. I used to think about Bitcoin the same way. It's just a nice sanity check: If this is the global reserve asset and the world converges on it, and everyone tries to buy it, how much is left to go around?" Read the full report and watch the full The Edge Podcast interview with Vivek Raman and Michael McGuiness in the links below.

Etherealize

171,344 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Chris Haynes on what's next for the Miami Heat after signing Tim Hardaway Jr.: "You're going to be looking for guys on minimum deals who can be available on the cheap for 1 year deals where the benefit for them is they can come in and maybe have a really good season that contributes to a high success of winning, then hit the market the following summer to increase their value. The thing about Miami and Giannis, It's going to be an attractive place."
0:45

Chris Haynes on what's next for the Miami Heat after signing Tim Hardaway Jr.: "You're going to be looking for guys on minimum deals who can be available on the cheap for 1 year deals where the benefit for them is they can come in and maybe have a really good season that contributes to a high success of winning, then hit the market the following summer to increase their value. The thing about Miami and Giannis, It's going to be an attractive place."

Heat Central

140,114 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

One of the most ridiculous "theories" about the current risk selloff especially Bitcoin and crypto is that the market is having a tantrum KC Jeff at the Fed won't let the FOMC cut rates in December. Delaying a quarter-point cut to the fed funds rate by a few months is responsible for BTC down by 33%? It's beyond stupid. But in the absence of knowledge and understanding, the mainstream goes full Pavlov, defaulting to the Fed. Fed. Fed. Fed Fed is irrelevant. They're rate cuts react to problems, which is why they're going to be cutting no matter how much Schmid protests (see: every market that matters). What's going on with Bitcoin has almost nothing to do with Bitcoin - it's a risk asset that is being sold because risky investors are now getting very worried about, well, taking risks. That's why Bitcoin is now correlated with junk bond spreads. Flat Beveridge rules, not the Fed.
1:17

One of the most ridiculous "theories" about the current risk selloff especially Bitcoin and crypto is that the market is having a tantrum KC Jeff at the Fed won't let the FOMC cut rates in December. Delaying a quarter-point cut to the fed funds rate by a few months is responsible for BTC down by 33%? It's beyond stupid. But in the absence of knowledge and understanding, the mainstream goes full Pavlov, defaulting to the Fed. Fed. Fed. Fed Fed is irrelevant. They're rate cuts react to problems, which is why they're going to be cutting no matter how much Schmid protests (see: every market that matters). What's going on with Bitcoin has almost nothing to do with Bitcoin - it's a risk asset that is being sold because risky investors are now getting very worried about, well, taking risks. That's why Bitcoin is now correlated with junk bond spreads. Flat Beveridge rules, not the Fed.

Jeffrey P. Snider

17,442 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Dana White says he got all the $7.7B from the UFC and Paramount deal this year "are you excited about the $7.7b deal with UFC and Paramount ? that's a lot of money...it's gotta be cool building this company from what it was when it first started to making a deal like that" "so wait do you get all that money? the $7.7 billion? yeah me ? I get all of it...if you look at what we're doing right now so next year with Paramount we going to do 44 events" "early on we paid to get on the Spike TV and basically the narrative was you pay to get on TV and it changed right now"
1:17

Dana White says he got all the $7.7B from the UFC and Paramount deal this year "are you excited about the $7.7b deal with UFC and Paramount ? that's a lot of money...it's gotta be cool building this company from what it was when it first started to making a deal like that" "so wait do you get all that money? the $7.7 billion? yeah me ? I get all of it...if you look at what we're doing right now so next year with Paramount we going to do 44 events" "early on we paid to get on the Spike TV and basically the narrative was you pay to get on TV and it changed right now"

CreativeDude

1,495,814 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🚨 WARNING: TOMORROW WILL BE THE WORST DAY OF 2026!! JPMorgan will dump $165 BILLION in U.S. stocks right after the market opens. If you think this is a "drop in the ocean" and it won’t affect the markets... YOU ARE COMPLETELY WRONG. Every time JP Morgan sells stocks, the S&P 500 drops 10–20%. And this isn't just about the stock market. It's about liquidity. It's about investor sentiment. And it's about a market that isn't prepared for what's coming. Let me explain: JPMorgan isn't some retail trader taking profits. It's one of the largest and most influential financial institutions on the planet. When they move capital at scale, markets pay attention. And history shows that large institutional selling rarely happens in a vacuum. It usually signals something bigger. A shift in risk appetite. A change in liquidity conditions. Or growing concerns beneath the surface that most investors haven't recognized yet. Now here's the part almost nobody talks about. The direct impact isn't limited to the stocks being sold. Because when a major institution dumps billions of dollars worth of equities, it affects sentiment across the entire market. Selling creates more selling. Liquidity gets thinner. Volatility increases. And risk assets everywhere start to feel the pressure. That's why this isn't just an S&P 500 story. The S&P 500 is the first domino. But the effects will spread into AI stocks. International equities. Commodities. Credit markets. And even digital assets. Today, people are positioned for stability. They're positioned for higher prices. They're positioned for the rally to continue. Which means they're vulnerable if liquidity suddenly moves in the opposite direction. THIS IS THE WARNING. Not because one institution is selling. But because markets often underestimate what large-scale institutional selling can trigger. The risk isn't the transaction itself. The risk is how everyone else reacts to it. Markets aren't pricing that possibility today. But eventually, they will. I've spent more than a decade studying macro and market cycles. I've called some of the biggest market tops and bottoms of the past 10+ years. And I'll call the next market crash in 2026 before the crowd sees it coming. Follow and turn notifications on. I'll post my next market call here first.
0:39

🚨 WARNING: TOMORROW WILL BE THE WORST DAY OF 2026!! JPMorgan will dump $165 BILLION in U.S. stocks right after the market opens. If you think this is a "drop in the ocean" and it won’t affect the markets... YOU ARE COMPLETELY WRONG. Every time JP Morgan sells stocks, the S&P 500 drops 10–20%. And this isn't just about the stock market. It's about liquidity. It's about investor sentiment. And it's about a market that isn't prepared for what's coming. Let me explain: JPMorgan isn't some retail trader taking profits. It's one of the largest and most influential financial institutions on the planet. When they move capital at scale, markets pay attention. And history shows that large institutional selling rarely happens in a vacuum. It usually signals something bigger. A shift in risk appetite. A change in liquidity conditions. Or growing concerns beneath the surface that most investors haven't recognized yet. Now here's the part almost nobody talks about. The direct impact isn't limited to the stocks being sold. Because when a major institution dumps billions of dollars worth of equities, it affects sentiment across the entire market. Selling creates more selling. Liquidity gets thinner. Volatility increases. And risk assets everywhere start to feel the pressure. That's why this isn't just an S&P 500 story. The S&P 500 is the first domino. But the effects will spread into AI stocks. International equities. Commodities. Credit markets. And even digital assets. Today, people are positioned for stability. They're positioned for higher prices. They're positioned for the rally to continue. Which means they're vulnerable if liquidity suddenly moves in the opposite direction. THIS IS THE WARNING. Not because one institution is selling. But because markets often underestimate what large-scale institutional selling can trigger. The risk isn't the transaction itself. The risk is how everyone else reacts to it. Markets aren't pricing that possibility today. But eventually, they will. I've spent more than a decade studying macro and market cycles. I've called some of the biggest market tops and bottoms of the past 10+ years. And I'll call the next market crash in 2026 before the crowd sees it coming. Follow and turn notifications on. I'll post my next market call here first.

0xNobler

375,857 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Chamath says OpenAI and Anthropic could be $5 to $10 trillion companies each if they remain a duopoly "I suspect revenues are going to crank at OpenAI and Anthropic and the open labs for a while. But again, that's not the important thing." "If you're thinking about valuation, the markets will look five to 10 years out to answer that question, they're not going to give you a premium valuation on something that they feel could be fragile in the first two to three years." "Somebody has to answer that question precisely. Because if the answer is that it is a duopoly, then there is no risk to the revenue five to 10 years from now, these things are $5 to $10 trillion companies each." "But if there are harnesses that cut the token consumption, because you stop wasting tokens to get to the same output, then it's a little bit more of a question mark. And I think that'll need to get sorted out."
1:11

Chamath says OpenAI and Anthropic could be $5 to $10 trillion companies each if they remain a duopoly "I suspect revenues are going to crank at OpenAI and Anthropic and the open labs for a while. But again, that's not the important thing." "If you're thinking about valuation, the markets will look five to 10 years out to answer that question, they're not going to give you a premium valuation on something that they feel could be fragile in the first two to three years." "Somebody has to answer that question precisely. Because if the answer is that it is a duopoly, then there is no risk to the revenue five to 10 years from now, these things are $5 to $10 trillion companies each." "But if there are harnesses that cut the token consumption, because you stop wasting tokens to get to the same output, then it's a little bit more of a question mark. And I think that'll need to get sorted out."

dnap

274,465 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

There's a principle I keep coming back to… the bottleneck theory. Find whatever is standing between the world and where it's trying to get to, and that's where the capital floods. Because the universe is solving for intelligence per unit of energy, and it will clear every roadblock in the way to get there. Right now that bottleneck is power. So that's where the money is going. But bottlenecks move. Solve one and the next one lights up, which is why you don't get one thing running forever. You get rotations. It won't always be Nvidia. And here's the part the market hasn't worked out yet. The whole agent economy is still unpriced. For all of history the addressable market was humans. Now it's infinite.
1:23

There's a principle I keep coming back to… the bottleneck theory. Find whatever is standing between the world and where it's trying to get to, and that's where the capital floods. Because the universe is solving for intelligence per unit of energy, and it will clear every roadblock in the way to get there. Right now that bottleneck is power. So that's where the money is going. But bottlenecks move. Solve one and the next one lights up, which is why you don't get one thing running forever. You get rotations. It won't always be Nvidia. And here's the part the market hasn't worked out yet. The whole agent economy is still unpriced. For all of history the addressable market was humans. Now it's infinite.

Raoul Pal

95,981 Aufrufe • vor 16 Tagen

🚨 WARNING: THE WORST DAY OF 2026 IS TOMORROW. JPMorgan is preparing to dump $165,000,000,000 into the market right at open. Thinking this won’t move the market? You’re in for the rudest awakening of your life. Every time JP Morgan sells stocks, the S&P 500 drops 10–20%. And this isn't just about the stock market. It's about liquidity. It's about investor sentiment. And it's about a market that isn't prepared for what's coming. Let me explain: JPMorgan isn't some retail trader taking profits. It's one of the largest and most influential financial institutions on the planet. When they move capital at scale, markets pay attention. And history shows that large institutional selling rarely happens in a vacuum. It usually signals something bigger. A shift in risk appetite. A change in liquidity conditions. Or growing concerns beneath the surface that most investors haven't recognized yet. Now here's the part almost nobody talks about. The direct impact isn't limited to the stocks being sold. Because when a major institution dumps billions of dollars worth of equities, it affects sentiment across the entire market. Selling creates more selling. Liquidity gets thinner. Volatility increases. And risk assets everywhere start to feel the pressure. That's why this isn't just an S&P 500 story. The S&P 500 is the first domino. But the effects will spread into AI stocks. International equities. Commodities. Credit markets. And even digital assets. Today, people are positioned for stability. They're positioned for higher prices. They're positioned for the rally to continue. Which means they're vulnerable if liquidity suddenly moves in the opposite direction. THIS IS THE WARNING. Not because one institution is selling. But because markets often underestimate what large-scale institutional selling can trigger. The risk isn't the transaction itself. The risk is how everyone else reacts to it. Markets aren't pricing that possibility today. But eventually, they will. I've spent more than a decade studying macro and market cycles. I've called some of the biggest market tops and bottoms of the past 10+ years. And I'll call the next market crash in 2026 before the crowd sees it coming. Follow and turn notifications on. I'll post my next market call here first.
0:37

🚨 WARNING: THE WORST DAY OF 2026 IS TOMORROW. JPMorgan is preparing to dump $165,000,000,000 into the market right at open. Thinking this won’t move the market? You’re in for the rudest awakening of your life. Every time JP Morgan sells stocks, the S&P 500 drops 10–20%. And this isn't just about the stock market. It's about liquidity. It's about investor sentiment. And it's about a market that isn't prepared for what's coming. Let me explain: JPMorgan isn't some retail trader taking profits. It's one of the largest and most influential financial institutions on the planet. When they move capital at scale, markets pay attention. And history shows that large institutional selling rarely happens in a vacuum. It usually signals something bigger. A shift in risk appetite. A change in liquidity conditions. Or growing concerns beneath the surface that most investors haven't recognized yet. Now here's the part almost nobody talks about. The direct impact isn't limited to the stocks being sold. Because when a major institution dumps billions of dollars worth of equities, it affects sentiment across the entire market. Selling creates more selling. Liquidity gets thinner. Volatility increases. And risk assets everywhere start to feel the pressure. That's why this isn't just an S&P 500 story. The S&P 500 is the first domino. But the effects will spread into AI stocks. International equities. Commodities. Credit markets. And even digital assets. Today, people are positioned for stability. They're positioned for higher prices. They're positioned for the rally to continue. Which means they're vulnerable if liquidity suddenly moves in the opposite direction. THIS IS THE WARNING. Not because one institution is selling. But because markets often underestimate what large-scale institutional selling can trigger. The risk isn't the transaction itself. The risk is how everyone else reacts to it. Markets aren't pricing that possibility today. But eventually, they will. I've spent more than a decade studying macro and market cycles. I've called some of the biggest market tops and bottoms of the past 10+ years. And I'll call the next market crash in 2026 before the crowd sees it coming. Follow and turn notifications on. I'll post my next market call here first.

WhaleTwits

340,786 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Silver's squeeze is being driven by gold which in turn is being driven by the dollar. No, not "debasement" or "inflation." Eurodollar deflation. People make the critical mistake believing gold is a substitute for the dollar when it's not even in the same arena. Precious metals instead compete with stocks and other risky financial assets as the safe haven alternative to them. Ledger money separated medium of exchange from store of value 150 years ago (not that you've heard anything about it, but you live it every day each time you use your credit card - medium - and check your 401k - store). Gold is not a medium, but it is superior form of value. Gold's behavior therefore has nothing to do with "the dollar" except when eurodollar conditions drive the exchange value and signal conditions relative to stores of value alternatives. This is why gold has behaved like it has and why all the gold "experts" get it wrong. When the dollar is rising, that's a deflation signal which means increasing chance conditions will be bad for risky stores of value. Gold shines. And that is exactly how it has traded recently, too, from late last year through April, the middle of the year when gold backed off because risk-taking was back at the forefront, and now with flat Beveridge everywhere and credit cockroaches showing up every other minute gold is utterly flying. That deflation would be really bad for risky assets that gold competes with. IT IS NOT DEBASEMENT OR ANYTHING LIKE IT. All the evidence is here: Everything you get from the mainstream is either wrong or backward. Oftentimes on purpose. Misdirection and misinformation is actually the trade of "central banks." Start unlearning the garbage and start learning the truth which has been hiding in plain sight all this time.
0:30

Silver's squeeze is being driven by gold which in turn is being driven by the dollar. No, not "debasement" or "inflation." Eurodollar deflation. People make the critical mistake believing gold is a substitute for the dollar when it's not even in the same arena. Precious metals instead compete with stocks and other risky financial assets as the safe haven alternative to them. Ledger money separated medium of exchange from store of value 150 years ago (not that you've heard anything about it, but you live it every day each time you use your credit card - medium - and check your 401k - store). Gold is not a medium, but it is superior form of value. Gold's behavior therefore has nothing to do with "the dollar" except when eurodollar conditions drive the exchange value and signal conditions relative to stores of value alternatives. This is why gold has behaved like it has and why all the gold "experts" get it wrong. When the dollar is rising, that's a deflation signal which means increasing chance conditions will be bad for risky stores of value. Gold shines. And that is exactly how it has traded recently, too, from late last year through April, the middle of the year when gold backed off because risk-taking was back at the forefront, and now with flat Beveridge everywhere and credit cockroaches showing up every other minute gold is utterly flying. That deflation would be really bad for risky assets that gold competes with. IT IS NOT DEBASEMENT OR ANYTHING LIKE IT. All the evidence is here: Everything you get from the mainstream is either wrong or backward. Oftentimes on purpose. Misdirection and misinformation is actually the trade of "central banks." Start unlearning the garbage and start learning the truth which has been hiding in plain sight all this time.

Jeffrey P. Snider

26,897 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten