Featured

Willy Woo: The Bitcoin Forecast | SALT Talks #208

“Conservatively, I think Bitcoin will have $10-$50 trillion market cap in ten years.”

Willy Woo is a leading on-chain analyst, a new field that extracts market intelligence signals from Bitcoin’s blockchain. He writes the Bitcoin Forecast which is the most popular paid newsletter in the crypto industry.

Bitcoin exists on the public blockchain, so every transaction is visible and from that ledger an on-chain analyst can make informed predictions related to the cryptocurrency. Bitcoin’s volatility continues to decrease as more of the population is exposed to the asset and scale grows. There has been a movement towards long-term Bitcoin investing which has helped drive the asset’s bull market. “We’ve seen a net flow of coins away from participants who are traditionally just speculating or buying for the short-term and then selling. These new investors are coming in and locking up coins [long-term].”

There is a lot of leverage in the current Bitcoin cycle. If the price starts to teeter, then there could be a sell-off that leads to a bear market. Though, if institutional capital moves into Bitcoin at the end of the year, then the price will run up even higher.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Willy Woo.jpeg

Willy Woo

Author

The Bitcoin Forecast

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:07)
Hello, everyone. And welcome come back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Soul talks are a digital interview series that we started in 2020 with leading investors, creators and thinkers. And our goal on the salt talks is same as our goal at our salt conference series a which we're resuming by the way in September of 2021 in New York, Willie, I don't know if you'll be able to make it, uh, flying in from Hong Kong, but we'd love to have you there. And that's to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And we're excited to bring you the latest in our series of salt talks on crypto digital assets and Bitcoin with the great Willie.

John Darcie: (00:54)
Woo. Uh, if you're in the crypto space at all, and you don't follow Willy, I don't know where that, what rock you're living under basically. And if you don't follow crypto and you're looking to learn more about it, there's no one better to follow both his writings and his Twitter feed and everything he puts out. Uh, then Willy will, uh, Willy as an on chain analyst, a new field that extracts market intelligence signals from Bitcoin's blockchain. He writes the Bitcoin forecast, which is the most popular paid newsletter in the crypto industry. Again, I couldn't recommend that newsletter highly enough. And I think Brett, our host today will echo that sentiment hosting today's talk is Brett messing. Who's the president and chief operating officer at SkyBridge capital, which is a global alternative investment firm. I would say, Brett is sort of our crypto enthusiast in chief.

John Darcie: (01:40)
And I would actually revise that to say our Bitcoin maximalist and chief he's very much a Bitcoin guy, although a fan of everything that's going on in the ecosystem. Uh, and with that, I'll turn it over to Brent for the interview. Thanks John. Willie, thanks for joining us. I think we're going to have some fun today. It'll be educational. I'm going to teach part of our discussion with your answer from Ryan will explain this or explain this later to our, uh, to our, our, our, uh, our fans here. Um, before we hop into the fun stuff, can you explain, and I am a subscriber and do echo John's, uh, suggestion that people should do. Likewise, can you explain what I'm chain analytics are? Because I think, again, for those of us that are traditional investors, these are just not tools that we had or are just, we're not sort of generally familiar with. So if you can just provide a quick one-on-one and then we'll jump into the fun stuff.

Willy Woo: (02:36)
Yeah, sure. Um, Bitcoin is quite unique, um, as in that it's got a public blockchain. So every transaction that we see is totally visible, um, on that ledger. So there's this whole process where we can pull that data and analyze it and essentially get, um, like demand and supply, um, from different investors coming in and out of Bitcoin. Um, you know, it turns out there's a lot of signal in there. You can make, um, forecasts and predictions. You can diagnose what's happening with the network at any time. Um, like recently we just had a massive drop in the hash rate when there was a big power outage in China affecting minors. So you could see, um, all sorts of, um, you know, things that happen, um, on the ledger. And, um, within the matrix of the network, you, you

John Darcie: (03:26)
Mentioned the, the, uh, what happened in China with the mining going offline. I think the thing that paid people paid more attention to was we had a bit of a, you know, a flash crash, if you will, this weekend, right where we had about a 15% decline in half an hour. And as we taped today on April 22nd, we're trading, you know, at 54,000 or so down from, you know, a high of 63,000. Um, can you talk about sort of that decline, what you think triggered it? Um, uh, yeah, I I'd be curious what your insights are. Sure.

Willy Woo: (04:04)
I'm like, yeah. Where we're trading in, um, sort of the high range of 60, 60 to 62,000, um, uh, like a few weeks ago. And, um, you know, it's, it was, it was trading in a near all time high and whenever we're at an all time high trades, like to go long because, you know, there's no resistance overhead and the whole market was very highly leveraged. Um, there was more, um, open interest contracts in the derivative markets than we've seen any time in this year. And so when, um, you're in a situation where, um, the market's highly levered, it's very emotional. And so what happened in China was, um, there was, um, a power sort of outage to China. Um, like China is, um, the Chinese power companies were, uh, undergoing our safety inspection. And so they look like, um, the, the miners in China, which some estimates of between 25 and 40% of the, um, mining power on the Bitcoin network is located in this particular area.

Willy Woo: (05:10)
Um, these, these miners went offline and that went on offline at a very critical point, um, because, uh, essentially the, the Bitcoin network and balances, you know, the, the amount of hash power, these miners throw at the network with the difficulty adjustment. Um, so this sort of keeps everything can check. So our block times keep being processed every 10 minutes. And so the difficulty just went up and within, um, like something like 12 hours of that difficulty adjustment, um, the miners, uh, went offline and let part of China. So we had a reduction of, um, compute power thrown on it, the network, um, just at a time when we needed it for this higher amount of compute that, um, is normally, um, thrown at it. So immediately the, um, the network started to slow down, um, the amount of the amount of mining, the compute, um, was not sufficient to balance off the difficulty.

Willy Woo: (06:15)
And so block time started to slope down and can imagine if, um, hash power starts to drop out of the network. Um, and there's a, there's always been this correlation between hash power and price. Um, you know, we're in this highly leveraged zone and, um, speak later sold off. And, um, and so, yeah, it was, it was a sell off that was quite, um, unprecedented for this year. And there, uh, nearly 5 billion, um, contracts got liquidated, um, a hundred lowers. Our million accounts were liquidated across, across the whole ecosystem. Um, if you were to include, um, the entire crypto asset space, it was nearly $10 billion of liquidation. So we had a big flash crash. So, I mean,

John Darcie: (07:07)
I can put that into layman's terms is what we really have is where we have people who were levered right. 20 to a hundred, a one, right. And that as the price starts falling, right, you have people that get sold out and that puts pressure on the market, which then sells out more people. Right. And then you get this sort of cascading effect. Is that, is that really the that's, that's the dynamic you're describing, right, exactly.

Willy Woo: (07:33)
It's a, we call it a long sweet squeeze, um, either, um, you know, if you're, if you're, um, if you were trading on leverage you're esentially, um, buying assets with money, you don't have. And so liquidation is essentially the bank foreclosing on you. Um, so, you know, when that happens, your entire positions get sold and that's dumped onto the market. And obviously that pushes the price down and then it sort of cascades to the people below you with, you know, with their risk limits, see a little bit below, and that just creates this chain reaction in the whole thing starts collapsing. And, um, until, until everyone's liquidated, um, and then the price bounces back up. So, I mean, so

John Darcie: (08:15)
We do a weekly Bitcoin show because there's just so much news in Bitcoin. One of the things we someone asked yesterday was, you know, how is the market different today than it was in 18? And the answer I gave, which would be curious to your reaction and tie it back to this is in 18, it seemed like everyone was speculating people, right? We're buying Bitcoin to sell it at another price to make money, to go buy stuff with, right. There's this sort of idea of hobbling or being like an investor, I think really hadn't taken hold. And I, and I'm not going to tell you as an institutional investor, we own, you know, $600 million or so of Bitcoin we're investors. Right. We, we haven't sold any Bitcoin. Right. You know, we deal with the ups and downs. Um, but it does seem that there's still, uh, and I don't know what percentage of the market right. Is composed of speculators. Right. And price action tends to be driven by the marginal buyer or seller, I guess. I just like your reaction to how the market composition today versus what it used to be. And, you know, again, is it speculators that are driving the market or is it this institutional adoption that we're seeing? Um,

Willy Woo: (09:30)
Yeah, the market's completely different from 2018. Um, maybe, well, 2018 was a bear market. Right. So then I'm sorry. So in 2017,

John Darcie: (09:40)
I mean, when I, when I say that

Willy Woo: (09:43)
[inaudible] was, um, you know, Bitcoin had a lot of, um, exchange activity, but very little of it was, um, leave it. Um, we didn't have well-developed, um, futures markets, uh, the leverage you could get was on margin, so borrowing rather than, um, derivatives. And so, um, the, the, the price was more or less, um, yeah, I would say it's less, less leave it. Um, but I'd say also right now, um, you know, we've got this very large dominant derivatives market. Um, like the I'm just looking here. Um, the normally derivative director's market is, was much, much higher than spots, sometimes five to 10 times higher. Um, we've just flushed out a lot of the duress of traders. So, uh, even now post that flush, um, the, to volume is 50% higher than what we're seeing on spot volume. Uh, I would say, you know, you'd say you might think that, um, the derivative market has a lot of price control over, um, Bitcoin, but actually that's not entirely true.

Willy Woo: (11:03)
It has a very, um, like short term dominance, you know, because like, if you're going to buy Bitcoin on margin or, um, it's, you're, you know, you're there, whatever you buy, you're going to have to sell out sooner or later because it sets a short term trade. And so ultimately what's really important. And, um, this, um, it is the long-term investors who are coming into buy and hold, whether they're coming into buy and accumulate or whether they're selling. Ultimately, when we're looking into the weeks and months ahead, that's going to determine the price of Bitcoin, essentially the demand and supply this, that, um, dominated by the long-term investors. And this is what we're looking at on chain. Um, we can actually see what's happening so much in terms of the trade positions on chain. We can't see any of that. You have to look at data coming off the exchanges, but, um, whatever happens in the short term, even if traders are shorting. Um, and when you see, uh, like long-term investors coming in to buy and accumulate, you know, that it's going to be the traders that are going to get ripped. Um, they cannot, um, continue to short and sell off into the demand that's coming from long-term investors. So

John Darcie: (12:28)
You, you raised an interesting point. Um, you know, there's a lot of discussion that the influx of institutional capital is going to reduce the volatility of Bitcoin. I actually don't happen to share that view, which seems to be consensus. And I hadn't really thought about what you just said, which is that we have much more leverage in the system today than we did in 17. So that makes me feel more strongly that, you know, we're a ways away before Bitcoin between us becomes a less volatile asset. We're w what's your view on that?

Willy Woo: (13:06)
Yeah. Um, I've run a projection on volatility. I've got the volatility of Bitcoin since the markets first opened in 2009. Um, and if you plot there on a log scale where, um, you know, originally the volatility was over a hundred percent over a 60 day period. Um, the, it is coming down, there's coming down, it's a decay, there's kind of like a half-life of decay and most people will not notice it, um, because they're only looking in the last few months with last year, but if you plot this over the long-term scale, we're looking, um, I carry number off hand. I think it's about an a decade give another dozen years. Um, that's actually on track to cross under the peak volatility of USD Euro, um, which is quite surprising. Um, but that's, that's what happens when you, you met this over the long term, um, this, this asset classes still very, very much in its infancy. Um, you know, like it's taken us 12 years to get to some, somewhere between two and two and a half percent of the world population having exposure to it. We've just broken $1 trillion of capitalization. Um, it seemed to get a lot bigger and as we get that kind of scale into the system and that kind of capital, it will reduce and volatility. And we have seen that for 12 years. Yeah.

John Darcie: (14:49)
I, I guess, I guess when I say the volatility not being reduced, I I'm speaking more in a noticeable way in the next one to three years. I definitely agree with you, you know, when, if you scope out the time to a decade, you know, I certainly agree. Um, well,

Willy Woo: (15:07)
I I'd say I've been seeing the volatility over the last say three years reduce as well. Now, the reason for there is there, I think I'm very, I think very strongly, like in 2018 we had very high volatility because, um, all of the leverage was essentially one exchange. It was unregulated called BitMEX and there was a lot of, um, kind of a few being trading that market. You could see a lot of, um, maybe call it trader games where, um, you know, the stock positions, you know, the defensive lines where people would exit the positions they were being hunted, um, through, uh, essentially, um, you can either call it manipulation or you could, you could call it game theory, like trading, where you're pushing the price in a particular direction to, to, um, take out traders. Um, that was very evident. Um, I used to say, um, the short-term price section of Bitcoin was essentially a random walk, um, to liquidate the most traders on BitMEX.

Willy Woo: (16:17)
And, um, obviously in their kind of here, you would see this ridiculous amount of volatility where you have these works of price going up, um, you know, whatever, it was hundreds of dollars in minutes. And then I would revert back down as traders were being liquidated and the price action was the, it's like a square wave, like these bats that would go up down and very choppy. And, um, now we're in the Sierra where, you know, you've got like 20 drift of exchanges and most of them are playing very nicely. Um, but Nick's, um, now a very much minority of it. You've got the CME, which is wholly unregulated. Um, so there's less volatility just in the sheer mechanics of, um, the, um, the industry, um, the infrastructure there for, for, um, for trading these derivatives. Um, and then when you add to that, um, this, this kind of 20, 21 year telling a 2020, where we've had very, very large spot demand coming in from institutions.

Willy Woo: (17:25)
Um, we're yeah, we're, it's, it's, it's limiting the downside, um, sell off from, um, what you'd normally expect, um, from derivatives. Um, so, you know, I, I keep in mind, you know, this kind of idea where you've got an organic price of a bit coin supported by a investors, and that can be modeled using on chain data, and you can model that quite closely. And then you can measure the actual price of the coin, which is really, um, the Terman and pat, um, by the speculators. And so you've got the speculative, um, premium that, that happens. And whenever the price gets close to that floor price at organic price, um, it's very difficult to squeeze the price below that valuation. The only time I've seen that happen was in, um, you know, the early part of last year when we hit the COVID of the event where all Mac had sold off. And it, it did momentary drop below that for a few weeks until all of a M deleveraging had completed. Um, so, um, yeah, I think, I think the volatility is dropping, um, and it's just from the sheer amount of demand coming in from, um, institutions currently. Yeah.

John Darcie: (18:50)
I think, you know, we have a, we have an ETF application before the sec, so I'm sort of conversing in some of the terms that are important to them. I think they would use a less polite word and say that the market was subject to manipulation years ago. And of course we're arguing that with the maturation of the market, um, that, you know, it's just not as susceptible to it as it was, you know, when it was cause I, I concurrent still, we're still in, you know, a very young asset class, but, you know, it's growing up a lot, you know, over the last four or five years. Um, can you speak to sort of the, just the state of the market today, and maybe you can tie in why I opened our session with a 1987 song by Rick Ashley, and maybe, uh, maybe tie that to, you know, what your forecast is, which I think, uh, I think our listeners would, would enjoy hearing.

Willy Woo: (19:49)
Yeah. It's, um, we're seeing currently and unprecedented supply shock. Um, so normally you see this kind of, um, this kind of depletion in inventory on spot exchanges is, um, essentially like the long-term buyers come in and accumulate and move those coins into a cold storage. Um, and this kind of buyer is kind of the smart money buyer that buys in early, um, before, you know, the price starts rocketing, you know, when you take a lot of the supply out of the market, it does rock it up. And that happened in 2017 and the sort of one to two and a half thousand dollar ban before we rocketed up to 20,000 and the, the following three quarters of 2017 and, you know, their depletion of the smart money coming in, um, that lasted no more than five months. And like this time we're at, what is it?

Willy Woo: (20:54)
I don't know, is it 13 months already? There's just so how much coins are being scooped off the exchanges and, um, you know, no who do a lot of the on chain metrics. And, and they've got a metric where we look at the, um, the wallets on the exchanges. I mean, not while it's on the network and we cluster them and we figure out, um, essentially who are the different participants and we look at them and we go, is this person a highly liquid person who seems to buy and sell, buy and sell. And then we have the, what I call the Rick Astley's of this world who buy their Bitcoins and we'll never let it down. You know, they just keep buying and buying with value, much history of selling and very similar to their supply shot. We're seeing of coins moving off the exchanges.

Willy Woo: (21:45)
We're seeing these Rick athlete, um, genre of, of, of accumulators, of, of investors that are buying and holding, um, coming in very strong. So we're seeing a net flow of coins from, um, participants that there have been traditionally more or less speculating or buying over the short term and in selling, um, maybe they are like traders that trade in and out of old coins. Uh, but essentially these new people, the Ric athletes are coming in and they're just buying a locking up the coins. Um, and so that's been a very big driver of this bull market that, um, there's been strong buying, um, and even like we can measure the size of the purchases and the movement of their capital. And, um, you know, a lot of the conversation has been about institutional investors. Um, that's true. Yeah. Also, um, I am thinking that there's a lot of high net worth investors coming in here coming to buy it.

Willy Woo: (22:49)
And, you know, slugs are $1 million at a time. Um, and we saw that, um, very stressful in the sort of first two months of 2021. Uh, so yeah, I think it's these guys institutions, the, um, high net worth guys that are coming in and scooping it up. They tend to store on, um, into Coldstone wallets, which I'm a very visible on chain. Um, whereas retail, um, which, um, you know, that just started to come in the last two to three weeks. Um, lot of retail numbers are going up, um, retail teams to store the coins on exchanges. Like the Coinbase is of this world. Uh, and that's less visible on the blockchain obviously because they don't take off the exchanges. Uh, but we are seeing, um, a lot of numbers claim lately with, um, more retail type. So

John Darcie: (23:46)
You, um, uh, recently raised your price target from two 50 to 300, um, I guess, can you put a timeframe on that? Can you talk about, you know, how you get to that, how you derive that and you know, what drives that?

Willy Woo: (24:03)
Yeah, it's a, it's a very, um, kind of dynamic, um, like model and there, um, it uses, you know, what we called mean reversion, essentially a moving average, and also I'm moving average of, uh, of the price of Bitcoin. And, um, if you do that every single top that, um, Bitcoin's experienced and it's 12 year history, um, it's, it follows a particular trajectory and, um, you know, to get a target, you kind of have to get an idea of where the top will be, um, when a real hit that, um, that they align essentially the all time moving average across a multiplier, their model, um, is looking like it is shooting for three to 400, even higher. Just really depends how the price section of the coin acts over the next, um, you know, half, half of the year. Um, but so perfectly we, in all past cycles, we've seen Bitcoin top out around the December, um, at least the fourth quarter of, of the year after the havening.

Willy Woo: (25:19)
Um, and you know, like Bitcoin is like this assay that's very, very much locked into an algorithm where every four years we have a happening, um, where the inflation rate of the canoe coins minted into the supply gets halved. And that creates this, um, like reduction in south pressure by one half and so seamlessly that gives us a little shove on the price. If you've got half of them out of S sell power from new coins being mined, um, you get a bullish in pulse and, um, in all the past cycles that it seems that that bullish and pulse manifests into this crazy Brenner. You know, the last one was, um, 29, 2017, took us from a thousand to $20,000, um, and tends to Peter out around the fourth quarter, around December. So ballpark in December, um, that top cap model of mine, um, it could be anywhere in the three to 400,000 range and might even go higher, but we need to see how it performs over the next six months.

John Darcie: (26:31)
Okay. I want to dive on into this ruling. So I'm going to challenge a little bit here. Um, so, and I'm wearing a Bitcoin hat, so, you know, just remember I'm super Polish as I challenged you, but it seems to me whenever I've seen a great trade, that's so obvious they eventually go away. So just as an example, last summer, we look very hard at the grayscale arbitrage, which was a fantastic trade and we passed on it, which was probably a little bit of luck, but it just seemed too obvious, felt like everyone was doing it. And whenever I've seen that, it just means that you're sort of late in the cycle for that, that sort of trade, the obvious trade in Bitcoin that everyone seems to have is, well, this cycle is going to be like a last, like, when are you going to sell, what is it going to be December?

John Darcie: (27:20)
Is it October? And my experience tells me that this cycle is going to be different one way or the other, like maybe we've taught maybe we'll top in July, or maybe we're going to just blow through December and just keep going higher and higher. And this cycle from a time and price standpoint, we'll look, I think that the cycle, if I were to put odds on it, the likelihood that this cycle looks like the past one, I would have very, very low. Um, and obviously I would skew to a longer a bull market with higher prices because I'm wearing a Bitcoin hat, but I actually would think a shorter bull market to me is more likely than just a repeat of history. I just would like your reaction to that because it's just, there's, there's so much discussion about, you know, where are we already, Paul talks about while we're in the fifth inning and he's basing it on prior history, and if everyone's got the same trade on it, it's going to be different than that.

Willy Woo: (28:21)
Uh, I kinda agree with you

Speaker 3: (28:24)
Actually. Um, you know, I, I, I've seen a lot of templating of the cycle past cycles. Um, I don't think anyone would have guessed that the cycle would be ripping up so quickly. So, so had, um, and I know a lot of the team traders have been like, this is overboard and it's just been on the red line consistently until the last, you know, I guess month and a half. Um, and

Willy Woo: (28:55)
My approach really is like,

Speaker 3: (28:58)
You know, we got all these models, um, the status of you trading a model, um, I ran the 2017. We hit like $10,000 and everyone said, this is tall. And I looked at the back trace and I look at the on chain analysis of it and it, it could have been a talk, it was touch and go. Um, and then it ripped and doubled, doubled to 20,000 in a matter of weeks. Um, and so everyone's got this plan, um, beautiful plan. And so thing happens and, you know, I get people asking me, can you let me know when we get with them 25% of the top? And I think back to 2017, I go, you know what, well, didn't, we just like, we, we, we doubled and I think just barely over two weeks in two weeks, we went from 10,000, but like, there was something like, we went from 10,000, 20,002 weeks.

Speaker 3: (30:08)
And, um, every day the prices running up thousands of dollars and you think, can I have a nice, um, wanting 25% of the way to the top? And the whole thing is Maine. Um, and so when you're in there, mania phase of the market, anything can happen. The fundamentals have gone out the window and it's just highly speculative. You'll see the price rise way about what on chain. Um, valuations will go. The, um, I mean, you just don't know, it's like you're playing chicken off a freight train, speak of FOMO. So, um, I think that's gonna come into it and we'll we're to maybe the models where maybe they die. Um, but everyone's going to be in complete disarray when, when, when we approached the top, that's, that's always happening at that point. Um,

Willy Woo: (31:03)
I don't know if we're going to top out early. Um, I think there's a fair chance. Um, there's a fair chance we might might just looking at some, some of the, the rates of climb. Um, you know, I look at, I look at the, the capital coming into the network and I look at these bounds, you can put on it based on the back trace. Um, it's like, while the price can go beyond this part or this, this price target, because, um, historically, you know, we haven't been able to break there with this amount of capital on the system, so there's, there are bounds. Um, and, uh, I, you know, you predict them for, it seems like, well, we're gonna close out this cycle earlier. Um, but having said that fundamentally, um, you know, looking at the institutions coming in, um, which maybe you have a better idea of, it looks like a lot of money's still coming in.

Willy Woo: (32:05)
Um, and, and it's kind of, yeah, I do get the sense that if their money is coming in and it's coming in near the later into this year, um, the, it could change a lot. And I, the, you know, the top, the top model I have, it's a moving target based on essentially the price section that's happening throughout the year. Um, so having said this, this target out there, and there's a very broad gin near target. It's very dependent on the time signature of there happening around December. Um, so I have, for anyone who's trading this and thinking of your hundred thousand, that's a hard and fast target. Um, it changes, you know, I see 300,000 year, January of this year, cause that was where, and there was conservative because it was based on past curbing of that model. Um, but I think it's very subject to, to, um, change. Um, it's certainly not like plan B's, um, stock to flow model where he's got a line on the same where this amount guests, the models, this price, this, this regulation. Um,

John Darcie: (33:23)
And by the way, I don't mean, you know, my approach to models is it's sort of like, it's like riding a horse, you know, you ride it till it bucks you, you know what I mean? So, you know, I, I'm just wondering if this is the year we break the book, the model, in fact, John and I spoke with someone who runs one of the larger institutional businesses in Bitcoin, and he believes that that will happen for the reason you just said. He just said that the, the, the March of institutional capital is so large and, uh, it takes these folks time. You know, it just takes them time and, you know, if they're going through their committees now and they're coming in in the fall, like they're, they're not worried about the cycle. Right. You know, and they're not going to be saying, well, it's late in the cycle. Let's not invest there. They're going to be buying. Um, and that's where you could get, you know, sort of a, um, a busted cycle. I'm not on board with Dan held Supercycle. I said, I do think we're going to have a, a bear market. I think that's just nature of, of everything I've ever traded. Um, but I just think it's going to be different this time, but who knows we'll find out. Um,

Willy Woo: (34:35)
Yeah, I agree. I thought, I think the whole thing's on a, um, you know, it's a, it's, I feel like it's like, uh, it could go either

Speaker 3: (34:44)
Way. Um, we could, like, if we get an influx of this very large capital from the very large institutions that could change, um, but then also there's so much leverage in the system on the cycle. And we haven't seen that in 2017, like just the amount of people I've heard that are like mortgaging their houses to buy more Bitcoin or

Willy Woo: (35:14)
Collateralizing their Bitcoin on a block fire line to get fear, to buy more Bitcoin, um, even funds are doing there. Um, so, you know, once the price starts to Teeter, I could see, um, a very large sell off in a large deleveraging event there that throws us into, uh, a BMI market. But if this capital comes in near the tail end of this year, that's going to stop that from happening and it'll just run up higher, um, cause then deleveraging might happen. Um, so,

John Darcie: (35:53)
So th th there's one factor that, that I don't hear people talking about, which I think about a lot, which is, as, as we know, there are 900 Bitcoin new Bitcoin mined every day, right? So in fall, let's say when the Bitcoin price was 15,000, that represented 13 and a half, a million dollars a day. And, you know, PayPal and square and grayscale were able to scoop up that much just based on their, their daily inflows and buying, you know, today we're up to 49 and a half million dollars. Right. And, you know, w w we have a fund we're buying Bitcoin every day. There are other people, right? So, you know, that that's an absorbable amount, but when you start get to bigger numbers, right. You know, it's 90 million at a hundred thousand. I mean, this is just basic math, but th you know, when you say the numbers are, you get to 250,000 Bitcoin, right.

John Darcie: (36:49)
That's 225 million supply. And, you know, I love Michael sailor's idea of Bitcoin miners holding the Bitcoin on balance sheet. But most of them, you know, don't have access to the capital markets yet we don't have, as a percentage of the miners, a very small amount of them, right. Are trading on public exchanges where they can raise debt and equity. So I think we have to assume that that's, that is supply, that, that will come onto the market. That's just a lot of incremental demand just to sustain the price, I guess. What are your thoughts on that and how does that affect your model? Right. Again, we get to two 50, right? That's $225 million, then that new flows have to come in just to keep the price add 250,000. Am I thinking about that wrong?

Willy Woo: (37:40)
Yeah. I, I really don't think the minor cell offers anything that significant. A lot of people look at the charts of, of minor, um, outflows into exchanges. Um, and I look at them every day. Um, you know, I've got it, the whole chart here every day, I'm looking at it and I don't even look at it because it's so minuscule against, um, genes, the buying power of, um, of, of a full-blown bull market. Like we're saying, um, currently at least on Shane it's 50,000 people are buying Bitcoin for the very first time. That means that, uh, by my estimates multiply by three, roughly, um, we're seeing 150, 50,000 people that are buying Bitcoin for the very first time, um, at the exchanges Naval, nevermind, just looking on chain. So, um, gosh, even excluding the institutions, just talking retail, um, that's like less than a 10th of a Bitcoin, um, per day, like, like for each one of those new participants, that's very minuscule.

Willy Woo: (38:58)
Um, uh, not, not very much talked about as, um, the actual real self power, um, in this cycle is really the, the, um, the fees that are generated on these derivative exchanges. Um, like I was talking to one of the very large OTC desks. Um, the head was giving me an estimate of the sell off by exchanges from, you can think of it as a tax on trading. And then that gets dumped into the market converted to fee, to pay salaries and, and, and whatnot. Um, he, he estimated, um, 1200 Bitcoins per day, um, in 2020, um, is being dumped onto the market. Um, so you can think of that as a sell pressure and other kind of minors. Um, so appreciate, it's like the exchange mining fees and dumping that on the market. Um, we've got a lot more bullish activity, a lot more trading volume, 2021. Um, that's the one to look at, um,

John Darcie: (40:07)
Just to be clear. So you talking about, like, for example, a Binance is making their money in Bitcoin and they need to pay employees. So they're selling some amount of the Bitcoin that their revenues come in to pay employees. Is that, is that what you're saying?

Willy Woo: (40:24)
There's an example. I, I posted this, um, last year CZ mentioned that they, um, pay the employees and being, and they don't sell off to cash match. Um, but, uh, we're talking a heck of a lot of volume, you know, um, we're talking, um, you know, easily quarter of a trillion dollars a day into volume, um, most days. Um, so, uh, you, you take a small fee of that. It's gonna, it's gonna pale, and it's gonna make the, make the miner's fee tiny, absolutely tiny compared to what these exchanges are doing. And a lot of it does depend on whether they are, um, stacking sets, essentially stacking those Bitcoins and holding it. And how are they paying their staff and Bitcoin, or are they selling to fear?

Speaker 4: (41:13)
Um,

Willy Woo: (41:15)
And so that that's, that's not analysis I've done that comes from OTC desk. Um, I think to get a really good handle on it, you'd need to know exactly what the behavior of these changes are, but coming from an OTC desk, um, I think they've got a pretty good handle on exactly what's coming out.

John Darcie: (41:35)
Um, that's interesting. I wasn't aware of that. Um, I guess, relatedly, so we've been in this sort of 50,000 channel now for two months or so give or take, and, you know, there's a lot of talk of the institutional buying, right. You know, there's been a lot of good news thrown at Bitcoin over the last two months. Right. We had Brevan Howard, a big hedge fund announced they bought Dan Loeb, Ray, Daleo just in the last week, right. Ben opened up, um, and we're at 54,000, which again, we're up 80, 90% for the year, but where's this outside of, you know, the miners, which are sending us in substantial. And, you know, let's say exchange fees to pay compensation, where is all the supply coming? Right. Cause there's, there's a lot of talk about all the influx of demand and, you know, and how we're holding this trillion dollar level right here at 52 50 3000.

John Darcie: (42:30)
But it I'm an equities guy traded equities for my most of my career. It feels heavy to me. You know, Bitcoin feels heavy to me, you know, inequities trading. They say when a stock gets lots of good news and it, and it stops going up on that good news, it's a good time to sell. And, um, again, I'm, ragingly bullish on Bitcoin, but you know, for the last couple of weeks, that's how it's been acting as like a stock that gets hit with a lot of good news, but can't seem to break out. Um, so just like your reaction to that in terms of who is selling based on your analysis, um,

Willy Woo: (43:08)
Let me just zoom in. I want to pull up a chat so I can get my bearings on the dates here. Um, so, you know, typically, and you see it on the blockchain, you see the age of coins that are moving, um, Asia coins that are moving out of wallets. Um, when you see coins moving out of wallets and moving to new participants, um, that's a sale. And so we measure the age of those coins and the size of those clean movements. Um, we we've seen since the entire history of Bitcoin, um, the OGs, the, the whales that bought from early days, 2012 and earlier when things were like under a hundred dollars, those guys are divesting and every single bull market rally, they divest a little divided dailies, but, um, and we saw that, um, interestingly,

John Darcie: (43:58)
Well, I talked to a lot of those guys and they all deny it. So I believe your data and they're probably lying to me, but none of them say they're selling,

Willy Woo: (44:07)
Maybe not recently. They certainly did. And, um, you know, they certainly did up to match and they stopped selling when Elon Musk started buying, which was very interesting. And then the sell is, um, since then, um, you know, they are away or sellers that have been selling, um, that have been selling, um, since, um, the OGE stopped selling. Um, the age of coins have been, um, much younger and, um, we saw a lot of that hitting into the tail end of match for the quarterly rebalance. So, um, my guess is really the, the hedge funds that bought in, um, in the 10,000 ban took a lot of profit. Um, I think Rafa was one of the funds that went on record. Um, so

John Darcie: (44:58)
Yes, we're seeing,

Willy Woo: (44:59)
I think a lot of these, um, trading funds that are buying in for, um, shorter term, um, live positions that, that, that taking the five to six X. Um, and, and that's, that's creating a bit of a cap and the same here. Um, so yeah, I, those are the sellers is what I'm seeing. Um, very clearly based on the date of the coins that are moving into the exchanges.

John Darcie: (45:27)
Got it. I guess that makes sense. Um, so something that's happened is that over the last six months, that has surprised me is, um, like the doge coin phenomenon, you know, I, I, it, the ICO craze and the all coin craze of 17, 16, 17 felt again like, you know, the sort of speculation you see early in a market. And we had Bitcoin back to approaching what eight 80% or so of the overall cryptocurrency market in the fall Bitcoins. Now down to 50% of the cryptocurrency market, right? Doge coin is 58 billion. And I'm only using that as a stand in, right. There are a lot of other, um, coins and defy tokens that, you know, are trading advantage. It really big numbers. I, I guess I'd like your thoughts on that in terms of the overall market and what does it mean for Bitcoin good, bad or indifferent?

Willy Woo: (46:32)
Well, you know, like, um, the altcoin market, there's many ways we can look at it. Like the, the, the, the, the age old way of looking at it is, look, these are, these are, um, alternative assets that you can trade in and out of, um, you do a back trace on them, and I bet traced what nearly 2,500 of them across all the history that there was. And, um, more or less these assets it's trimmed down over multiple cycles. But the interesting thing about these ACS is that they, um, they provide, uh, um, you know, I kind of beat her. Like, it, it, it, um, in a bull market, they can go a lot higher than, um, Bitcoin and outperform Bitcoin and, you know, be a market underperform and they go through oscillations. So, um, a lot of traders will, will, um, particularly the crypto native traders will trade in and of altcoins in different phases of the market, particularly when the Queensland or sideways band.

Willy Woo: (47:35)
So while you've got the sell off coming from, um, initially the whales from the OGs, and now the hedge fund selling off in the quarter, you're rebalancing, um, it's trapped Bitcoin in a sideways band. Um, and then, um, when you're in that zone and you also get these native traders that are like crypto native traders, they're like going, okay, this is my opportunity while Bitcoin's going sideways, I'm not going to get any gains on that. So I'm going to move capital out of Bitcoin and into these coin assets and that tiny little market caps. So they go weak all the way up, um, on very small amounts capital. Um, so yeah, you get that kind of a fit. Um, that's the traditional way of explaining it, that is definitely happening. Um, we're in a, kind of a 20, 21 phase of the market where there's a lot of experimentation happening on, um, defy.

Willy Woo: (48:30)
And so, um, you know, there's a lot of, some of the, you know, a lot of legitimate experimentation, um, a lot of, um, complete scams, um, uh, there's some very well engineered devices projects that are, um, well engineered in the economics to go upwards, um, striking a lot of capital. Um, and then you've got, um, a lot of interesting projects there. Um, actually we didn't have in 2017 then look like, um, you know, they can hold the future of defy. Like, um, you know, I, for example, FTX is a shining star or one of these derivative markets and, um, the, of being creating serum decks and that built their own salon owner. And, you know, we've, we've got exchanges there. We can trade on now where the transaction fees are sub sub one, penny, um, and all secured on a private key with no counterparty risk when less counterparty risk, maybe a little more, a little bit more risk on that technology stack, but, um, who doesn't want to trade, um, without counterparty risk, you know, these, these are very exciting projects.

Willy Woo: (49:44)
And if you were to think about how that looks like in the nutritional world, um, the amount of capital in these, these derivative markets is huge. So, um, these projects are really wanting to get a slice of, um, essentially the future finance, taking a lot of trade fire moving onto defy. It's a big, that's a big, um, there's a big market right then. So there's a lot of speakers, a lot of fervor, um, between even investors, as much as, um, traders that are like taking a ride on some of these, um, you know, more scalable next generation platforms. So I think that that's, it's a, it's a little bit more mature than the 20, when we had no technology, you could raise money on it on a white paper and a woman, a good story. Now we're seeing some interesting technologies that may be able to carry, um, some of the world's finance, maybe in four years, once it matures, once we get the bugs out of it. And, um, a lot of people want to get in on the ground floor of that stuff, you know?

John Darcie: (50:49)
Right, right. You know, it's been, it's, uh, it seems though very early in terms of the real use cases for these [inaudible] tokens, you know what I mean? Um, in terms of, you know, there being long-term sustainable business models, I haven't seen many that have them yet, or at least in operation. Um, but I do agree. I do agree. It's super exciting, John, since you're dressed like a Bitcoin, or do you want to bring us home? Absolutely. I have a few just big picture questions. I'd love to hear your answer to Willie. And one is the price of Bitcoin in 2030. What do you think it will be? And what will Bitcoin's role in the global financial system be? Is it going to become the default global store of value around which every other Fiat currency and digital currency and the global economy revolves around? Uh, what are your thoughts on those two questions?

Willy Woo: (51:43)
Yeah. I approached Bitcoin as a technologist, um, and I do track the growth rate. Um, I've been on record from the data. I'm seeing that in the next four to five years, 20, 25, we'll have 1 billion people with exposure to a digital asset being Bitcoin or any other one. Um, so what I'm saying is, um, essentially, um, software eating the world. Now it's, now that we'll figure out how to do scarcity on the internet, which we never be able to be able to do before. Um, software's eating the finance world. And so I can see 'em in 10 years, that's plenty time to take big chunks. Um, maybe even majority chunks out of traditional finance and putting that onto blockchains, um, Bitcoin being the leading store of value. Um, so, you know, um, we're like, yeah, w w we're in this, this kind of transition to a digital age? Um, I I'm seeing that like crypto assets is going to eat everything, um, eventually is there's teen years enough to do that and maybe, um, Bitcoin itself, uh, I think it's going to eat gold in that time. Um, I think it's going to eat some of the store of value and equities, which is like, what is it, a hundred trillion? Um, I think, I think that conservatively, we're going to be in the 10 to $50 trillion market cap and 10 years. Um, you know, so yeah, whatever that works out is,

Speaker 4: (53:32)
Um, right, so

John Darcie: (53:36)
10, 10 to 50 X from here. So we'll let our viewers do the math there, but, uh, not, not a terrible return. Um, do you think Bitcoin and cryptocurrency in general, you're talking about software eating the world. So I think I might know your answer to this question. Do you think it poses a legitimate threat to us, dollar hegemony? Uh, you know, the idea that the us dollar is going to maintain its role as, as the dominant asset through which the United States government can pull all kinds of different levers related to sanctions and its other geopolitical goals.

Speaker 3: (54:05)
Oh, that's a tough one. You're probably asking the wrong person. I don't actually think that Bitcoin's gonna be completely dominant. I think that the future is the basket. Um, I think the U S dollar is going to be, um, more or less digitized. Um, and you know, in terms of

Willy Woo: (54:24)
Like, you know, the U S is very, very much a large economy. I don't think that's going away. So there is such a thing as, you know, a nation state currency backed by a very large economy with a big, um, defense force. So I don't think that's going away, but I do think that, um, the future of, uh, like money, um, will be backed by a basket of assets. And I do think Bitcoin will be a major paddle there. And, um, and so I don't know if they asked us the question. I don't think we're, I'm not a Maximo. So I think that, um, Bitcoin's going to be the money for the future and the only money that's going to swell everything. I think it's going to be a lot more nuanced and more complex. Um, so yeah, you're,

John Darcie: (55:11)
You're sitting in Hong Kong right now. Uh, China's relationship with Bitcoin has been, uh, interesting and mixed over the years where you have a lot of global Bitcoin mining takes place in China, but four years ago they banned the transfer and issuance of cryptocurrency, but in the last a week or so, the deputy at the people's bank of China, the central bank of China came out and said, Bitcoin is not a cryptocurrency in his eyes. And obviously he speaks on behalf of the government. People don't speak out of turn in China, uh, but he thinks it could be an investment alternative. And that marks a significant shift in tone from the Chinese government. Obviously, if China were to open things up relating to Bitcoin, that opens up a massive market of buyers for Bitcoin and Metcalf's law and the derivative network impact to that. Do you think China is on its way to liberalizing the way it looks at Bitcoin?

Willy Woo: (56:04)
Oh, I don't know. I actually, there's one thing I do not know. Well, I do not know how to read China. Um, I don't know what the strategy is, um, whether or not they want the people to, to expose to this se it, um, it does make sense that they would, I think there was a paper put out by someone and w in, in Chinese, um, and inside China that hit hit Wade. I can't remember. It was many years ago. They did say it made sense for, um, the citizens to have exposure to this. If it got big. Um, it seems, it seems, it seems like a, um, a good move, but, uh, I'm not an expert of China inside China. So again, I don't, I don't think I have any, any kind of smart thing to say about, all right.

John Darcie: (56:52)
Well, we know Willie, he specializes in on chain analysis. Anything related to the data, uh, on the chain is where Willie, uh, you know, it really specializes. So look forward to continuing to reading your analysis on your newsletter. Please tell us again about your newsletter, where people can subscribe to it and find it.

Willy Woo: (57:10)
Yeah, the newsletter is my take a read of the blockchain. I look at demand supply, so essentially looking at what's happening and what it's projected to happen. Um, so you can make kind of forecast, so ma mid macro directionality. Um, and so if you, if you want to subscribe to that best way to look it up is to go to my Twitter profile. Uh, we NAMEC on Twitter and I, there's a link on my profile page to, to the newsletter. You can subscribe. Yeah.

John Darcie: (57:38)
All right. Woo NAMEC on Twitter. You can go find Willy woo. Uh, his sub stack newsletter, which is fantastic. Again, we'll share a link to it when we send a, this episode out to all of our, our community at salt. So, uh, thanks so much for joining us, Willie, uh, Brett, you have a final word for Willie before we let them go. No, just, just again, I'm a fan. This was really fun. Thanks for joining us for way. I really appreciate it. Okay.

Willy Woo: (58:01)
Thanks guys. Enjoyed it too. Okay. Well, thank

John Darcie: (58:04)
You everybody for tuning into today's salt. Talk with Willy. Woo. Just a reminder. If you missed any part of this talk or any of our previous salt talks, you can access them on our website. It's salt.org backslash talks or on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. We're also on social media. Twitter is where we're most active at salt conference, but we're also on LinkedIn, Instagram, and Facebook. And please, if you don't mind spread the word about these salt talks, particularly if you have a, an uncle who rails on the fact that the Bitcoin is some type of imaginary currency with no utility or value, send them to Willie Woo's newsletter his sub stack as well as have them watch this episode. And I think it'll go a long way towards helping to change their mind, but on behalf of Brett and the entire salt team, this is John Darcie signing off from salt talks for today. We hope to see you back here against them.

Mike Novogratz & Ari Paul: The Future of Crypto | SALT Talks #144

“People were not just in it for money, but were in it for change… There are a lot of Bitcoin tattoos… It’s cool to be part of a revolution to do good.”

Mike Novogratz is CEO of Galaxy Investment Partners, a cryptocurrency investment firm. Ari Paul is the co-founder and chief investment officer of BlockTower Capital, an investment firm that manages a portfolio of crypto assets

In the early stages around 2013, Bitcoin was a speculative asset that appealed mainly to libertarians and those with frustrations surrounding recent economic crises. The passion behind the decentralized finance community was unmatched and served as an early indicator to its eventual rise. Before recognizing Bitcoin as the answer, it was clear that the rapid expansion of money supply would call for a response. With concerns around inflation, Bitcoin serves as the guard against that. “The bet of a lifetime is going to be betting on currency depreciation… it didn’t click for me that Bitcoin could be that asset until 2014.”

Until recently, the majority of Bitcoin purchases happened at the retail level. That is partly responsible for its initial volatility. As major financial institutions become more involved and put it on their balance sheets, expect Bitcoin to stabilize and grow in value.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKERS

Michael Novogratz.jpeg

Mike Novogratz

Founder & CEO

Galaxy Digital

Ari Paul.jpeg

Ari Paul

Co-Founder & Chief Investment Officer

BlockTower Capital

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darsie: (00:07)
Hello, everyone and welcome back to SALT Talks. My name is John Darsie, I'm the Managing Director of SALT, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance, technology, and public policy. SALT Talks are a digital interview series with leading investors, creators and thinkers, and our goal on these SALT Talks is the same as our goal in our SALT Conference Series, which is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future.

John Darsie: (00:38)
We're very excited to bring you the next edition in our digital assets series of SALT Talks with Michael Novogratz and Ari Paul. First I'll introduce Mr. Novogratz. Michael Novogratz is the founder and CEO of Galaxy Digital. He was formerly a partner and President of Fortress Investment Group. But prior to Fortress, Mr. Novogratz spent 11 years at Goldman Sachs, where he was elected partner in 1998. Michael served on the New York Federal Reserve's Investment Advisory Committee on Financial Markets from 2012 to 2015, and he serves as the Chairman of the Bail Project and has made criminal justice reform a focus of his family's foundation. He also serves as the chairman of Hudson River Park Friends, and sits on the boards of NYU Langone Medical Center, the Princeton Varsity Club, Jazz Foundation of America and Artists for Peace and Justice.

John Darsie: (01:29)
Just some editorialization from my perspective, Mike was one of the first major players from what I guess you could turn the legacy alternative investment universe to really dive headfirst into bitcoin and digital assets. We have to give him a lot of credit for that.

John Darsie: (01:44)
Ari Paul co-founded BlockTower Capital in 2017, and began his career in the financial services industry in 2006. Between 2006 and 2010, Ari was a trader and derivatives market maker at SUSquehanna International Group, and then a proprietary derivatives trader until 2013. Between 2013 and 2017, Ari served as the portfolio manager and risk manager for the University of Chicago's $8 billion endowment, where he managed a tail hedging strategy via long volatility investments.

John Darsie: (02:14)
In his role, Ari also worked with the Chief Risk Officer in risk management and analytics and performed research on the characteristics of endowment investments and asset classes, including researching cryptocurrency. Ari began his investment in cryptocurrency in 2014, and he's previously invested in exchange, traded crypto assets, initial coin offerings, initial coin offerings and other parts of the crypto and blockchain ecosystem.

John Darsie: (02:39)
Hosting today's talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the Founder and Managing Partner of Skybridge Capital, a global alternative investment firm that recently invested several hundred million dollars into Bitcoin and launched a Bitcoin fund to allow other clients to access the market in a pure play format. Anthony is also the Chairman of SALT. With that, I'll turn it over to Anthony for the interview.

Anthony Scaramucci: (03:01)
Also trade through Galaxy, right?

John Darsie: (03:04)
Yeah. Is that you, Galaxy Digital, Michael Novogratz?

Michael Novogratz: (03:08)
That sure is, me. Thank you for that.

Anthony Scaramucci: (03:10)
I'm going to start with you Novo, because Ari and I are just getting to know each other, but you and I are long lost friends, probably related somewhere, just given the level of flamboyance and fashion and all the other stuff that goes on. You are a legendary macro trader, you're a brilliant investor. You had a great celebrated career at Goldman, and then you went on to Fortress, but you had this aha eureka moment on Bitcoin. When did that happen, Michael? Why did it happen, and when did the light go on for you, where you became where you are in Bitcoin?

Michael Novogratz: (03:48)
Well, listen, I started investing in Bitcoin, call it 2013. Originally, it was a speculative move. Someone called me up and said, "Hey, what do you think about this?" I didn't think anything about it. So, I looked into it, and realized it was a perfect asset for speculative frenzy, for people to get excited about. It was a new technology back then. It played right into the heart of people being frustrated with the government. We had the great financial crisis in '08, the European financial crisis in 2012. We were in the middle of QE, and people didn't trust banks, they didn't trust central banks, they didn't trust authority.

Michael Novogratz: (04:27)
That was this ethos of the Bitcoin community of Satoshis first white paper let's do a currency at that point, store of value now that lives beyond the borders of government. I was like, there are enough libertarians, hyperinflation people, people that want to live off the grid, the cypherpunks, all of these many communities were buying into this and the Chinese were buying. I thought it's a pretty easy thing, it's going to go higher.

Michael Novogratz: (04:57)
I bought a bunch when it was about $100, but really not with a religious zeal, thinking this would be a great speculative trading. Quite frankly, wanted to sell it at $1,000. One of my partners at the time, really didn't want to, and convinced me not to, through coercion. Went back down to $200, I thought, I told you so. I'm happy now at $36,000, $37,000 that I didn't sell. Partly, because when you sell your whole position, it's hard to ever buy the same amount back.

Michael Novogratz: (05:31)
I really got my religion though, when I walked into the offices of a company called Consensus in Brooklyn, in Bushwick, Brooklyn, run by a guy named Joe Lubin who happened to be a college roommate. This was right after I left Fortress, late 2015, and they were just launching Ethereum. Ethereum, the token was trading at about 97 cents, maybe it had been in existence for four or five months. But he was starting this company, Consensus, and I walked in, and I saw this group of people, young and old, plotting out this financial revolution, plotting out, not just the finance revolution, a worldwide revolution.

Michael Novogratz: (06:10)
I realized that there was a religion to this stuff, that people were in it not just for the money, they run it for change, to rebuild the financial system in a more egalitarian way, in a more transparent way, in a fairer way. What we're seeing now called DeFi, they were talking about back then, but they were also talking about it for the music industry, for publishing, for almost every industry you can think about.

Michael Novogratz: (06:33)
That got me really thinking that there's a passion behind these communities that doesn't exist in very normal... Maybe it exists in the Tesla maniacs, but in general, you don't see people with four tattoos, while there are a lot of Bitcoin tattoos. They're purpose driven movements. That got me really excited because it aligned up with my social consciousness, the way I saw the world, and I was like, this is cool to be part of a revolution that wants to do good.

Michael Novogratz: (07:07)
That's when I really plunged in. I bought a ton of Ethereum, it went up that year. 2017 became this amazing speculative bubble, and at that point, I was like, okay, we're going to start a company. We started Galaxy, really in early 2018, right as the bubble was popping. I knew it was a bubble, I talked about it being a bubble, I sold a lot of stuff. But I decided to start a company anyway, because I figured, this won't be a long burst. That the underlying people in this space aren't going to give up, and the underlying technology is real.

Michael Novogratz: (07:42)
Lo and behold, three years later, we're back to what feels like another frenzy. I would say, it's not the same as 2017 at all, just given the breadth of the players coming in and the amount of capital being put into the system and building new architecture. I think this is early innings of the real revolution, with 17 being the first tempest in a teapot, we'll look back on. But that's it. That's a long winded answer. Sorry about that.

Anthony Scaramucci: (08:11)
No, it's cool. That's why I got you on. Ari, I want to ask you the same question, what got you passionate about crypto? Where did the brain click? I can tell you my moment in a second, but where did the brain click... By the way, Novo, I owe you a lot for that moment because you came to the SALT Conference, we're talking about it. I said, okay, if Mike's doing it, I have to do more research on this. But, Ari, go ahead.

Ari Paul: (08:36)
When the financial crisis hit, I was a novice trader at the Susquehanna International Group and very interested in macro, certainly not with Mike's professional experience, but I was reading a lot of... I write people all the time, people like Nouriel Roubini I discovered in 2007. It was clear that the Fed's money printing wouldn't cause inflation right away. We were in such a deflationary world, but I literally thought at the time, in five to 10 years, the tradable lifetime is going to be betting on currency depreciation. That started me searching.

Ari Paul: (09:12)
I'm not the fastest learner in the world, even though I came across Bitcoin in 2011, it didn't click for me that Bitcoin could be that asset. It wasn't until 2014 that things clicked on like okay, insofar as people whether or not we get inflation, whether or not we get extreme currency depreciation, fears of that will increase.

Ari Paul: (09:32)
As an options trader, you can think of it almost like an option where if volatility increases, the option's more valuable, whether or not we end up finishing in the money. What we're seeing today is exactly that. Whether or not we end up getting inflation, people are much more concerned about it today. The idea of us having high single digit inflation in five, six years doesn't sound crazy anymore. I would say the first thing that had me looking... Obviously, I was looking for Bitcoin, I was looking for what is the play when central banks around the world quadrupled the money supply? I recognized it might take five years for that to start trickling in, given the velocity of money fell.

Ari Paul: (10:08)
Bitcoin is so clearly that asset, having a fixed supply, total radical transparency. Well, one thing I'd say is that I don't think Bitcoin is competing as a technology, it really is an analogy, it's closer to something like a Lloyd's of London or JP Morgan in the sense that no one thinks JP Morgan's going to go away because of new competitors says we can undercut them on fees by 10%. It's competing on longevity, on adoption, on network effects. I'll stop there.

Anthony Scaramucci: (10:41)
Novo, the volatility of Bitcoin is a major concern for skeptics. Why is Bitcoin so volatile, when you think about all the convergence of buying right now, and as it's making this transcending moment into the institutional class of investors? Why is it so-

Michael Novogratz: (11:02)
Listen, in 2017, I would have told you that 99% of buying was retail. That number's coming down, but it didn't start coming down really till this year. Crypto was set up as an alternative to institution. It was set up to live outside of institutions. It played into this retail. But more importantly, the real big exchanges where there was great innovation over in Asia. You're talking about places like Binance and Bitfinex and BitMEX and WOBI. If you think about it, they played right into the Asian love of gambling, and set up what I'll call Macau 2.0.

Michael Novogratz: (11:51)
These are really big exchanges that offer up to 100 times leverage. Think about that, Anthony, I'm a rich guy, and when I go to Goldman Sachs or UBS and I want to borrow money to buy equities, maybe they give me two times leverage, and if I want to short something, I get no leverage. That's with a giant balance sheet. We have all these rules about how much leverage we let people take in the equity market, or even in the currency market. But in the crypto market, in all these exchanges, you get 100 to one leverage. That's near insanity.

Michael Novogratz: (12:22)
What you have still is the remnants of this giant gambling class, mostly from Asia, but not all from Asia, this giant gambling class that has used this as an alternative to Macau. We're seeing now this transition from retail, into much deeper institutional hands, that over time, will mute volatility. You can see it, there's a great chart, Ari probably has it, of how fast coins are coming off exchanges.

Michael Novogratz: (12:55)
They're going somewhere, they're going into cold storage, institutional custody places. They're going into lending businesses, but they're moving off exchanges at a rapid pace. That tells me the shift is happening. Right now, Ethereum is trading at 190 vol. I was trying to buy some options last night, I was like, at 190 vol, that's a lot. Bitcoin's at 140, 150 vol. That's unsustainable. We are not going to be in this frenzy forever. There will be a blow off top at one point. You'll consolidate and things will calm down, people will lose some money, people will make some money.

Michael Novogratz: (13:37)
I've never seen markets literally trading in this kind of frenzy. I was going to buy some Ethereum last night, and I got a phone call. I was pricing up some options, the vol was too expensive. I got a phone call, it was a 30 minute phone call, I came back and it was up 7%. I go, "That's great." It's up another 7% since then. When you see price action like this, you know something special is happening, but you also have to be very careful.

Anthony Scaramucci: (14:02)
Ari, you get to look at most of this landscape. Explain to our viewers the supply demand dynamics for Bitcoin today.

Ari Paul: (14:14)
Sure. One thought on volatility, you can't go from being $1 to $30,000 without volatility, almost tautological. When Bitcoin first... An unusual thing, we're used to assets becoming liquid and tradable at a billion dollar market cap or at least 100 million. Bitcoin started trading when it hit a market cap of something like less than $5 million. You can't get from a $5 million market cap to a 300 billion, half trillion dollar market cap without incredible volatility over 11 years.

Ari Paul: (14:47)
As we're in price discovery mode, and that's really what it is. One other angle to think about this, I was at the endowment world where we're constantly saying, man, it's so hard to get out. The world's best fund managers are really happy if they got a few percent points on $10 billion a year. We want to look at asset classes that are inefficient for various reasons. What we've seen, my basic thesis for crypto as a whole being a secular bull run, is it's not a set of market participants that are repricing the asset, it's a growing set of market participants every couple of years, where as the regulatory ambiguity fail falls away, as the operational burdens fall away as you get legitimate and name brand custodians like Fidelity. Basically, as new institution types, as pensions are able to buy the asset, suddenly, the number of market participants increases exponentially.

Ari Paul: (15:39)
We're in this price discovery mode with ripples of new types of market participants gaining access to the asset. It's not going to be a steady 1% every day, because when you're in a bull run, speculators see the 1% daily gains, they start adding leverage, it feels like free money, so then you get over, extended, then you correct.

Ari Paul: (15:57)
The supply demand dynamic today, as Mike noted, we've seen tons of Bitcoin moving off exchange. Every data point we have on this is massive institutional buying. US and quantitative data, things like inflows into Grayscale, which are inflows into the closed end vehicle. That was, I believe, $3.8 billion, in Q4, which was close to everything that had ever flown into Grayscale prior to that.

Ari Paul: (16:26)
Anecdotally, a really interesting data point is we've been talking to a lot of billionaires in the financial world who are... It's such an interesting shift of mindset, they're now thinking defensively. They're thinking enough of their billionaire buddies have 10% of their net worth in Bitcoin, that if they don't, they're thinking, man, if Bitcoin does another 20X, I'm not invited to the parties anymore. I'm not in that rich club. Wherever they are in the hierarchy.

Ari Paul: (16:50)
Now they're thinking, I need a passive allocation, I need to have 10% of my net worth in this just to keep up, just in case. It's not about getting rich, it's now about staying rich. Those are very strong hand buyers, these are people who are looking to buy more on dips. These are people, they're not going to sell with a change in trend. The volatility is not going away. You can't have raging bull runs that take you 10X higher without volatility, the volatility will gradually fall. as it's institutionalized, broader market dissipation, we are seeing volatility gradually fall. But it's going to remain a volatile asset until it reaches maturity. That's still probably pretty far away.

Anthony Scaramucci: (17:34)
I want to ask you guys a few rapid fire. These are yes or no questions. Then I got to turn it over to the millennial. It sucks for me, but it's part of his contract, this agent puts pressure on me, where Darsie has to ask some of these questions. Let's go over a couple of rapid fire questions, and there's short answers. Michael, where's Bitcoin on 12-31-21?

Michael Novogratz: (18:00)
$65,000.

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:02)
Ari, where's Bitcoin on 12-31?

Ari Paul: (18:04)
At $85,000.

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:06)
$85,000, okay.

Michael Novogratz: (18:07)
Like the Price is Right here. All right.

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:09)
Okay. We're going to keep going. Okay, Michael, yes or no, Goldman Sachs will have a Bitcoin fund in the next two years, yes or no?

Michael Novogratz: (18:19)
Yes.

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:20)
Ari?

Ari Paul: (18:21)
Yes.

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:22)
Okay. BlackRock, will BlackRock have a Bitcoin fund?

Michael Novogratz: (18:26)
Yep.

Ari Paul: (18:26)
Yep.

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:28)
Okay. Gary Gensler, somebody we both know, Michael, maybe Ari knows him as well. We had the opportunity to work with him at Goldman, great guy. He's going to be the SEC chairman, is he going to be pro-Bitcoin, medium Bitcoin? Is he going to be the mama bear, baby bear, or papa bear of Bitcoin?

Michael Novogratz: (18:45)
He is very knowledgeable on crypto. So, I think he's going to be a real positive for the space. He's going to be tough on banks. He's progressive. He's in my camp, not your camp. But he'll be very fair and very-

Anthony Scaramucci: (19:01)
I might be in your camp now, no regrets. I know, this guy-

Michael Novogratz: (19:05)
We're moving you over.

Anthony Scaramucci: (19:06)
Yeah, he destroyed one of the major political parties, the Party of Lincoln, the guy took it out, put it in a paper shredder. But this is about Bitcoin, we're going to keep it on Bitcoin, not my political theories. Go ahead, Ari, what do you think of Gary?

Ari Paul: (19:21)
The concern I think for the industry is that Gary views most tokens as likely securities. You have Bitcoin but then you have 300 other meaningful assets, real market cap, real value. The concern is that a lot of those had offerings that may have been unregistered security offerings. Ethereum is a great example of this where the SEC has said, not as an official statement, but they've had representatives say at conferences that they view it as grandfathered in, that they don't intend to go after Ethereum even though the initial offering may have been technically an unregistered security offering.

Ari Paul: (19:53)
Concerned with Gensler, is that he may be much more aggressive on that front with other assets. Probably very pro-Bitcoin. As Mike said, he was a professor of blockchain, I believe at MIT. Very, very knowledgeable, but aggressive on the regulatory side. What the whole crypto world is paying attention to is how... We just had Mnuchin proposed rule out of the Treasury Department, governments are not going to ignore crypto. That's always been true. Satoshi Nakamoto wrote about this about how we want to grow quietly until we're ready to have government attention.

Ari Paul: (20:29)
Cryptocurrency is now a stage where every government around the world is developing policies, every regulator is thinking about how this falls under the purview. The hope is that it's relatively light, sensible regulation. Gensler may be on the aggressive side.

Anthony Scaramucci: (20:43)
Okay, Michael, the date that a crypto, let's say Bitcoin, the date that a Bitcoin ETF is approved?

Michael Novogratz: (20:52)
Within 12 months.

Anthony Scaramucci: (20:53)
Okay, Ari?

Ari Paul: (20:55)
I don't know, but I'm optimistic. I hope Mike's right.

Anthony Scaramucci: (20:59)
Okay. All right.

Ari Paul: (21:01)
I'll say yes if I have to give-

Michael Novogratz: (21:03)
Anthony, let me elaborate a little bit. The SEC's job is to protect the little guy, right? That's the SEC's job, protect the retail investor. They have allowed the Grayscale Trust, which is an amazing piece of business for Barry Silbert, and his team to grow to $25, $30 billion, where investors are paying high fees, they're being arbitraged everyday by hedge funds. Hedge funds put in Bitcoin, retail investors buy it 20%, 25% premium, 18% premium, it changes day to day.

Michael Novogratz: (21:34)
You got retail paying high fees and buying at bad prices, but that was okay, the SEC let that go. But they wouldn't let an ETF go. They were just asked backwards on this whole thing. Chairman Clayton didn't really get it. I think Gary Gensler is far far more attuned to what his role is, and understanding the intricacies of crypto.

Michael Novogratz: (21:57)
We're going to have an ETF. It's going to make the Grayscale premium go from where it is, to probably negative. It's a giant closed end funnel. I wish I owned that closed end funnel. It's going to be there for a long, long time. But most closed end funds trade at a discount to NAV, and I think in time, Grayscale will, too. It will, once there's an ETF. I think that will be the big transition this year.

Anthony Scaramucci: (22:22)
Okay. I got to tell you something, Ari, you got a really cool camera going, it's like you're coming in, you're coming out. I feel like Scorsese is directing the SALT Talk, but at any moment, just don't go into a whole Scarface mode or something like that, God forbid. Okay, go ahead, Darsie, I know you're dying to ask questions [crosstalk 00:22:42] it's been long Bitcoin since before it was invented. Go ahead.

John Darsie: (22:48)
Michael, I want to start with you. You mentioned earlier that the 2017 rally was driven a lot by retail investors. You said, I think 99%, you felt, was retail speculation, and now that percentage is shifting towards institutions. In your view, what is that percentage today, and what type of interests are you fielding from institutions? Whether it be pension endowments, large investment firms, insurance companies? What type of ventures are you fielding in Bitcoin today?

Michael Novogratz: (23:18)
I think if you add high net worth into that bucket, which are many institutions themselves these days, listen, that's all our business because we were set up as an institutional business. I will tell you, Galaxy's mantra was we're going to be the bridge between crypto and institutions. Man, it was kind of lonely for a couple of years. Our business wasn't great until really it all shifted with COVID, and post COVID, we've had these two tailwinds. We've had this macro story because of the money printing, that is a beautiful tailwind for Bitcoin, the story that Ari was telling eloquently earlier.

Michael Novogratz: (23:55)
You've also had the digitalization of everything, that from us doing this on Zoom, to the hyper acceleration of that, and that's really played into the Ethereum community, it's played into stable coins. All of us saying, shit, I wish they could have done the COVID checks directly as opposed to getting them in the mail, we should all have wallets, government should be able to direct payments through a payment system that's wallet based.

Michael Novogratz: (24:25)
We're going to have central bank issued digital currencies. They're coming in every single major country. What form they take, it'll be interesting, but they're coming in every major country. That whole process, I think has shifted the institutional mindset. First, it was all Bitcoin. Next, why I think Ethereum is going to double and I literally didn't think this till yesterday. I was walking, I was like, shit, all the smart hedge funds are going, "What's next? We're going to now look at Ethereum." Then the same thing with the other institutions.

Michael Novogratz: (24:57)
Then it's going to be decentralized finance, which really is the cool stuff. We're in this process now, of more and more smart people with real capital looking, understanding it. Ari and I aren't crazy, but we're not that much smarter than anybody else, we just got in early, and the same conclusions we make most likely are gonna be made by other people looking at it.

Michael Novogratz: (25:17)
I always thought in mercantile thinks 10 smart guys looking at a set of problems usually come up with the same answers. As we get more and more eyeballs on these solutions for things that don't work, you're going to have more people getting interested in investing.

John Darsie: (25:32)
Right. Ari, just to build on that point from Michael, in terms of the interest you're seeing in the crypto world, is it focused on Bitcoin? Is it now include Ethereum, obviously, which has rallied a lot, even in the last week or so, or do you think people are going to continue to go further down the risk curve and look at alt coins, and other sort of venture opportunities in the digital asset space?

Ari Paul: (25:55)
They're definitely going to move along the curve. What we've seen... Most of the money coming into the ecosystem comes into Bitcoin first, and that's always been true. I think we're in the sixth inning of a fairly classic bull cycle, and for the rest of this bull cycle, my prediction is alt coins in general outperform Bitcoin, and it's very similar across any asset class, where after you've had major wealth creation, people move along the risk curve, they want to find that next 10X.

Ari Paul: (26:20)
Bitcoin is up more than 10X since March of last year, nine months up, more than 10X. People see a price tag of $36,000, $37,000, and they say, "Well, it's going to be hard to get another 10X out of that." They look at something like Ethereum, that just in the last 24 hours, actually made an all time high, and they say, "Well, okay, that's a much smaller asset, a few billion dollars going into that and the thing is going to triple." Then they keep moving down the risk curve.

Ari Paul: (26:46)
Basically, new money first goes to Bitcoin. Bitcoin's the safest, the most stable, the easiest to understand. And then as people get into the ecosystem, they learn a little more, they get more comfortable, they look out along the risk curve, and they look also for where they can add active alpha, that alpha for asset selection, alpha through just having other assets to market time.

Ari Paul: (27:05)
I'm in a slightly different seat than Mike, in that we're active managers. We're not pitching gen passive allocation. We're not Grayscale, we're not trying to get people to just put money into Bitcoin. The people we're talking to naturally are interested in the full spectrum of opportunities.

Michael Novogratz: (27:22)
Yeah. Let me clarify, I would say 85% of the new institutional money, 90% of the institutional money that comes into the space this year, is going to come into bitcoin. Be very clear about that. Bitcoin's got a $700 billion market cap. That'll move the market. I actually think Bitcoin, like I said, could close to double from here, it would have been double on the year, from where we started the year. That's a lot of market cap to move, is adding another $700 billion or more. It doesn't take nearly as much money to move Luna Coin, or SushiSwap or YFI, or even Ethereum. Those coins, I think, potentially have more volatility, more upside, also more downside. Bitcoin's been de-risked in a lot of ways.

John Darsie: (28:09)
Yeah, and that's our thesis at Skybridge, Bitcoin is our gateway drug, and for now, it's our exclusive focus, but it's something that, like you said, big institutions are going to look at the bellwether first. I just want to... Ari, if you could elaborate on-

Anthony Scaramucci: (28:23)
You got to say gateway drug, or you're going to get Novogratz all excited when you say that. Gateway drug? That's the best metaphor you can come up with? Keep going.

Michael Novogratz: (28:34)
I'm drinking water out of a sake cup.

Anthony Scaramucci: (28:37)
I know that's vodka hidden in an aquaponic, man. Don't start.

John Darsie: (28:44)
Ari, I want to talk about the thesis behind why Bitcoin has been so strong. There's this macro argument that people are buying into bitcoin, because of money printing and inflation and things like that. But then there's also purely a supply, demand dynamic that exists where there's so much more buying of Bitcoin taking place, and it's a chicken and egg type situation. What do you think is the real biggest [inaudible 00:29:06] behind this massive rally that we've seen over the last several months?

Ari Paul: (29:12)
I would call it billionaire FOMO. The virus, in Q4 in particular, something you could see, it was actually, it's an amazing pattern. If you bought Bitcoin during US business hours, and you sold it during Asia hours, you actually doubled Bitcoin's performance, even though it did a 3X in the quarter. You could see it in the market. It's TWAP, it was time weighted average price scaling in orders largely on Coinbase and other US exchanges.

Ari Paul: (29:39)
These were US institutions and US billionaires establishing large positions through OTC desks. We talked to some of these people, we know it anecdotally, you see sometimes public reports from for example, micro sale or micro strategy. That's what it's been, that was what was driving it, and the psychology was very much these ripples of word of mouth adoption.

Ari Paul: (30:02)
One billionaire is talking to four of his financial buddies, people like Novogratz, and it's yeah, I've now got 10%, 20% of my net worth in it, and I'm super convinced. I think it's going to double this year, it's the best risk adjusted place to have your money. As with all marketing, it's a number of touches. Once you hear that from three of your smartest billionaire friends who you respect, maybe you get converted. We've been seeing that.

Ari Paul: (30:24)
Then what's happened just very recently is finally Asia is getting in the game. That pattern of sell offs during Asia hours, finally stopped about a week ago, there's now a small kimchi premium, which is Bitcoin is trading at a premium in South Korea. This has been the pattern in every crypto bull cycle, by the way, it's basically usually starts off as US more savvy money, smarter money, and then you get US retail and Asia chasing the momentum. We're just now getting into that stage of more retail and Asia driving the rally.

Michael Novogratz: (31:00)
Let me jump in, and chime in here for a second, because I think Ari hit on something that's important, but maybe didn't hit on it as hard as I want to. When you think about what's unique about Bitcoin, it's the first global speculative asset, really, period. We never had an asset as distributed as Bitcoin. But Bitcoin is owned by over 120 million people now. In every village, there's Bitcoiner trying to convince their friends that this is the cool thing.

Michael Novogratz: (31:33)
If you're running Apple, or Tesla, you've got usually one guy out there as the salesman, who's selling this company, and who's telling the story of this company. In Bitcoin, I'm one of 15 people that seem to show up on CNBC, weekly, telling the Bitcoin story. There's podcasts galore, but there's people in every village in the damn world, who are bitcoiners, who feel like it's their job to proselytize, about why.

Michael Novogratz: (32:07)
We have never had an asset that has a retail base in Iran, or retail base in India, retail base in Africa, retail base in Korea, passionate retail basis, all over the world. What we're seeing is this viral effect, this networking effect that's accelerating.

Michael Novogratz: (32:29)
Ari told you about a really important network, The good old billionaire boys club. I was on an early call that a friend of mine set up and we looked around, and I was like, Jesus, there's like 30 of the richest guys I've ever seen on this call. From that call, a lot of them ended up getting involved in the crypto space. Some with us, many not with us.

Michael Novogratz: (32:52)
You have these mini ecosystems, but they're developing everywhere. That's the power of this community and asset, is the power of decentralization. There's not a CEO of Bitcoin. I like to think I am sometimes, but I am absolutely not CEO of Bitcoin. I used to call myself the Forrest Gump of Bitcoin. There isn't a CEO, and there are different people. Michael Saylor has had an amazing effect this year, he's popped up, it's his moment. There's different people at different times that are having influence in different communities.

Michael Novogratz: (33:25)
Michael is doing, I think it's next week, we're participating, a conference for literally 2,000 CFOs and CEOs of companies, to try to convince them to put some of their corporate cash in Bitcoin. Now, he's not going to give it to the majority of them, but he's going to convince some of them. Here's another guy building community. That's happening everywhere in this asset, which is pretty cool.

John Darsie: (33:46)
Are there a lot of still, to use a bad metaphor, again, closeted Bitcoin bulls that haven't come out yet? You have people like Paul Tudor Jones and Stan Druckenmiller and Bill Miller. There was a lot of names that people would say wow, when they realize how invested people are in Bitcoin.

Michael Novogratz: (34:02)
Less than 10% of the people that would be notable names, who have bought it, have bought it publicly, which doesn't make a lot of sense, they should all be public, because it will help drive adoption. But a lot of people revere their privacy. I don't happen to be one of those people. But lots of people. Even in the insurance company, there's one insurance company that's come out and said they bought Bitcoin, but I know of three insurance companies that have.

Michael Novogratz: (34:33)
Listen, one person is a crazy man. He might wear dragon sweatshirts and a funny hat. But by the time you have three or four, it's a movement. We already have a movement in the insurance business, but we just don't know it yet.

John Darsie: (34:47)
Right. Ari, I'm going to play devil's advocate now for a couple of questions here on our video segment, but there's an accusation out there, and I think it's one of the more common and credible accusations, at least at one point it was, that people have dug into the reality of it and there's some skepticism around the accusation. But that Bitcoin has manipulated using Tether and using other stable coins, and really this is a bunch of Bitcoin whales that are trading with each other and helping to manipulate the price higher. What do you say to people who argue that the price of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is manipulated? I'll let you answer it too, Michael.

Ari Paul: (35:24)
Yes, two years ago, most Bitcoin volume was on offshore unregulated exchanges that did play a lot of games that the reported volumes were probably 10X the real volumes. What's happened recently is a couple of these [inaudible 00:35:38] things. The US... Which department was it? BitMEX, which was one of the largest exchanges, the principals were indicted by the US government, and that caused a lot of volume to flow away from BitMEX. Also, BitMEX in Black Thursday, when Bitcoin crashed, they mishandled it, so a lot of money flew to regulated US space, very reputable exchanges. CME futures are now... Mike, what's the daily volume on that now? Do you know on CME?

Michael Novogratz: (36:07)
It's a ton.

Ari Paul: (36:08)
I would say it's $4 billion a day on CME futures now, massive. OKX had some principles arrested in China, and that led similarly to a lot of volume flowing into places like Coinbase. We have price discovery happening to the many billions of dollars a day in Bitcoin on regulated exchanges that are CME futures. I think we trust that those are not manipulated any differently than any other CME future, for example. As for the stable coins, for Tether, Tether is a pool right now of about $26 billion, it's relatively opaque, and it historically was the on ramp for Asia to buy bitcoin.

Ari Paul: (36:45)
A lot of these exchanges to avoid really... Basically, if you're an exchange that touches Fiat, you have massive regulatory hurdles. If you don't touch Fiat, you fall under a much lighter regulatory regime. A lot of the highest volume exchanges chose not to touch Fiat. Well, how do you buy bitcoin on those exchanges then? You need a stable coin.

Ari Paul: (37:03)
Tether was the original stable coin. That was how the highest volume exchanges, if you wanted to get money on, you would first buy Tether. Tether's opaque, because basically, the banks that serve Tether don't really want to be public. One is Deltec, but there's a few that don't, because they're afraid it will just put them in regulatory crosshairs, even if they're not doing anything illegal.

Ari Paul: (37:24)
For example, I had a bank account shut down because I transferred money from that bank to Coinbase. Totally legal transaction. Coinbase is a regulated US entity, the bank shut down my account because they just don't want to deal with compliance around crypto. It's easy to see why a lot of banks would not be public, but they're holding $5 billion of Tether's money.

Ari Paul: (37:43)
I think it is a legitimate concern, in the sense that I can't prove that nothing funny is going on, it's too opaque. With that said, all the criticisms that have been circulated are very weak. Most of it is very easy to explain. For example, people point out that Tether transactions happen in round numbers. They batch, like many entities, they just batch transactions daily. People have pointed out a correlation between Tether printing and Bitcoin rising. Well, of course, it's the on ramp. People give $100 million to Tether, they convert the Tether, they send the Tether to other machines and buy Bitcoin. Of course, you would expect there to be a high correlation. Tether printing is generally bullish, because it's an on ramp that people use to buy Bitcoin.

Ari Paul: (38:24)
My best guess at the moment is that Tether is legitimate. I don't think it's manipulating anything. With that said, it is a systemic risk.

John Darsie: (38:33)
Michael, do you have any reaction to that? Or what are other risks in your mind that are real, and maybe-

Michael Novogratz: (38:39)
I think Ari nailed it, and it would be nice if there was an audit on Tether, there really isn't. We looked at it, to be fair, years ago, they had a partner who wanted to get rid of it at one point because it was dragging down Bitfinex. Bitfinex was a very profitable exchange for them. The thought was, sell it to someone in the US who could then bring the regulators in and make sure it was legit and clean. I was very excited about it, I thought it was a cool business. I wish I'd gotten into the stable coin business. I'm jealous.

Michael Novogratz: (39:15)
Of course, he ended up being pushed out of their ownership group and they kept it. Listen, the guys that own Bitfinex, the guys that own Tether are really crafty, aggressive, cowboy businessmen, who have lived outside the grid in some ways. That doesn't give you great confidence. That said, they have so much to lose by screwing this thing up, that you hope that... Listen, there's been quasi audits done. I remember a guy who was an ex head of the FBI, came in and they hired him to do a quasi audit, and he believed that they had the right backing.

Michael Novogratz: (39:56)
But right now, in some ways, it doesn't matter till it matters. People see tether as a legitimate store of value. What would be really fascinating is if you can create something that then drifts away from being backed, that people just trust anyway, then all of a sudden you've got [inaudible 00:40:14] and then you've made a money printing machine. That's the fear, because no one believes that's the case right now. If they're doing that, man, they're good.

Michael Novogratz: (40:25)
It is the one systemic risk in the system, if there was something that blew up. Look, it's only $25 million, but right now, it still provides a lot of the grace for how all these exchanges work. It would be a real win for places like Coinbase and Kraken, and the more established, the regulated places or US places, it would hit bitcoin price temporarily. But things would then I think, just regroup.

John Darsie: (40:52)
Right. Michael, what are you worried about? You talk about Tether being one of the systemic risks with Bitcoin and crypto, what other risks are you worried about, related to that asset class?

Michael Novogratz: (41:02)
Listen, whenever you're trading at 170 vol... Ethereum options are 190 vol offered last night. Whenever things are moving this fast, people make mistakes, mistakes get really costly. There's a lot of leverage in this Grayscale arbitrage, where people borrow coins, put them on Grayscale, wait six months and then sell them to the retail buyer. There's a tremendous amount of leverage in that space. If there was an ETF announced tomorrow, ETF announced tomorrow, which is not going to happen, but if it was, theoretically, that premium collapses, there are hedge funds and other businesses, that would be shit out of luck.

Michael Novogratz: (41:47)
Again, that's bad for the overall system when somebody notable blows up, it always scares people, what else could happen? Some of that's going to happen, because we're trading at 190 vol, that's just the way the world works. You keep your fingers close to the keyboard, and you keep your radar on. We're in a hyper bull market right now, and it's always hard to ride the bull.

John Darsie: (42:16)
Yep. How about you, Ari, what are you concerned about?

Ari Paul: (42:25)
I have a risk manager background. I always have a long, long list of concerns. I'd say at the moment though, I think Mike and I are in the same page of our analysis of you have money flowing in that is strong hands that are buying for the long term that are looking at dips as opportunities. I agree, I think if Tether were to collapse tomorrow, basically in any hyper vol bull runs, you get big pullbacks, you get 30% pullbacks on the way, and those are always terrifying. Those always happen because of a headline and the headline's usually real, it's usually something actually happens that's scary, you fall 30%, and then everyone remembers, wait, we think this thing's higher in two years, so why wouldn't we be buying the step?

Ari Paul: (43:06)
I would say, Tether is up there. You have a lot of smaller scale risks. In DeFi, for example, there's constant hacks and exploits of the smart contracts. If you're in DeFi, if you own assets, that could be systemically dangerous to Ethereum, if you've had a much larger scale, if you have billion dollars taken out of DeFi, for example.

Ari Paul: (43:27)
Other than that, I don't think there's anything imminent on the regulatory front. But I am a little bit concerned that now we have Democrats controlling Congress. We have seen some legislation that's pretty adverse coming from the AOC crowd. So far, it's fringe, it doesn't look like it has congressional support. But as this bull market plays out, under a Democratic administration, Democratic Congress, I think we're likely to face some onerous regulation that may prove challenging, may create some of those dips that are then a good trading opportunities for people like Mike and I.

Ari Paul: (44:00)
I don't really have existential concerns, currently. I'll say this though, every time crypto has gone up 10X, it becomes much scarier to a new level of sovereign entity. 2013 was, well, Bitcoin is being used on Silk Road, the FBI cares about it being used to buy drugs. Then 2017, it was wow, ICOs are bigger than seatstay financing and traditional finance. Now, the SEC cares. Well, this bull market, we're getting to a scale that central banks care, that saw the Treasury Department's care. I think at least in some parts of the world, we will see more meaningful pushback, and it's hard to predict how that will play out, and I think that's probably at least six months away, it's probably another 100% rally in Bitcoin, first. But at some point, that'll be a risk.

John Darsie: (44:43)
I'm going to ask-

Michael Novogratz: (44:43)
Let me ask one thing. One thing that's driven me crazy is and I wouldn't call myself a progressive or certainly center left, is that the progressive, you have this legislation that Rashida Tlaib put out. Bitcoin and crypto at its core, the reason I got in it is that it's progressive. The banking system has not been progressive, the banking system charges huge fees to people with no money and smaller fees and gives great access to people with money. The way the whole IPO game is played is, the richer you are, the more you make free on the IPO game.

Michael Novogratz: (45:23)
In some ways, that group of politicians have it backwards. I've made it my mission this year, at one point to sit down with AOC and, and some of the other dams and try to help them understand that, we're on their side. I got into this, basically for that reason. It's some way bizarre.

Michael Novogratz: (45:44)
Now, listen, part of it is, it would help if there was more diversity in crypto, both gender diversity and racial diversity, and I'm gonna try to do my own side of it there. Crypto felt like it's a bros club. If you looked at my Twitter, it was 85% male. That needs to change the setting, to win over some of the progressives, but also just it needs to change because if you really want to rebuild things in a more equitable way, you can't just have white males as the only guys participating, at least within the US context.

John Darsie: (46:20)
Yeah. It's interesting, you're starting to see some athletes become aware of crypto and there's a couple, Russell Okung, who is a left tackle for the Carolina Panthers getting paid in Bitcoin. Spencer Dinwiddie is trying to tokenize himself, he's a guard for the Brooklyn Nets. It is exciting to see a broader coalition of people getting into the space.

John Darsie: (46:39)
The final question I want to ask you both about is central bank digital currency. We had Marty Chavez, former Goldman CTO and Chief Information Officer on here, talking very expansively about the potential benefits of central bank digital currencies. Could you explain that to our audience, who's less familiar? Mike, I'll go with you first, and what does that mean, if we do get central bank digital currencies, what does it mean for Bitcoin, which is a truly distributed, globalist digital currency?

Michael Novogratz: (47:07)
A central bank digital currency basically is just a digital rendition of the dollar, or the Euro, or what's coming first is the Chinese Renminbi. How those systems are set up, can vary immensely. If you're in China, it's going to be completely centralized, the Chinese are going to control the blockchain, which means they're going to control and understand every bit of data. It helps them with understanding the macro, real time data in their country, but it also is an unbelievable invasion of privacy, how every penny is spent.

Michael Novogratz: (47:45)
If you want to control your population, a good way to control them is understanding where their money goes. There are other systems. What's unique about blockchain is it's distributed, no one owns the database, but everybody shares it. A lot of the ones that in the West are being built on the Ethereum blockchain, which is decentralized. You can have, in a perfect world, just a much more efficient payment system without giving up all your privacy.

Michael Novogratz: (48:17)
Right now, for me to send you money, I have Venmo, I can Venmo you money up to 1,500 bucks, I think it's the limit. That's kind of like a crypto, but it's a centralized, closed system, I can't send Venmo overseas, I can't send you $100,000 on Venmo or $10,000, on Venmo. Venmo will be replaced, most likely by a system and it might be on the Facebook system, setting their version of a dollar stable coin back and forth to people. But it's crazy that I can send you a photo of me, dressed in a wig with high heels on, and I can set up on one of 19 different apps, with privacy, with anything I want, but I can't send you $10 if you're living in Europe. That's all going to change.

John Darsie: (49:06)
Ari, can you talk about your views on the DeFi movement and where that's going?

Ari Paul: (49:11)
Yeah. central bank digital currencies are going to conquer the world by storm, because they're attracted to basically everyone and everything. The IRS loves it because you get perfect tax compliance, Treasury Department loves it because you get real time economic information. FBI loves it, for obvious reasons. I think it very clearly dramatically increases demand for decentralized alternatives. Because if I tell you that everything that you do with Fiat is now going to be completely transparent to your government, as well as we now know foreign governments. We know that the SolarWinds hack, basically anything you give to the US government, you have to assume is public, is going to be on the dark net for anyone to buy.

Ari Paul: (49:48)
If I tell you that, all of your financial transactions you do with Fiat are going to be completely transparent to basically anyone who wants it. Isn't your next step to say, oh, man, what else can I do? What's the alternative to that?

Ari Paul: (50:02)
We're going to see central bank digital currencies rolled out worldwide, and I think it's going to largely replace the current system, and simultaneously, we're going to see a huge growth in demand for decentralized alternatives. I think that will be both Bitcoin, possibly privacy coins, coins that are optimized around maintaining privacy, as well as on the more complex financial transaction side. That's where DeFi comes in.

Ari Paul: (50:26)
Just like people want financial privacy on their monetary moves, they also want that on their stock trades, they also want that on the real estate transactions, and DeFi is more efficient, removes a lot of middlemen. As Mike said, it's much more egalitarian. You don't have the gatekeepers. You don't have the punitive fees to get paid that the crazy bank overdraft games banks play with their low income customers. All of that gets removed. You have total transparency and you have privacy.

Ari Paul: (50:57)
The rollout of central bank digital currencies is, I think, the catalyst that makes cryptocurrency mainstream as currency.

Michael Novogratz: (51:03)
Yep. I agree with Ari.

John Darsie: (51:06)
China had that aha moment where they went from thinking about banning cryptocurrency, thinking, wow, this could actually be a really powerful tool for us to achieve our goals, as you mentioned, Mike, in authoritarian ways.

Michael Novogratz: (51:19)
[crosstalk 00:51:19] This is where the big debate has to happen, because crypto in a centralized fashion is a dystopian nightmare. Think about it, everyone's expanding data, which China already has. Everything that's spent on; Alipay, or [inaudible 00:51:39] goes to a central clearing house. I know you're pregnant before you know you're pregnant by what you're shopping for. I know, you're gay, I know whatever I want to know, I can know, by your shopping patterns.

Michael Novogratz: (51:52)
If I decide I don't like gay people like the president of Brazil, who's been very vocal about his anti-gay stance. In a centralized digital cryptocurrency, you can hit a button and just make the money go away, it's programmable money. It's a really dangerous line on where that privacy, where that data gets held, who holds it, how long it lasts.

Michael Novogratz: (52:19)
Literally, the data collected from the central bank digital currencies, that's really where the smart regulation and thought process has to come on how these things get set up, or we're headed to a world that I don't want to be a part of.

Ari Paul: (52:31)
That's so key, I want to emphasize it, that it's not just transparency, but it's control. China, with a... Currently, if basically any government wants to financially censor citizens, they have to do it manually. It's like, let's create a list, let's give that list to different banks [inaudible 00:52:47] But imagine if an algorithm could say, you posted something unpatriotic to social media, all of your assets are frozen, and it's done algorithmically, and you have no recourse and it was effortless for some bureaucrat in China to save 10 million people, all of their assets are frozen.

Ari Paul: (53:04)
That's the world we're headed to, in at least many parts of the world, and I think very clear how that's going to increase demand for alternatives.

John Darsie: (53:11)
Right. I think it's one reason why Bitcoin continues to be the big winner, Bitcoin and other truly distributed global digital currencies continue to be the big winner in this movement. Thank you so much, Michael Novogratz from Galaxy Digital, and Ari Paul from BlockTower, two of the leading players in the space. Thank you so much for joining us on SALT Talks. We look to have you both with us at future SALT conferences in person, which I know Mike has been to many times and a great contributor to SALT, and we hope to have you, Ari, as well.

Michael Novogratz: (53:41)
Ari, good seeing you.

Ari Paul: (53:41)
Thanks for the invitation.

Michael Novogratz: (53:43)
Be well. Thanks, guys.

John Darsie: (53:44)
Thanks, Mike, and thank you to everybody who tuned in to today's SALT Talk, the latest in our series on digital assets and cryptocurrency. We look forward to having very regular conversations about these topics, which I think are on the vanguard of the type of innovation that we'd like to cover here on SALT Talks. But just a reminder, if you missed any of this talk, or you want to watch any of our previous talks with people like Michael Saylor who was referenced earlier, in this SALT Talk, you can go to salt.org\talks\archive, and view our entire archive of previous episodes of SALT Talks.

John Darsie: (54:15)
You can sign up for all of our future webinars at salt.org\talks. Please spread the word about SALT Talks. We love growing our community and we've gotten a great chance to do it digitally. During the pandemic, we had to cancel our conferences, but these SALT Talks have allowed us to build a global audience. We've been very excited about that. So, please spread the word, and please follow us on social media. We're on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram.

John Darsie: (54:39)
On behalf of the entire SALT team, this is John Darsie, signing off for today from SALT Talks. We'll see you back here again tomorrow.

Michael Saylor: The Importance of Bitcoin | SALT Talks #141

“If God designed gold with no imperfections, he would’ve created Bitcoin.”

Michael Saylor is a technologist, entrepreneur, business executive, philanthropist, and best-selling author. He currently serves as Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Office of MicroStrategy, Inc.

Companies like Google, Amazon, Facebook and Apple represent the big winners in the technology space. The last ten years were marked by investments in these giants. Now, it is harder to see such high returns through retail investing. With a massive expansion of the money supply, the biggest opportunity now lies with Bitcoin. Bitcoin acts as a digital gold guarding against inflation caused by government stimulus. “If you’re going to make money the 21st century way, you’ve got to do it virtually… Bitcoin has the potential to be digital gold… thermodynamically perfect.”

Bitcoin is now moving mainstream and major financial institutions are getting on board. These companies are putting Bitcoin on their balance sheet as an institutional safe-haven asset. This growth in adoption will drive an exponential increase in value. “Bitcoin is the one asset that as the price goes up, it becomes more attractive to an investor.”

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Michael Saylor

Chairman of the Board & Chief Executive Officer

MicroStrategy

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darsie: (00:07)
Hello Everyone. And welcome back to SALT Talk's. My name is John Darsie. I'm the managing director of SALT, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. SALT Talk's are a digital interview series with leading investors, creators and thinkers. And our goal on SALT Talk's is the same as our goal at our global conference series. The SALT Conference, which is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And there's no bigger idea in our view right now at SkyBridge, that's shaping the future, than the digital asset space, the decentralized finance movement, and in particular Bitcoin. So we're thrilled to welcome the great Michael Saylor back for his second appearance on SALT Talk. He's a man who needs no introduction, especially to those who have been following the Bitcoin movement over the last year or so, but I'll read you a little bit of his background anyway.

John Darsie: (01:07)
Michael Saylor is a technologist, an entrepreneur, a business executive, a philanthropist as well as being a bestselling author. He currently serves as the chairman of the board of directors and the chief executive officer at MicroStrategy. Since co-founding the company at the age of 24, Michael has built MicroStrategy into a global leader in business intelligence, mobile software and cloud-based services. In 2012, he authored a great book called The Mobile Wave, how mobile intelligence will change everything, which earned a spot on the New York times bestsellers list. Michael attended MIT receiving an SB in aeronautics and astronautics and an SB in science technology and society. And again, as you may know, he has recently become a whale in the crypto space. He initially allocated a $425 million, I believe was his initial investment into Bitcoin from the corporate treasury balance sheet of MicroStrategy.

John Darsie: (02:05)
He subsequently issued more convertible bonds and bought more Bitcoin. And I believe his stack now numbers in the multiple billions in terms of his Bitcoin ownership. Hosting today's Talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge capital, a global alternative investment firm, SkyBridge, as you may have seen as well recently invested several hundred million dollars into Bitcoin, as well as launching a Bitcoin fund to provide a direct play for investors to gain pure access to Bitcoin. Anthony is also the chairman of SALT and with no further ado, I'll turn it over to Anthony for round two with Michael Saylor.

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:41)
Michael, thanks again for joining us. It's been quite a journey for us, as I know it's been for you. And you go from Bitcoin skeptic to Bitcoin believer and then there's this seismic Eureka moment where all of a sudden, you to yourself, "Wait a minute. I understand what this is now. I understand why I need to be invested and why I'm at the front of a early stage project. I'm at the frontier of something." Can you take us through that Odyssey that you went through from Bitcoin skeptic to Bitcoin believer, but then also putting your money where your mouth is?

Michael Saylor: (03:23)
Well, I think over the last decade we had progressive monetary expansion and the level of 5% a year which was significant to people that were sensitive to it. But for people in the tech industry or people that were busy with some other part of their life, we could live with 5% monetary expansion and still go about our jobs. And so I was a big tech enthusiasts and I was really, really occupied by my business until we got to 2020. And that context, everything I knew about Bitcoin for the first decade was like noise. Like I know it's something interesting and there's some people that care a lot about it, but it's noise. And I'm really more concerned about what the next iPhone is going to be or what Facebook is going to do, or the implications of Amazon rolling over 15,000 retail companies.

Michael Saylor: (04:22)
And those were all very exciting stories for a decade. And then I think we got the 2020, we got the K-Shaped recovery main street locked down wall street had a V-shaped recovery. The monetary expansion jumped from 5% to 20 or 25%. Now you couldn't ignore the fact that the money supply was expanding. Now, all of the interesting stories of the last decade, the Amazon story is over. We know how that ends, right? They win the Google story, the Apple story, the Facebook story, they're all over. We know how they end, right? It's pretty clear. They're going to go on to another stage, but it's not a technology play. Now it becomes about politics and society. And so now we all have a problem in 2020, the problem is the money supplies expanding. And then you realize if you're trying to make money doing it the 20th century way, it's just really hard.

Michael Saylor: (05:23)
And if you're trying to make money, the 21st century way, you got to do it virtually the virtual wave hit us. And so I would say, I became really interested in Bitcoin the second quarter of this year. And I realized that this had the potential to be digital gold. It felt like digital gold that no institutions had quite embraced, but a lot of early adopters had embraced. And everybody wants in a expansionary economy where the money supply is expanding. You all want sound money. And previous sound money for 5,000 years was gold, mostly sound expanding to 3% a year. Bitcoin is digital gold thermodynamically, perfectly sound money in theory, on a sheet of paper of God designed gold with no imperfections, he would've designed Bitcoin. So it's like, well, this is too good to be true. You just got to figure out, is going to be hacked? Is it going to be banned? Is anybody else going to buy into it?

Michael Saylor: (06:23)
What's the problem because it looks perfect. And we got involved not because it was elective. If I had a 5% problem each year, I could have ignored it. But when it became a 20% problem, I couldn't ignore it. We were forced, after March of 2020 to embrace the issue. So we got into it and we embraced it, not because we thought Bitcoin was risk-free. Bitcoin was nine, $10,000 a coin. There's a lot of controversy in April, May, June, even July, August, but we figured the certainty of losing half your purchasing power over four years was enough compensation to justify taking the risk of doing something new, right? A guarantee, and that's why we got into it the next six months.

Michael Saylor: (07:19)
You're going to see this story, which is maybe it's digital gold. Maybe the institutions need this thing to, well, I guess some needed to more of them need it. And then it goes to 20,000, 30,000 and 40,000. And I think as we enter 2021, people's perception is rotated to, I guess it is digital gold, and it's the newest institutional Safe-haven asset. And by the way, it looks to me like monetary expansion is continuing. Everybody's got an asset inflation problem. It's top of mind for every investor, what are we going to do about it? And so that's how we kick off the year as I speak to you.

Anthony Scaramucci: (08:05)
I was with a group of people, we've obviously launched our fund in good part, thanks to your help and your intellectual gravitas and helping us get around to this. My Eureka moment alongside of yours was understanding something you said last time we were together about it being a digital network, a digital platform for money, similar to an Amazon for retail, or say a Google for search and advertising or Facebook for social networking. But I was with what I would call the rat poison crew. It was a group of men and women, but mostly men in their seventies and eighties that were buying into the Warren Buffet idea that Bitcoin is rat poison.

Anthony Scaramucci: (08:50)
Now, Bill Miller said, "Well, it may be rat poison, but the rat might Fiat currency." So Bill is a believer like you and I but one thing that keeps coming up repetitively, Michael, I have my take, but I really want to hear yours is what the hell is it? It's just encrypted code, there's 21 million of them. Okay. So I get the scarcity, but why would that be worth anything? If all it is a code in the ether, and this is from the rat poison crew. And so your response to that would be, how did you get over that hurdle?

Michael Saylor: (09:29)
It's digital gold. Anybody could design code for digital gold, but is digital gold on the dominant monetary network in the world. So if I had an idea for Twitter and I thought I was going to launch a speech network, anybody could copy it. But at the point that everybody in our joined Twitter and they all looked at Twitter for half an hour, an hour a day, you got 400 million people pouring 400 million hours of bandwidth per day into Twitter. Then it's not the software anymore. Then it's a digital speech network. It's the dominant digital speech network for public speech. I think in the last decade you saw dominant networks form for speech on Twitter. You saw dominant video network on YouTube. You saw dominant mobile network for Apple. You saw dominant social network. You saw dominant retail network in Amazon. Each of these things gathered the commitment of a billion people and Warren buffet talks about brand, Warren Buffett would understand Coke.

Michael Saylor: (10:41)
The power of the brand of Coca Cola is. If I obliterated every Coca-Cola plant and every bottle of Coke everywhere on earth, I couldn't get it out of the minds of seven billion people, seven billion people know that what a Coca-Cola is. And so the brand of having that idea stuck in the minds of billions of people is very powerful. So Bitcoin is the brand of digital gold stuck in the minds of a billion people, but more importantly, it's gathered hundreds of billions and now getting close to what is it? $700 billion worth of monetary energy. As that energy flows on that network, that's an incredible dominant network effect. And on the other side of the network with the minors, you have billions and billions of dollars invested in special purpose hardware, mining rigs, decentralized everywhere in the world that has no purpose other than to run the digital gold network that is Bitcoin.

Michael Saylor: (11:51)
And so you have massive hundreds of billions, of dollars of monetary energy sunk onto a monetary network that is the brand. And so in that regard, it has the same dominant inertial effect that the Twitter or Facebook or YouTube or Google have in order to replace it with a copy of the code, you have to displace the $700 billion of monetary energy. But then again, what would be the motive for the $700 billion to move to Bitcoin version 2? I mean, there really isn't one, so it takes on a life of its own. And as the price goes up, this is not just driven by Metcalfe's laws. Metcalfe's law says that the power of the network is the square of the number of people, the number of nodes on the network. That would be true if everybody on earth had the same amount of money, if everybody had $10, then Metcalfe's law would be the rule.

Michael Saylor: (13:01)
But this is driven by Newtonian laws of physics that is some people have a billion dollars, some people have $10 billion. So if people weighed 10 billion pounds or a trillion pounds, they'd have a gravitational pull that is more than the person that weighs a hundred pounds. And so the laws of gravity are flowing on this network. And as the price goes up, it's kind of like all the mass is collapsing into a planetary body. The gravitational attraction is increasing therefore everything that comes in the orbit of the planetary body is being sucked into the planet and it's getting stronger and stronger as that price goes up. Bitcoin is the one asset that as its price goes up, it is more attractive to investors, which is the opposite of a stock price. Whereas the price goes up, it looks more risky and less attractive to an investor. And it's a very subtle impact of a monetary network that's worth understanding and dwelling on.

Anthony Scaramucci: (14:10)
Well, it's interesting because it'd people talking to me about it. I'm more comfortable with Bitcoin at 35000, 40,000 a coin than it was in 2014 at $400 a coin because it didn't hit that escape velocity point that you're describing. It didn't get the full embrace, a bed network and the capitalization. And then of course, we've got places to store this now beyond the USB, whether it's a place like a fidelity digital assets or other homes for Bitcoin. So you know, it's now, in my opinion, gotten to that escape velocity akin to Twitter and Google, but you said something that has never left me, I'm going to repeat or hopefully paraphrase what you've said. You said the first Bitcoin is the hardest one to buy. Once you own it, you realize that you don't own enough. Do you remember saying that I want you to take us through that thought pattern?

Michael Saylor: (15:11)
Well, I mean, first you have to a problem. If you embrace the idea, you have a store of value problem because of a macro economic sensitivity that leads you on a quest for what's your store of value. Then you realize that the theoretical best answer is a crypto asset network. That's decentralized that duplicates gold that is deflationary, and that is Bitcoin. Then you have to get over all of your concerns about forking and hacking and banning. And is it legal? And what's the tax treatment and the like, once you get past all those and you decide, "Yeah, Bitcoin is digital gold. It is the best safe Haven assets for the 21st century." Then the issue is, "Well, how do I buy it?" You can't buy it from traditional banks and wirehouses. You can pick up the phone and buy a hundred million dollars worth of gold ETF in 10 seconds, 30 seconds, but buying a hundred million dollars worth of a Bitcoin ETF while there is none.

Michael Saylor: (16:20)
I hear rumors people say, well, there are a lot of banks wherever you try to buy, like GBTC or something. They either make you sign a disclaimer, they make you sign a form, or they tell you they won't sell it to you. So there's a lot of people, I guess what? 90, as we enter the year 2021, you might know better than me, but I'm guessing 95% to 99% of investors. They don't have an easy on-ramp to buy this, it's a struggle for them. So you have to actually go through a search and look for an institutional grade brokerage and you either got to find a fund you trust, and you either buy into it as a fund, or you got to decide, you're going to find an exchange you trust, and you bind the underlying asset. And there are pros and cons to either of those.

Michael Saylor: (17:17)
Once you find that if you're going to buy the underlying asset, you've got to work through the issue of custody and who do I trust and will I self custody? And will I Multisig self custody with the 24 phrase seed key or will I use an institutional grade custodian. And of course that is to a certain extent, the beauty of Bitcoin is the crypto and our kids could literally buy a hundred million dollars, a Bitcoin, put it on a hardware wallet or memorize it in their head and walk around with it. That's one extreme. And that keeps everybody honest because knowing that you could take custody of this stuff means that if you're a bank or a custodian, you can't abuse your customer. No one's going to take delivery of a hundred million dollars of gold and carry that around in their head.

Michael Saylor: (18:10)
So it's a nice theoretical benefit. But as a practical matter, 99% of the people don't want to self custody, a hundred million dollars worth of this stuff. They don't trust themselves as much as they trusted institution. So that means they have to go through this exercise of, do I buy it and custody it with an institution, or do I buy a fund, right? And a fund kind of solves the problem because I don't have to trade it. I don't have to buy it. I don't have to custody it. I don't have to worry about all these headaches. I just wire my money to a fund. They buy it for me, and then I get the economic interest in it. One way or the other, I think it probably took me four weeks of screaming and begging and pleading to get through the AML KYC paperwork process with my first custodian and broker. And it took me another four weeks, so it took me eight weeks for the next one. And I won't talk about who it is because it doesn't really matter, it's a four to eight week journey.

Anthony Scaramucci: (19:16)
Right.

Michael Saylor: (19:17)
And it's getting easier now, but my thought throughout the entire process was, "Wow, God designed gold in cyberspace. And that's exactly what I need. I need digital perfect gold in cyberspace." And then I thought, "Gee, it's really hard to buy this stuff." And I was all right, and then I thought, this is great because it's so hard to buy this stuff. It must be undervalued because everybody else that comes behind me is going to pay more for this. So I'm just going to go ahead and rush through, go through, jump through the hoops, get the accounts and I'm going to buy this stuff.

Michael Saylor: (19:57)
And I remember I was buying it when it was like $9,400 a coin. And was thinking, "Oh, I got to finish buying everything. I'm going to buy because when I wake up tomorrow morning, maybe other intelligent investors are going to realize that this is God's gift to the investor in the year 2020, and they're all going to buy it. They're going to double the price." And I really literally, I went to bed with anxiety, worried that when I woke up the price was going to shoot through the roof because people were going to realize that this is the perfect safe haven engineered store of value. And when they did, they were all going to buy it. And luckily I had a bit of time, but you know, the truth is once people started to realize it happened pretty fast, right?

Anthony Scaramucci: (20:47)
Yeah.

Michael Saylor: (20:48)
They started figuring it out.

Anthony Scaramucci: (20:49)
Yeah, it's happening. And obviously we both think we're at the exponential front of a frontiers clearly, if it gets to be the market capitalization of gold, the opportunities here, despite the volatility everyone will look quite precious if we're correct in our assessment of that. The regulators and particularly the bank of the ECB, the European Central Bank, Christine Lagarde about a day ago, made some comments. Uh, she basically said that quote unquote, "Funny business and some interesting and totally reprehensible money laundering activity has taken place with Bitcoin."

Anthony Scaramucci: (21:33)
The federal reserve, the treasury department, Fiat currency producers for many obvious reasons. Michael do not like Bitcoin. And so obviously Mike Novogratz responded and said, "Well, the banks have paid more in fines, a hundred plus billion dollars of fines in the last decade than anything that's happened on the Bitcoin network." But what's your reaction to regulators resistance, the speed bumps that could be ahead of Bitcoin related to the old guard, if you will, or the old monetary system and its regulators rejecting what would you and I would think of as a more perfect monetary system?

Michael Saylor: (22:12)
I think everybody should calm down and not overreact to this. I think that in the crypto community there's a lot of ideologues, I lovably refer this crypto anarchist. There are libertarians and they're sure they don't like inflation, but they don't really like taxation much either. And the idea that they don't like regulation and they're ready for, if all banks disappeared and all governments disappeared, they're ready for that too and they'd be fine with that. I actually think, and I've seen him sift through you know, the media overreacts to this. I think some of the critics over reacted this, I've seen him sift through like the writings of one politician and say, like eight years ago for like one minute and in a hearing, they said three sentences that looked kind of negative toward Bitcoin and we hate them.

Michael Saylor: (23:26)
Well, my reaction to this is like everybody's buying Bitcoin on regulated exchanges, you know what it's like to get a New York regulated license to sell Bitcoin. They all have to comply with KYC. They all have to comply with AML, anti-money laundering regulations, Know Your Customer regulations. And when she says, well, we're concerned about it from a money laundering point of view, the implication is you're going to see large banks and brokerages that are already complying with AML and KYC regulations that will continue to comply with those things. And all of the money that's currently sitting in Apple stock and Amazon and sovereign debt and cash accounts and real estate indexes that is subject to AML and KYC regulations will continue to be subject to it. And it's going to float into some digital gold and should the central regulators decide that banks have to comply with AML and KYC regulations with regard to a crypto asset in the same way that they would comply with those with regard to a stock asset, a real estate asset, a bond asset, or a commodity asset?

Michael Saylor: (24:48)
I don't think it's earth shattering. I don't think it's going to be negative for the industry. In fact, I think it's the opposite, which is for example, until we saw exchanges like Fidelity, like Coinbase get proper licenses from US regulators, neither you nor I would be buying Bitcoin. None of the institutions are buying Bitcoin through unregulated exchanges when a regulator says we should make sure it's properly regulated, I think that people can overreact to that. I think that every bank in the world holding all the money well, all the money in the United States is in regulated brokerages and exchanges. And it's just fine. And I don't think Bitcoin needs to be unregulated to be successful.

Michael Saylor: (25:47)
I think Bitcoin just needs to be better than gold to be successful, right? If you pick up the phone and called your bank and said, I want you to ship a hundred million dollars worth of gold on a pallet to a dark private wallet in Sub-Saharan Africa. And I want you to do it in the next 30 minutes and they'll report it to the government. I don't think that would be happening either, right? So I think people are very sensitive and they don't need to be, I think it's all going to work itself out just fine. And to the extent that we have regulated entities that are dealing in Bitcoin, I think it's just going to accelerate the stampede of institutional money into Bitcoin.

Anthony Scaramucci: (26:34)
Well, I think you make a brilliant case of Anchorage Digital Bank was recently approved as the first federally regulated digital asset bank. Michael, what do you think the impact of that news is?

Michael Saylor: (26:48)
I think it's going to be catalytic to other banks. I think what's going on right now is every bank, all of the major banks that don't handle Bitcoin they're, they won't let you buy it. They don't have a fund. They don't have an on-ramp. They don't have a custody relationship. I think they're all looking at this saying, "We're falling behind." They're going to be massive outflows of capital from traditional banks into crypto banks and Bitcoin friendly banks. It's already happening. It's going to accelerate. It's going to get to the CEO level of all the major banks on wall street. They probably got committees looking at this right now. They'll move at a institutional speed and some will move faster than others, but the writing is on the wall. And these are kind of more warning shots and sparks that tell you the world is changing. And people that want to keep up they're going to have to change with it.

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:59)
Well, I know Gary Gensler pretty well. It's being reported that he's the new SEC chairman. He taught a course on the blockchain at MIT, your Alma mater. Do you know Gary whether you do or you don't, but what is your regulatory outlook in the United States coming from the SEC? Do you have a view there one way or the other?

Michael Saylor: (28:25)
I don't know him. So I suppose his appointment is auspicious for Bitcoin in general. I'm a big fan of MIT professors. I did my thesis at the MIT School of Management so we have that relationship. I'm a big supporter of MITs DCI, Digital Currency Initiative and their security initiatives and they think highly of him so those are all good. My view on regulation, the most important thing could be boiled down to one sentence. Bitcoin is deemed as property by the SEC period, that's the single most important understanding. Bitcoin is property by the SEC, the IRS deems it as property. If you understand how it's going to be taxed, long-term, short-term capital gains. If you understand how it's going to be regulated in this particular case, being property versus security is a very bright line.

Michael Saylor: (29:36)
And it means that it is not regulated right per the securities laws. I think those two things are critical and by the designation of property by the IRS means Bitcoin is not going to be a day-to-day currency in a medium of exchange. It makes no sense to do a million transactions a day with something that generates a million capital gains tax bills. You know, it'd break every accounting system. It would break every taxes system. So, that decision by the IRS was critical. And the decision by the SEC to make it property means that it is appropriate to serve as a thermodynamically sound money or thermodynamically sound monetary index, an asset class. If it was a security, it would not be an asset class, it couldn't be.

Michael Saylor: (30:32)
But with Bitcoin as property, there's no reason why it shouldn't take its place next to the Dow, the S&P 500, the NASDAQ and other monetary indexes as an asset class. It transcends the limitations of a company or corporate security and that is the single most important thing that we could have on our mind, right? It's the thing that allows a senator to educate Congress on Bitcoin. That's the thing that allows you to have a congressional caucus that supports Bitcoin. It's the thing that allows someone in media to have an opinion on it. You can't imagine a Senator good at getting elected and saying, "I really think that XX stock is a better store value than the dollar." And I'm going to explain to Congress why the stock is a better store value than the dollar, right?

Michael Saylor: (31:30)
You could never say that because that's a security and it's a thousand times less powerful. And ultimately, by the way, the designation of Bitcoin as property while they're silent on the next 6,000 cryptos is incredibly important, right? One of the reasons Bitcoin has a network effect is because for you to actually have a digital, safe haven asset, it needs to be global property. It can't be a global security. There's no way that any company or any publicly traded company, no matter how big and powerful will ever have the same gravitas and the same prospects as Bitcoin as digital property. And it's always going to be a question looming over every other crypto, right? Like you can see the challenges of Ripple, right? If another crypto is deemed as a security, it completely is devastating to its prospects as the base layer of a monitoring network. And that's really important for investors.

Anthony Scaramucci: (32:39)
I think that is the genius of the design. Are you worried that the Satoshi Nakamoto or the group that created Bitcoin, or if there is this, a Satoshi is sitting on a tremendous amount of coins that could potentially flood the market? Is that something that you worry about that comes up in a lot of question and answer sessions with me?

Michael Saylor: (33:02)
No, I'm not worried. I think that Bitcoin is an ideally designed monetary network with a lot of rational incentives, right? And first of all, I don't think Satoshi is coming back ever. I don't think we're going to hear anything from a Satoshi for the rest of our lifetime. But second, there's a lot of FID and the crypto industry. And a lot of times it comes from other crypto assets, other digital assets where people are just throwing this out maybe Satoshi will dump, people will actually post on Twitter that maybe I'm going to dump all of my crypto and tank the market. And I read, I think, who are these people? Like you think Jeff Bezos is going to dump all of his Amazon to destroy the Amazon stock and whoever did an irrational thing just to like spite someone.

Michael Saylor: (34:07)
I think there's a lot of that, that goes around and you see your fair share of Satoshi will come back and destroy the market. You know, Dr. Evil will get a quantum computer and destroy the market. Someone's going to print a trillion dollars of Tether and destroy the market. And none of these things make any sense to me, but one of the dynamics is, in an unregulated environment, people seem to think they can get away with injecting those rumors. And so you get a lot more of those rumors get injected. I just think it's irrelevant, barbaric. Let me make one more point. You could sell a billion dollars worth of Bitcoin over the course of a week without moving the market.

Anthony Scaramucci: (34:54)
Yeah. It's deeply liquid. So yeah, we've got a few more moments with you. I'm going to turn it over to the millennial who thinks he has better hair than me, Michael, which he obviously doesn't just take a look. You can see that he doesn't have better hair than me. of what we're going to turn it over to John Dorsey to take some of these outside questions that we've got coming in. Go ahead, John.

John Darsie: (35:15)
All right. The big difference between your and my hair is that I didn't put shoe polish in mine this morning, so.

Anthony Scaramucci: (35:21)
Well, someday you will. Okay. So don't be, so self-righteous about it.

John Darsie: (35:24)
Ouch!

Anthony Scaramucci: (35:26)
We'll see what you look like when you're 150 years old, like me. Yeah. So it'd be, but go ahead, fire away.

John Darsie: (35:32)
And Michael, it's great to have you back on SALT Talk's. So we get a lot of questions about your decision and strategy to invest your corporate balance sheet into Bitcoin, Square did the same thing. Have you talked, without naming the companies, have you talked to other corporate treasurers who have looked at what you've done and said, "Wow, could you show me the playbook to how you got that done?"

Michael Saylor: (35:52)
I think entrance from companies, ever since we came out publicly and started talking in like September, I've had nonstop set of conversations with corporations and executives and large investors on this subject. And I think interest keeps building. And I've noticed that it built in September and October for a bit, and then it ramped up in December and now it's ramped up much more in January. I say tongue-in-cheek to Anthony, and honestly, as the price goes up, the asset becomes more attractive and the risk goes away. I think I'll say one more point on that, John. I think it's becoming increasingly clear to people that if you're a company carrying cash on your balance sheet, it's a liability. And if Bitcoin is an asset and to be clear by that, I mean, cash instruments, sovereign debt, anything that's cash or cash like it's not going to appreciate in purchasing power by 15% per year.

Michael Saylor: (37:05)
So if you expect a 15% asset inflation rate, then none of these cash like instruments will keep up. And you got to assume that over 10 years, you're going to lose 75% of your purchasing power. So a hundred billion dollars in cash is going to be $75 billion of shareholder value destroyed with a conventional Fiat based treasury strategy. On the other hand, if you convert that cash into Bitcoin, Bitcoin is, we debate, is it going up 15% a year or 100%? You know, when we had the three-day crash of this week and everybody declared Bitcoin dead, I pointed out facetiously, well, all that proves is that Bitcoin is not going to go up and an annualized rate of 1500% per year for more than one month at a time, right?

Michael Saylor: (38:01)
It was going up at 15X per year for that month. So it's clear, it's appreciating versus cash and whether it's appreciating a 10%, 20%, 50%, 100, 200, 300 it doesn't really matter because the number is positive and the number is likely going to beat the cost of capital. So I think the trend you're going to see this year is you're going to see more and more corporate cash rotate into Bitcoin. And that's...

John Darsie: (38:37)
An interesting comment that I see some from some crypto influencers on social media, is that, you think about Bitcoin, not as a currency. You can think about it sort of as an asset, but really it's a savings account. It's a way for you to park your cash in an asset or a commodity that has a little bit more long-term bullish prospects than something like the US dollar, which macro policies are pushing down upon. I want to talk about this virtual conference you have coming up February 3rd and 4th, you're hosting a virtual conference called Bitcoin for corporations to build on what you were talking about before. Why did you decide to host this event and what type of interest are you seeing in people that are looking to learn more?

Michael Saylor: (39:20)
You know, we have thousands of corporate customers and ever since we announced our Bitcoin strategy, we've had unsolicited people asking us, how do you do this? And they've got issues. Tell us about the legal issues. Tell us about the accounting issues. Tell us how we buy this stuff. How do we store it safely? And after getting so many requests, we decided we should as host a conference, which will be an accelerated two day crash course. And how corporations can plug their balance sheet or their P&L into Bitcoin. You know, Bitcoin's a monitoring network, so you can grow your company with it like Square and PayPal are obviously doing that. But I mean, so as SkyBridge, right? You can offer funds, you can offer mobile apps. You can offer insurance policies, you can build indexes. So one thing you can do is grow your company and improve your products and services.

Michael Saylor: (40:16)
The other thing you can do is plug your treasury into it and rotate cash which is a liability into Bitcoin as an asset. And that's a way to either create or preserve shareholder value. I don't think it was on the top of people's minds in February of 2020 and March of 2020, the world changed then we all sorted through this issue. Now, as we look at February, 2021, every corporation on earth is starting to be sensitive to this store of value problem. Their cash is a shareholder liability, not a shareholder asset. They've got a fiduciary challenge, but it's a scary new thing. So we need to get some education. And Bitcoin for corporations is a quick, easy way for people to get educated. You know, we've curated a bunch of content. We're going to put all of our proprietary content into the public domain and give it away to people that show up to the conference and that's million dollars plus millions of dollars of legal accounting, due diligence, jumping through hoops, took us two months to do it all.

Michael Saylor: (41:30)
And we figured it's stack thousands of pages. You ever see a 82 page board memo to explain the store of value due diligence, search and breakdown, silver versus gold versus real estate versus bond and exit versus stock indexes versus every crypto versus Bitcoin. And in such a fashion that everyone could get comfortable they considered the risks. That's the kind of memo that maybe you don't want to have your lawyer rate at $500 an hour or a thousand dollars an hour. So we figured we'd just give it away to the world as a public service. And I'm very impressed at the surge of interest, I think it's going to be a pretty big conference and hopefully we'll help a thousand companies or more come up to speed on this and figure out what to do next.

John Darsie: (42:20)
Well as a dedicated cyber hornet and in the spirit of Bitcoin's open source origins, that's great that you're sharing all that information in an open source way, really valuable information. We're going to leave it there. Michael, we're going to do more of these talks with you, hopefully in the future. We would encourage if you are an executive at a corporation, and you're watching this SALT's Talk, which we have a lot of corporate executives do watch, we would encourage you to participate in that conference with Michael on February 3rd and 4th, Bitcoin for corporations.

John Darsie: (42:48)
You know, the way we see it, the retail market got involved in Bitcoin years ago, and now you're seeing people like yourself, corporate treasuries, you're seeing hedge funds like SkyBridge and other entities starting to get involved in the space. I think you could start to see sovereigns start to get more involved in the space and you're seeing insurance companies. So it's just a wave of bigger and bigger players that are getting involved in the space that are, that are helping with that to accelerate Metcalfe's law, as you talked about earlier, but Michael, thanks so much for joining us. Anthony, do you have a final word for Michael before we let him go?

Anthony Scaramucci: (43:19)
Well, of course, we want to get you back, Michael. As you know, we're building our Bitcoin position. We're closing in, as I said, on $400 million, our fund is off to a very strong start. Just to remind our people, it's 75 basis points. We think that's a very attractive price as Michael was mentioning about the storage and the ease of use and having Ursa Young audit or positions and so forth. We just think it's an interesting delivery mechanism for high net worth individuals. So you can go to the skybridgebitcoin.com website for more details there, and we'll certainly be helping you any way that we can, Michael, to evangelize the story to other CEOs, corporate CEOs, corporate CFOs, et cetera. And thank you so much again for joining SALT. And I look forward to seeing you soon.

Michael Saylor: (44:11)
Thanks for having me always a pleasure.

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:13)
Well if you need any hair dye, Michael, I have a stash in my house according to the John Darcy. So just keep that in mind.

Michael Saylor: (44:21)
You got it.

John Darsie: (44:21)
You just have to get my digs in, but thank you everybody for tuning in to today's SALT Talks. It's been great to grow our community to include more people that are interested in digital assets, whether they're invested in Bitcoin today, or crypto curious as we like to say. We've enjoyed diving into that community and obviously our Bitcoin investments came at a very interesting time, we'll say, in the market. So thank you for joining us. Just a reminder. We're going to have a whole series of crypto and digital asset and Bitcoin SALT Talk's in 2021. It'll be a regular feature within the broader SALT Talk's brand. So you can sign up for all of those future SALT Talk's at salt.org/talks, and you can sign up for our entire archive of SALT Talk's at salt.org/talks/archive. Including our first conversation with the great Michael Saylor.

John Darsie: (45:11)
Please follow our YouTube channel. We're up to almost 10,000 subscribers. It's something we started during the pandemic. You know, we are known for our in-person conferences, but the opportunity during the pandemic to do these digital webinar type of events has been extremely gratifying for us. And we're starting to build up our digital presence. So we have great resources there on our YouTube channel, and you can watch all the episodes there. Please follow us on social media as well. We broadcast a lot of these talks on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn. So please follow us there and please tell your friends about SALT Talk's, we love growing our community, and we hope to see many of you at our in-person conferences, which we'll have an announcement on that in the next couple of weeks about our next in-person conference, which should be very exciting. I think everybody is chomping at the bit to get some in-person interaction after what we've all gone through with the pandemic. But on behalf of the entire SALT team, this is John Darcy signing off for today. We'll see you back here again. Next week on SALT Talk's.

Arjun Sethi: Venture Capital, Bitcoin & China | SALT Talks #130

“Instead of thinking about what's forward, it's about how do you see the present more clearly.”

Arjun Sethi is a co-founder of Tribe Capital, a venture capital firm built by engineers and scientists. Arjun sits on the board of Carta, Relativity, and Bolt. As a founder and operator, he has also been an active angel investor in over 100 companies, including Lyft, Opendoor, Gusto, and Front.

Success is never a straight line and involves failure and unsuccessful attempts. Achieving success requires exposure to the people and community where you’re involved. Ultimately, it’s then about the arrival of an inflection point where you decide whether to push forward or stagnate. Silicon Valley offers exposure because of the vast community of like-minded individuals in close proximity. Lessons learned from previous unsuccessful start-ups can help create an even stronger team, where each member brings distilled ideas. “There was a set of folks that I would say, had shared DNA around thinking about iterating innovation and what could you build that's different around looking at technology companies.”

When considering whether to invest in start-up companies, it is important to recognizes one’s own thought patterns and biases. Focusing on what is known about a company instead of a person’s background or network is important in avoid those pitfalls. “We have a motto internally, which is, ‘how do we focus on what versus who you know?’”

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Arjun Sethi.jpeg

Arjun Sethi

Co-Founder & Partner

Tribe Capital

MODERATOR

anthony_scaramucci.jpeg

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darsie: (00:07)
Hello everyone, and welcome back to SALT Talks. My name is John Darsie. I'm the managing director of SALT, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance, technology and public policy. SALT Talks are a digital interview series that we started during this work from home period with leading investors, creators and thinkers. And what we're trying to do on these SALT Talks is replicate the experience that we provide in our global conferences, the SALT conference, which we host twice a year, one in the United States and one internationally. And at those conferences and on these talks, what we're really trying to do is provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And today we're very excited to welcome Arjun Sethi to SALT Talks.

John Darsie: (00:57)
Arjun is a serial entrepreneur, investor and executive with deep roots in Silicon Valley. And more than a decade of experience building, sourcing and investing in high growth technology companies. Most notably, independently investing in companies, such as Opendoor, Gusto, Lyft, Postmates and True Color. Arjun also co-founded Tribe Capital, which is a venture capital firm with about $500 million in AUM built by engineers and data scientists, which have invested in fast growing and notable companies, such as Carta, Relativity, Applied Intuition, Instabase, Momentus and Bolt. Prior to founding Tribe, Arjun was a partner at Social Capital where he led the team that established a successful track record of backing high growth companies, such as Slack, CloudKitchens and Box. He also served on the executive team at Yahoo, where he grew product usage over one billion to over one billion monthly active users. He joined Yahoo as part of the acquisition of MessageMe a messaging app that he founded in 2012.

John Darsie: (02:05)
Prior to that Arjun co-founded LOL apps, a mobile gaming and applications company that he scaled to 100 million monthly users before he sold it to Six Waves, a subsidiary of Nexon. Just a reminder for anybody tuning into today's SALT Talk, if you have a question for Arjun, you can enter that in the Q and A box at the bottom of your video screen on Zoom. And hosting today's talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge Capital, a global alternative investment firm. Anthony is also the chairman of SALT. And with that, we'll turn it over to Anthony for the interview.

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:40)
Well, first of all, congratulations on your career, and I'm going to out you a little bit. You said that you were in the lower quartile of the people in your five mile radius. Isn't that how we all think about life, but in all seriousness you're doing amazing Arjun. And I always ask these cliche questions in the beginning, like, what can I learn about you that you didn't know on the Wikipedia, but I'm not going to ask you that one. I got a different question for you, okay? What are the base ingredients for success, the distillation of your life that has allowed you to identify these companies and see where they could be years before they become what they have become?

Arjun Sethi: (03:30)
So first off, John Anthony and team, thanks for having me on board. Two, if I take a step back and try to think through your question, which is a hard one to answer, I think it comes down to a couple pieces. One is raw exposure. What do you see, what is the tribe of things that you see around you? Two, then what's the inflection point at which you decide to push forward or stay stagnant? People think about local, state and federal, but when I think about local, it's also just family. And so your exposure is what are you trying to get done? So I grew up in an immigrant family. My dad came from India with a couple of bucks in his pocket, and his whole goal in life was to survive first.

Arjun Sethi: (04:23)
And then from survival it's to push to the next phase. So I kind of grew up with that perspective, which is if we didn't try as hard as possible, we could be out in the streets. And while that might seem extreme, given where we are today, it didn't feel like it was that extreme as we were growing up. And so the exposure of the folks that were around you was around education, was around science, was around what could the world look like if you had replicators? Similar to what you see in Star Trek? So I think what happens is that when you have exposure to that type of community, we have a very large community here in Silicon Valley that thinks that way. And then we have our sub pockets. What does that allow you to do?

Arjun Sethi: (05:07)
And then how do you start thinking from there? And then the last piece I'd say from a pedestal is what's the speed at which you want to learn? So that the word university is supposed to be, a meaning of like an institution of learning. So if I think about the institution of learning here in the Silicon Valley, where we are based, that just gives you the ability if you want it, the toolkits to keep pushing. And I think that's like one of the privileges of why I liked staying here, being around the folks that are here, the universities that are here, the companies that keep pushing that mantra forward.

Anthony Scaramucci: (05:44)
My life experience has gone up and down. Obviously if you're having a bad day ever Arjun, I want you to imagine me getting fired from the White House in July of 2017, it will make you feel better about whatever kind of day you're having. But you seem to have a pretty amazing career. Tell me about a setback. Tell me about a shot that you've got hit with and then how did you recover from it and what lessons did you learn from it?

Arjun Sethi: (06:14)
I think what people read on biographies, LinkedIn, they'll look at that as a progressive success. What they won't see is, I grew up with a pretty hard family. My dad had lost his job twice, and he had gotten a job in like the semiconductor industry and he had to take a pay cut. In some cases, when we moved from Northern California to central California, to Southern California, we had experienced different forms of racism, and when I was younger I didn't know what that meant. And so as you grow older, you start kind of instilling that into your livelihood. But I got fired from almost every job. I wasn't a good employee. I got fired from Macy's. I got fired from Pfizer Electronics. I got fired from Radio Shack when it existed, all of these companies. And then I think just keep moving up the stack-

Anthony Scaramucci: (07:10)
So was there a common theme, Arjun, of the firing? I mean, my firing is usually I'm doing something really stupid and I'm saying something I'm not supposed to be saying and the next thing I'm in Pennsylvania Avenue. Was there a common theme to your firing?

Arjun Sethi: (07:25)
I think it was, and we can get to it at some point, but there was probably a lack of care, where there just wasn't an inflection point that it really mattered, that you need to start pushing forward and learning and being productive in some way. And that's a different philosophical tilt, but, and I also got kicked out of school. So this thing just keeps progressing, which is, I actually just had a progressive of failure routes, that at a certain point, I think it finally clicked, which is I can't continue to do this. And I think you can get stuck in that, but if I didn't have like a family support, if I didn't have folks around the table that had kept helping to propel me back up and saying that it's okay if you fail. These are not failures. These are unsuccessful attempts, you can figure it out.

Arjun Sethi: (08:13)
But then I wouldn't have had the 15, 16, 17 chances. And so what I took from that was how do you iterate test and design towards what you want to forge moving forward? And so, I appreciate the description of myself, but previous to those companies that I started, 10 failure companies with, founding teams that didn't work, because we weren't iterating towards something that could work. And it doesn't really happen if you don't have a North star. And so luckily I had like a vision of where we wanted to move forward with my co-founders and myself. And that's actually been sort of the emphasis. If you look at my career, doing what I do at Tribe is actually the same thing I was at Lolapps, MessageMe, at Yahoo. That's the exact same thing, it's just, now we're just building a technology company that's deploying capital into venture capital as an ecosystem. And so the mindset is different and the way in which we build is different the way in which we iterate is different.

Anthony Scaramucci: (09:12)
So you left Social Capital after working with the Chamath Palihapitiya and right now, John Darsie cannot believe I-

Arjun Sethi: (09:21)
Palihapitiya, Anthony. It's not that hard.

Anthony Scaramucci: (09:23)
All right, it's close enough.

Arjun Sethi: (09:24)
Chamath Palihapitiya.

Anthony Scaramucci: (09:25)
Chamath doesn't care, he knows I love him. And he knows I don't know how to pronounce his name. It was almost close enough. So you left after a couple of years, what did you learn there? What shaped you from that experience?

Arjun Sethi: (09:40)
Look, the first step, I'd say that, as I mentioned, instead of the five mile radius, go 50 miles. There's a set of folks that have worked with each other for a very long time. I actually met Chamath when he was at Facebook and I was at, Lolapps. He had tried to acquire my company and the apps that we were building on the platform. So there was a set of folks that I would say, had shared DNA around thinking about, iterating innovation. And what could you build that's different around looking at technology companies, right? Instead of thinking about what's forward, it's how do you see the present more clearly, what is there now? And then how do you forge your path forward? And that's the world we live in. And so, a lot of what I think we admire, with Chamath and other folks in the ecosystem and why we all work together in the first place and admired each other was that we were all forging a path towards the same direction, came from the same cohort, same clubs, same schools, in some case.

Arjun Sethi: (10:41)
And, what Social Capital was able to deliver was a collection of a lot of these individuals. You could say the Social Capital mafia. If you look at the folks that came out of the firm, and we all took what we distilled as the most important, and then forged ahead with that. So I took our data science and product approach towards what I think venture capital looks like in innovation. A couple of other folks took different pieces of that, Chamath himself took different pieces of that to the public markets. And then I think you just see a lot of us move in that direction because we had a collection of ideas that were really well-regarded in the firms. I think that's really special. You've seen that with companies like PayPal, you seen that with companies like Twitter, we have a very special collection of individuals and they go out to go do their new thing.

Anthony Scaramucci: (11:30)
It makes total sense. And obviously we had him on SALT and he was very impressive, and as are you. Let me go in this direction. You're an entrepreneur, you're in Silicon Valley, you're trying, start something, you have a vision for something, they come to see you. How do you know? You're the sort of like the Simon Cowell, you're at the desk, you're looking for the X factor. How do you know that they have the X factor?

Arjun Sethi: (12:11)
We don't. The whole point is that we don't, if you think about, what people do and what they build, I think what happens is, for example, you and I are chatting now and so you get, some sort of pattern recognition of your past 20 years of history of saying, "I think this person has it, or they don't." But you're, pattern matching to your biases may that be right or wrong. And so that happens a lot, right? Like you can just see that with the way in which people get funded, the capital they're deploying, that they're being infused. And our approach is, "Hey, I think we may not know, the collection of experiences where this person comes from." We have a motto internally, which is, how do we focus on what, versus who you know.

Arjun Sethi: (12:55)
And so let's forget where, what school they went to. Let's forget where they grew up. Let's forget all those pieces for just a second. Let's look at their team, let's look at the focus of what they've built. And especially in a world that's software and tech enabled, what can you measure, right? What can you measure from a ground truth perspective? It's kind of akin to financial accounting. When you look at the public markets and you look at a company, you look at their guts through financial accounting, balance sheets, [inaudible 00:13:19] income, et cetera, can you do that with software? And that's what we have been working on for our whole careers. And so it was a way of how do you articulate that for the next set of, Zuckerbergs or Dorseys that show up and say, I have this product, but there are outliers, there are extreme.

Arjun Sethi: (13:36)
You might not like the way in which they, articulate their vision. But the whole point is that, that's not the point. The point is what is it that they've built so far? What's their foundation? Let's forget where they come from. You just a second and see if there's any demand from customers, integrations. Is there anything that you can measure that will give you now insights into what the future could look like if could forecast? And that's the fine tuning that I think is really important to think, that's the approach that we take. So the answer is we don't know, but we start building conviction and starting off from a foundation of what they have built, and we morph around them rather than having them morph around us.

Anthony Scaramucci: (14:17)
You're in a very interesting high altitude ether, Reid Hoffman once said to me that if you're waiting for the website to be perfect, you're waiting too long. Let's launch the website and start figuring out as it goes. Do you share that philosophy? And if you do, how would you describe when is the right time to start a business or to try to scale a business?

Arjun Sethi: (14:46)
Yeah. So, I'll try to paraphrase here, but I think it was, if you're not embarrassed about your product, you're doing it wrong. And so while I think that's a good approach or certain types of companies, it's not the approach for every company. So if you kind of split the world into bits and atoms on the bit side, if you're building a mobile app, if you're building mobile infrastructure, you have fast iteration time and feedback. Yes, you can experiment at a faster pace and you shouldn't be embarrassed about what you're building, because you can do it cheaper, faster, better. And that's what that technology stack is all about. And when you move to the world of atoms, you can do that in some cases where if you're trying to build a spaceship or a rocket, if you're trying to help with climate change, if you're focused on drones that go out there, you can't iterate a drone that's gonna like drop in the middle of the sky.

Arjun Sethi: (15:38)
It's not the point. And so I think you kinda have to bifurcate between the two worlds and then say, okay, now, based off of these frameworks, what's the right way to approach the market, the product that you're building, and frankly, how much capital do you need, in order to hit the first iteration that might be embarrassing in that vertical that you're thinking through. So while I agree with that, that works when you're thinking in small terms of the internet, although the market obviously is quite, quite large for the internet in the world of bits.

Anthony Scaramucci: (16:15)
I'm late to the VC space. And I know that there are-

Arjun Sethi: (16:20)
Never late, never late.

Anthony Scaramucci: (16:22)
Never late, okay. So that's a good line, right? That's what people tell me about Bitcoin. We had planned B on yesterday, he said he felt that he was late, but now he realizes he's never late. So that's a good line, but let's say that I'm an old timer. I'm late to the VC space. I see the specs, I see these VC funds. I see these special partnerships, these SPVs, what would you recommend to me as someone that's a traditional stock and bond buyer, I own cash, stock, bonds and gold. What am I missing and how would you recommend that I enter the space?

Arjun Sethi: (17:04)
I think you're smarter than I am on this. And I've watched your talks before, so you take a macro perspective. Right? And say you think about, Hey, what are the financial policies that are being, projected worldwide? Not just here in the United States, but with ECP, the Japanese Central Bank here in the United States, just printing and then rates going down, and then you just continue to do that. Someone hiccups, you do the same thing over and over again. And so you take that traditional approach. It's okay, great. The traditional portfolio approach, traditionally, where you kept your capital may no longer have the same yields and you got to keep up with some aspects of inflation. And not aspects of inflation that are average, but aspects that are cumulative towards certain parts, California and places where you are and vice versa.

Arjun Sethi: (17:53)
If you go to African emerging markets and so, that's the high level macro, and then you go into micro and say, "Okay, well, what are the emerging classes of where you want to spend your time?" There's a power law in equities, there's a power law in alternatives, then there's a power law in certain human innovations. And part of it is, what does Bitcoin mean? As programmable money is what a lot of people call it. What does gold 2.0 mean? There's a lot of ways in which people kind of describe it. And then you keep going into, down the train. What does public equities mean and what is private equities that haven't gone public for so long with a lot of latent demand mean? And then what are the financial instruments to invest into this innovation?

Arjun Sethi: (18:36)
So I think it really comes down everything. I think, to not bury the lede, just comes down to growth. Where's growth going to happen? Is that innovation oriented? Is that incrementalization oriented? Is that stock buybacks oriented? And how do you kind of perceive your way around how you want to deploy our capital? So when you say you're late, I don't think you're late at all, because we've just starting to see, you can call it the ramifications, or sort of a new economy thought process, post 2008.

Anthony Scaramucci: (19:07)
I mean, you're making excellent points. And I do study the Dow and the S&P 500 and the rotation, and if you look at the top 50 names from 20 years ago, they are very different from the top 50 names today. If you look at the top 10 names, and of course you and I know that Tesla just got added to the S&P 500. And so my question to you is what are going to be those leaders, in five or 10 years? Are there private companies right now that you're looking at, you'll say, "Wow, in five or 10 years, they are going to be the Ford Motor Company of 1920, but they're the XYZ company of 2025 or 2030."

Arjun Sethi: (19:51)
Yeah. So, I think this is why I love technology. There's a concept that we talk about a lot. Peter Thiel talks about it, what our perfect monopolies versus innovation monopolies. Internally, we call that one of N versus N of one companies, which is, what's a special company that is just so special it's hard to compete with? And then what are the sectors that are all similar to each other, again, one of N, one of many companies.

Arjun Sethi: (20:17)
And so I think if you take a look of just, this is a good point, just going from atoms to bits and what are the industries that are moving and shaping the world forward. Payments, e-commerce, the retail to digital transformation. This is not just the United States, this is worldwide. Where are you going to be placing your bets? So if you just look at the power law of the public markets, now you can call it the FAANG, MF stocks, where there's different acronyms today. But it's really concentrated towards the future, right? Where those are the companies that are winning now, and that there's going to be a larger majority of them that are going to continue to win given that consumer demand is going that way, B2B demand is going that way and worldwide demand is going that way.

Arjun Sethi: (21:01)
So you just kind of trace route that and say, "Okay, well, where else is that going to happen? What are the ecosystems that need to be there to support them? And then what are the ecosystems that are going to actually just die over the next, let's call it five, 10, 20 years from now?" And I think you've seen that, where private equity went really hard. I don't know if you remember 2008 to 2014 into retail. Retail is coming back. We know that ship has sailed, it's not coming back. COVID has accelerated that, not just here in the United States, but worldwide. And so you kind of, again, trace route that down, say, "Okay, well, what are the next industries that need to be A reshaped, and then B supported?" And that's kind of how we think about it, within the Silicon Valley realm of what we think is going to happen in the future.

Arjun Sethi: (21:49)
And I think it really just comes down to the private companies that are being built today. What are they doing and how are they supporting that ecosystem? And are they special? Or are they just one of many companies that are going to be a part of that transformation? I would argue anything that's D2C or consumer demand related are just one of many companies, right? What's the next brand that you're going to buy from when you go on Shopify or Amazon? But then the next set is who's supporting those brands? Who's someone that monopolize that? Who owns the roads and the railroads of the future. And that's I think what we spend a lot of time thinking through. One, we don't know, two we've seen some of them, and then three, we got to figure out a way to identify them without us having a certain biases that we've had in the past.

Anthony Scaramucci: (22:34)
Tell me one sector. You don't have to give me a name of a company, just say, "Look, this is an unstoppable force that's going to be with us in 10 years.

Arjun Sethi: (22:48)
Financial services, I think is completely and utterly being not only disruptive, but revolutionizing all over the world.

Anthony Scaramucci: (22:56)
So something like neo banking as an example, the revolutionizing the banking industry?

Arjun Sethi: (23:03)
Yeah. So if I walked down the street at 20 years ago, I would go to a retail branch and I would say, "I need these five things." And then depending on my purchasing power or status of, lower income, middle and above, those pieces would be fragmented, right? I'm privileged enough to have, the likes of Morgan Stanley to say, "Here's everything I'll do for you." But you don't have that for folks at a lower tier, and that's starting to change, right? Like I can send an email saying, "I want these five things." You can't do that if you're at the lower income or bracket and you can't do that if you're sitting in Mexico and if you can't and you can't do that if you're in India, driving an auto workshop. But that's starting to change where now they get the ability where the future was already there, but it wasn't evenly distributed and that's what technology allows us to do. And I think people use the word neo banking, but it's much more than that, right?

Arjun Sethi: (23:53)
Where that auto workshop individual wants a USD denominated account. He thinks about preserving his wealth in dollars. And I'll get to Bitcoin in a second and the same thing's happening in Latin American countries, the same thing's happening in Nigerian companies and you have this global influx of people moving back and forth. And so what does settlement look like? What do payments look like? What does banking look like? What does insurance look like? What does real estate look like when these products get bifurcated? And then a lot of people try to think and say, "Okay, Bitcoin is that piece, or crypto markets are going to be that piece." It's possible, but I think you have to think about it from an application perspective. What does the technology, the database, the settlement and the distribution allow you to build? And I think it's more people want trust security laws and you take those all together. Like we have here in the United States. And what are the products that get built off of that?

Anthony Scaramucci: (24:48)
All of a sudden I'm 100% with you and now I'm watching the neobanks take over. They've got no bricks and mortar. So they're offering the services at little to no cost and they're paying higher interest rates. And it becomes almost impossible longterm to compete with that. So I agree with you there. Let's talk about-

Arjun Sethi: (25:12)
Yeah. I think it's more than that. It's, we are willing to pay for a certain amount of experiences and products that they're able to say, in the world of negative and zero interest rates. Forget that for a second. Do you trust my experience to deliver you an outcome? Do you trust my experience to deliver you capital, lending and democratize that? Do you trust my product where you're willing to pay like a subscription fee for all these services that other people got? And then at scale, what people got at the higher tier you're now able to get at the lower tier as well. And I think that's actually the change, which is you can flip the pyramid and say at scale I can offer these services worldwide.

Anthony Scaramucci: (25:54)
Yeah. It's pretty fascinating before I turn it over to, John Darsie and our audience participation. I want to talk a little bit about SPACs. What is your feeling about the SPAC market, it relative to the IPO market? And do you think it's a viable long term solution SPACs or is it a by-product of the regulatory environment that we're in?

Arjun Sethi: (26:19)
It's a good question. If you take a step back and say in the '90s, what did we have? We had roughly eight, 10,000 companies going public, or sorry that were public, on the NYSE and NASDAQ, you had the ability for people to participate in the upside of these companies where they're at and certain valuations let's call it, 500 EV and up, and then what the regulatory regime in the 2000s, and then, again, the regime in 2008, while it may have been, protectionist is also created this mechanism where the regulatory regime just made companies go public later. And so I think you look at any entrepreneur to say, "Do you want to go public or private?" There's a set will say, "I want to stay private forever because I want to control it."

Arjun Sethi: (27:08)
But there's a large set that say, "Yeah, I want access to capital markets, but I can't because it's too expensive." Or you've actually just do the math. If you have 50 million in revenue and for you to go public, it's going to be five or 10% just to start, that just doesn't make any sense from a unit economics perspective. So you just, wait, wait and wait. And now you have, I'm on the board of a company called Carta. And the number one thing all of these companies are asking by the way, there's about 14,000 companies in their platform. It's about a trillion dollars of private equity just in the private markets that don't move. It means that it's just a stake of private investors like myself that are waiting for liquidity or dumping more capital into these companies because they're growing and we're participating in the upside, but the regular markets and an irregular individual is not, regardless of being accredited.

Arjun Sethi: (27:58)
So I think what you've seen now is that there's just a ton of latent demand for those enterprise value companies and not just companies that are in the United States, but worldwide, because worldwide liquidity also doesn't exist. If you're thinking about a growth perspective, if you're sitting in Taiwan or Indonesia or Southeast Asia, you don't really have any options. You're going to look at the US markets NYSE and NASDAQ because their growth mentality and frankly, an American mentality, where you can't go public and these other markets that want like four to five years of profitability. So there's this massive regulatory, I'd say down pressure of private companies where they can't go public, and SPAC I think it's become a mechanism where you can do that. And it's not just the SPACs. You have secondary liquidity. These exchanges have started popping up, we've invested in one, Carter being the one, at certain EV.

Arjun Sethi: (28:49)
And then you start thinking about, okay, well, these companies are still at their inflection point where they need help. They want other folks that are along with them. The world of activist investors in the public markets are gone. And so the SPACs allow people to partner with folks with a cash injection like they have in the private markets to think longterm. Now, while I don't think it's perfect, it's a mechanism, direct listing is another mechanism, and the traditional IPO is another mechanism. And as you know, these are all forms of raising capital or, getting access to the capital markets, for other forms of capital that they might need to grow. And so is it here to stay? I think so. Is it going to be at the peak of what we've had over the last two years? I'm not sure. But we're keenly watching it. A lot of our companies are now in their board decks saying here are my options. Raise capital, go public. And SPAC is a mechanism for that.

Anthony Scaramucci: (29:49)
All right. Well, listen, congratulations on all your success. I've got to turn it over to Darsie who's the millennial in charge, that's going to now try to outshine the two of us, so don't let him do that, Arjun. Okay? You and I have now bonded. Don't let them get the best of us. Go ahead, Darsie.

John Darsie: (30:07)
So Arjun, just following up on the SPAC question, you had a portfolio company recently that went public via SPAC. Was that a positive experience, and has led you to be more receptive to the idea that, SPACs are a long-term solution?

Arjun Sethi: (30:21)
Yeah. So while we were at Social Capital, Chamath and team, and the rest of us had thought of what are all the toolkits that we could provide on behalf of our companies. And one of them was SPAC and at the time it was a pretty dirty word, right? Like you just think of it as companies that aren't good enough should not go public. And that was a mechanism used, or the reverse merger and what we had seen over time, very accelerated by them. And I think COVID accelerated this even more, is that there were certain types of companies that need more capital. So as a private investor, investing into space, climate change, drones, heavy CapEx industries, these companies need 50, 100, 250, $500 million in order to hit their next milestones.

Arjun Sethi: (31:08)
They already have product market fit. We already know technologically their products work. They just need the capital to build it. So if you want to build a farm, right. A vertically integrated farm that deploys, food at a cheaper rate, how do you do that? Where are you going to get that capital from? It's harder to do it in the private markets. And I think I go back to the first question of, how do you know if these entrepreneurs have it or not? Well beyond that? What if they already have it? They don't have access to capital in the private markets. What do you do? And a lot of it is they just get fully diluted. It's really hard for them to get that capital in it and something that should have taken a year or two to accelerate will take five or 10 years.

Arjun Sethi: (31:47)
And so I think that SPAC became a mechanism for that, which is, are people willing to take the risk for certain types of these companies that are definable, there's a narrative to it, there's a team behind it. And someone has done the work that you either trust, or you don't to say, here are the types of companies and here's how much capital injection do you need. And so those are the companies in our portfolio that have been looking at that approach. And so Momentus, which is a first mile and mile delivery mechanisms. So that they've literally attached themselves like a parasite onto a star ship or a rocket. And then they go from point A to point B to point C for you. So it's kind of like a hub and spoke model. They need capital to build their satellites and their propulsion systems.

Arjun Sethi: (32:28)
The first one already works. They've already launched it. So, the technology works and the second one, the launch, with payload for their customers, and we'll be out in the next three to six months. Those are really well-defined companies that you can say, "Okay, great. Let's give them the capital. They already have product market fit. Now it's about how fast can they accelerate and where do you go from here?" The private markets value those companies lower as high risk where we don't think it is, the public markets think of it as a little bit less risk, and they're willing to give them the capital to make it happen. So I think it's been a good experience for those types of companies. It's still TBD for international companies and it's still TBD for generic software companies that are growing and they do have access to private and public capital.

John Darsie: (33:14)
Right. And you saw Chamath first, SPAC was Virgin Galactic, and you've seen it on a nice run lately. And it seems to be a really good solution that they've found, for that company. So, I mentioned in the open about how Tribe Capital was founded by yourself and a team of engineers and data scientists, and you guys are very data-driven, in terms of how you invest. And so you can take a lot of raw transaction data from companies and you synthesize it to create sort of a bottom up approach for private investing, the same way a Dodd Graham type of investor would take a bottom up approach in terms of analyzing a public company's financials. Why is a data driven approach important? And how do you combine that data with your own judgment intuition, from sort of a top down perspective on trends?

Arjun Sethi: (34:02)
Yeah. So there's a lot of questions in there. So I'll try to break those into pieces. Over the last 20 years, if you look at Facebook, Google, Yahoo, like the new order of technology companies, and you just go down the stack like Airbnb, we, we grew up in those companies, we helped those companies. We help them scale. We either through investment or starting them in some cases. So that's the team's DNA. And so you take that team's DNA and you take them to a traditional venture capital firm and you ask them to invest in companies. The first thing we think of, or when I entered venture capital, I'm why are we still using Excel? Why are we still using paper and pencil to make investment decisions? It doesn't make any sense to us.

Arjun Sethi: (34:48)
Because we've built all of these family of frameworks to invest our time, our capital, our products with the fast feedback loop, why can't we bring what we've done for the last 20 years and bring it to the investment side as a way for us to augment our decision-making? That's how it started. I'll call it seven to 10 years ago. It was just so archaic for us that we, when you get into venture, it becomes less team oriented and it becomes more solo oriented. So we flipped it. We flipped the script and we basically said, "Okay, great. Let's take that. As a bottoms up approach to understand a company the same way, we take a bottoms up approach to build products at least in the consumer and enterprise ecosystem."

Arjun Sethi: (35:34)
And I'd say that we have this motto internally. And if you take the dollar bill and you turn it around, I forgot what the exact symbol is, but I think it says like Novus ordo Cyclorama or something like that. It's like a new order of the ages. That's the exact way we think about where we are in venture, and capital allocation, which is you've had this tradition, where you looked at balance sheet, and accounting frameworks. Can you build those frameworks? And can you build systems and software to help you make better decisions? And can you flip the script in the way in which you can help these companies, partner with them. And so when we go to a company and I know this is a long-winded answer-

John Darsie: (36:17)
[crosstalk 00:36:17] like the long-winded answer.

Arjun Sethi: (36:18)
... the pitch literally is if you want the folks that helped scale Uber, Facebook, Yahoo, that the folks that built these companies from zero to billions of customers, that's us with capital. So we are a technology company that think about venture, and we build products, we build distribution products, we build analysis, we build data and analytics that we can serve you in that way, because that's the language you speak. That's how you're thinking about building your company. And those are the types of folks that you want around the table versus, talking to your grandfather. Your grandfather might be really smart, but they're taking a solo approach to helping you. And that's very, it's hard to scale that.

John Darsie: (37:01)
Yeah. One of the aha moments for me lately, and we don't have any financial interest in Stripe, but when Stripe basically started Stripe Capital and the idea that they're analyzing all the transaction data on the fundamentals of companies that are using their APIs and actually investing in businesses, that they noticed really positive trends related to revenues and profits and everything that's going on, on the underlying level at a company, about, the value of data, the exponential value of data in a technology first world. I want to go back to Anthony's question about, founders. So a founder comes to you, and they say, "Hey, I have this idea. I have some money. I could bootstrap it. I could take venture capital money and dilute myself." There's other sources of capital, first of all, how do you know for that founder, whether it's the right time for them to launch the startup and how do that they're ready to scale and how do you give them advice on the best source of capital, as well as the best partners to help them scale the business?

Arjun Sethi: (38:05)
This really comes down to underwriting risk. So if you and Anthony decided to start a company tomorrow, you have access to capital, proliferation of it at the pre-seed and seed stage. So it's called idea and concept. So there's a set of investors that focus on people and markets, tech, experience, et cetera. That's all over the world. That's awesome. Right? Like if you kind of think about it, there's a ecosystem that's being built that kind of mimics or romanticizes what you see here in the Silicon Valley. And so that we're going to adopt that in certain other sectors. That's a different type of risk that you're underwriting and that's become more and more proliferated with more people, right? So it's syndicated out, whereas before it was just in the hands of a couple of folks. And that's called pre-product market fit.

Arjun Sethi: (38:50)
Post-product market fit, that's a new set of investors in a different set of investors. So it's really about the gradients where you are in that life cycle of building. And so to answer your question is we don't know. I think we have to be more bold about investing into harder things and newer things, because it is cheaper, faster, and easier to build that. And so there's a set of investors that do that. We're not good at that. That's okay. We explicitly say that, but we do invest in certain ideas that we like, but we underwrite risk kind of appropriately, which is, we're not giving $20 million to someone that has an idea in concept. We might be giving them a couple of hundred thousand dollars to start, but there's a whole set of us, that you can say times 10, that are going to do the same thing.

Arjun Sethi: (39:34)
And then they have enough capital to start an experiment with. I think that's something that's been lost over time. Where you used to actually have that in the '20s, '50s, World War I, World War II. You had that from the '50s to '70s and it kind of stopped. And it might've not been this public and private partnership, but it was there for things that we wanted to do moving forward. That's not really measurable. And I think the important part here is that you need to invest, to try and have unsuccessful attempts. After that you have frameworks, right? You have people like us that come in and say, I now am able to quantify that you have something that works and it has product market fit. It may not have the same velocity that we might all think, but that's a different risk profile.

Arjun Sethi: (40:14)
I'm not underwriting risk in the same way. And so now it's all about value. What's the value of your enterprise? What's the value of your product? What's the value of your revenue? And that's not any different than financial accounting, the lagging indicators, but you can still do that with software. So again, long winded, but there's a lot of things that you can do. And what's the type of capital that needs to go into trying things and iterating and scientific things that you want to try that are hard. And then what's the capital that goes into it once it finally works, it's a two different states of mind, right?

John Darsie: (40:49)
So I want to end on a macro question that's pretty timely based on IPOs we've seen just this week. So you had DoorDash go public and pretty much doubled immediately before it even started trading. Airbnb is now a North of a hundred billion dollar company that back in March, we were talking about or not, the company was going to survive because the pandemic was supposedly gonna destroy any tourism type of business. But they obviously have rebounded from that spectacularly. Do you think, from a valuation perspective, when you look at these companies that are going public and the valuations we're seeing in a stock like Tesla, that technology is getting into that, B word territory that some people that are less familiar with the technology industry, they come to me and they say, "Oh, John, I know you work in finance. Are we in a bubble again? Is this another tech bubble?" And I sort of guide them to an answer, but I don't want to ask a leading question to you, but do you think things are getting a little bit frothy in the technology space or do you think we're just scratching the surface in terms of what the economy is going to look like in the future? And so these technology companies are still undervalued and you're not late.

Arjun Sethi: (42:00)
I'll preface my answer with, I don't know, but then I'll answer with frameworks that I think are important. So take a step back 20 years, you guys have experienced this, where we had talked about, irrationality and valuations. In the 2000s when we had the technology bubble, before the technology bubble, there were other things happening in the world, right? You had the issue with, Russia, you had longterm capital, I'm forgetting the name of the situation exactly. You had a multitude of things happening all over the world that were negative, not neutral to positive, just negative. And so everyone was rushing towards the next growth story, and that was .com. Anything .com, even if it had nothing to do with technology, you just put .com in your disclosures and you just skyrocketed, that was a different era of companies that had no revenue, no customers, and no substance, right?

Arjun Sethi: (42:58)
And that's the narrative. And then technology continued on its path. And you can argue that it was devalued and it took a longer time for, like the likes of Google to be sort of recognized the likes of Amazon to be recognized during that transition period. Same thing kind of happened in 2008, which is, it's a different bubble. It's a real estate bubble. And now we're entering a world where, again, macro you have negative, to low interest rates, depending on the area. You have a printing of cash and you don't have the yields that you used to have if you wanted to take your capital out of the tech where you could, get, six or seven percent back, in the 2000s up to the 2008 timeframe, you don't have that today. And so the question you kind of have to ask yourself is the value of these companies, the value of their growth, the speed at which they're growing exponentially, right?

Arjun Sethi: (43:48)
It's a super linear, right? It's not stagnant, it's not sub linear. What is the value of those companies that are retaining their customers, expanding with them revenue and engagement wise. And so from a software perspective, those are the questions you kind of have to ask. Do I think some of these companies are overvalued, of course. There's a power law to some of these companies where everyone's piling into what they believe is safe and the equities market, and the same thing happens in the private market. It's just about where do you enter and where do you exit. The great thing about what we do is we enter early and we just leave it up to you guys on the smart side, on the public markets to think about what's overvalued and what's not. But it's a hard one to answer because there's not a lot of downward pressure.

Arjun Sethi: (44:28)
Like where's that coming from? A company like Nikola, which is extremely fraudulent, is still valued at $7 billion. You know that there's something frothy there. And there's not a lot of downward pressure on that company, it's still, I think that's an issue. And then I could probably talk about 10, 11, 15 companies like that. Where that mechanism of downward pressure doesn't exist. So is the market frothy? There's some of it, but I think you're seeing it in pockets. And it's still yet to be determined where, 30% of our GDP was just printed. And what does that look like over the next three, five, 10 years? I'm not sure. It's hard to answer.

John Darsie: (45:06)
Yeah. I mean, I think about Bitcoin in the same way. I came at it for the last several years as a skeptic, but I'm thinking in my head now, look at all the new buyers that we have of Bitcoin, who are the sellers? I don't really see a lot of people that are eager to sell at these levels. And you have all types of companies from mass mutual, to other large investment institutions, Paul Tudor Jones coming out and buying this and buying 1% of their portfolios in Bitcoin. But those are massive astronomical sums of money. But Arjun, thanks so much for joining us. We'll leave it there. Anthony, do you have a final word for origin before we let him go?

Anthony Scaramucci: (45:40)
No, I think, look, it's a fascinating conversation, you're my crystal ball now, Arjun. So I'm going to be calling you from time to time. Like I need to look in there so you can tell me what the hell is going on with the world, okay? I'm counting on you.

Arjun Sethi: (45:54)
We call it the magic eight ball, I'll shake something and I'll give you an answer.

Anthony Scaramucci: (46:00)
Something tells me you're a little bit more precise than that, but I love that line. Well, you be well and thank you so much for joining us on SALT Talks, and congratulations. And I'm looking forward to the future successes for you and your firm.

Arjun Sethi: (46:12)
John, Anthony. Thanks for having me on board.

John Darsie: (46:15)
Thank you, Arjun. And thank you everybody who tuned in to today's SALT Talk.

Saifedean Ammous: “The Bitcoin Standard” | SALT Talks #127

“Bitcoin is the hardest money that we have ever discovered or invented.”

Dr. Saifedean Ammous is the author of The Bitcoin Standard: The Decentralized Alternative to Central Banking, the best-selling groundbreaking study of the economics of bitcoin. The book was a pioneer in explaining bitcoin's value proposition, and the implications of its unique properties.

As a peer-to-peer software for operating payment network, Bitcoin acts as the native currency. Bitcoin is totally protected from inflation because Bitcoin’s source code makes it mathematically impossible to exceed 21 million Bitcoins- a fixed monetary supply. The entire world was effectively on the gold standard, because it was the hardest money at the time, but more gold can continually be introduced into the supply. “Anything that gets held as a form of money, the value of it rises, and because the value rises, it gives people an incentive to make more of it.”

Bitcoin offers a way to remove the third-party intermediaries in the financial transaction. The decentralized nature of the blockchain, on which Bitcoin exists, creates security via transparency. There is no one single point of failure in the way that a third-party financial institution, entrusted with money, must secure itself from hackers or thieves.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Dr. Saifedean Ammous.jpeg

Saifedean Ammous

Author

The Bitcoin Standard

MODERATOR

anthony_scaramucci.jpeg

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darsie: (00:08)
Hello, everyone, and welcome back to SALT Talks. My name is John Darsie. I'm the managing director of SALT, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance, technology and public policy. SALT Talks are a digital interview series where we talk to leading investors, creators and thinkers. And our goal on these SALT Talks is really to replicate the experience that we provide at our global conferences, the SALT Conference, which we host twice a year. One in the United States, one internationally. Obviously this year we were unable to host our conferences, but we look forward to hopefully resuming our in-person events starting again in 2021.

John Darsie: (00:47)
What we're trying to do at our conferences and on these SALT Talks is provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And we're very excited today to bring you the latest installment of our digital asset series with our guest today Dr. Saifedean Ammous. Dr. Ammous is the author of The Bitcoin Standard: The Decentralized Alternative to Central Banking, which is a bestselling, ground breaking study of the economics of Bitcoin. And for people who are looking to get introduced to the space, we thought this was a great place to start.

John Darsie: (01:22)
When I was going through my personal Bitcoin education one of the first books that was recommended to me was The Bitcoin Standard. So we're very excited to have Saif with us today on SALT Talks. The book was a pioneer in explaining bitcoin's value proposition and the implications of its unique properties. Bitcoin's supply is completely irresponsive to demand, making it the hardest money ever discovered, and making hard money available to everyone worldwide.

John Darsie: (01:48)
Saif has been at the forefront of the study of the economic implications of this new technology. And he teaches and researches the economics of Bitcoin on his online learning platform Saifedean.com. Dr. Ammous holds a PhD in sustainable development from Columbia University, where his doctoral thesis studied the economics of biofuels and alternative energy sources. He also holds a Master's in development management from the London School of Economics, and a Bachelor of Engineering from the American University of Beirut.

John Darsie: (02:20)
Just a reminder, if you have any questions for Dr. Ammous. During today's talk, you can enter them in the Q&A box at the bottom of your video screen on Zoom. And in terms of today's format, we're going to do something a little bit different with Dr. Ammous. He's a fantastic presenter and has fantastic materials that sort of take you even if you're a Bitcoin novice, you can start to understand some of the economics and the value proposition of Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. So we're going to have Dr. Ammous, give a presentation and share his screen for the first 25 to 30 minutes of today's talk. And then I'm going to come in and moderate audience Q&A and ask some follow up questions from my end as well. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Dr. Ammous to give his presentation.

Saifedean Ammous: (03:01)
Thank you very much, John, thank you for having me. And for your very kind introduction. It's a pleasure to be here. Can everybody see my slides?

John Darsie: (03:11)
I think so. I can see them.

Saifedean Ammous: (03:13)
Okay, cool. So, in today's talk, I'm going to go over some of the main concepts in my book, The Bitcoin Standard. And I'm going to begin with explaining what is Bitcoin, the definition that I came up with for Bitcoin. And then we bitcoins monetary uniqueness? What is it about Bitcoin that makes us so unique? What is Bitcoin good for? And what are some of the implications of the use of Bitcoin? So my definition of Bitcoin is that Bitcoin is a peer to peer software for operating a payment network with its own native currency that is protected from unexpected inflation, without having to rely on any trusted third parties.

Saifedean Ammous: (03:53)
I think this really captures the essence of what we have here. It's a form of software that is peer to peer in that it's distributed over the Internet, and anybody can download it and use it and any member of the network is a peer with other members. So it's perfectly voluntary. And what that software does is that it operates a payment network between participants on the network. And that payment network runs with its own native currency, which is digital, and whose supply is protected from unexpected inflation, there's no way for anybody to make more of that money, which I think is the most important economic property of Bitcoin.

Saifedean Ammous: (04:32)
And all of that is done without having to rely on any single trusted third party, there aren't intermediaries that you need to rely on in the transactions that take place on the Bitcoin network. The significance of Bitcoin, in my mind, lies in two main properties. The first one is that it is the hardest money that we have ever discovered or invented. And I'm going to discuss this in a little bit more detail now. And second is that it is the only working alternative to central banks for international payments settlement.

Saifedean Ammous: (05:02)
So first of all, when we think about the hardness, if you think about it, anything can be used as money, there's no reason why anything can't be used as money, anybody who decides to hold something, not for the sake of consuming it, but for the sake of exchanging it for something else later on, is choosing to hold that thing as a form of money.

Saifedean Ammous: (05:26)
But anything that gets held as a form of money, the value of it rises, and because the value rises, that it gives people an incentive to make more of it. So anything that is easy to make ends up being a lousy money, because people can make more of it and the value of it will drop. And so if you look historically, you find that the things that have been used as money, historically, are usually things that are hard to make. And in fact, you find that whatever is used as money is whatever is the hardest to make at any particular point in time. And so, there are these examples, which I discuss in more detail in my book. But if you look at the beginning of the 20th century, you see the entire world effectively was on a gold standard, or the vast majority of the world was on a gold standard. Because at that time, gold was the hardest money that we had ever had.

Saifedean Ammous: (06:19)
And for a very long time we know that gold supply is only increasing at around one or 2%. This has been the case for about a century, we look at global gold production, we see that every year it goes up at around 1.5%. And that is, in my mind, what makes gold the most likely monetary asset, the most popular monetary asset in the market all over the world at the beginning of the 20th century, because it is the hardest money. And even the supply continues to grow at a very low rate. So there's no way for anybody to make increasingly large quantities of gold and to bring them onto the market.

Saifedean Ammous: (07:00)
Now, why is this important? Because if you look, today, you see that Bitcoin is basically the hardest money ever. Bitcoin's supply grows, but flattens out, it stops growing at around 21 million Bitcoin. There will only ever be 21 million Bitcoin. And that's it, there'll never be more and so the supply growth rate starts off quick starts off high, but then begins to drop as the already existing supply increases, and the new supply becomes less and less significant.

Saifedean Ammous: (07:36)
So the current annual growth rate is around 2% to 3% for Bitcoin, and over the next two, three years, it's going to be a little less than 2%. And then in 2025, it'll drop again to under 1%. And then it'll continue to drop under 1% until effectively it reaches zero sometime in the next century. So, this is quite unique. And this I think makes Bitcoin quite interesting as a monetary technology, because it is the first money that we have whose supply is completely irresponsive to demand.

Saifedean Ammous: (08:12)
In other words, with everything else, if they get if something gets chosen as money, more people will be trying to produce more of it, and so the supply will increase. But with Bitcoin, there is no way of producing more of it because of something called the difficulty adjustment. When you try and make more Bitcoin, you don't make more Bitcoin, you just end up expanding more processing power and electricity on making Bitcoin more secure.

Saifedean Ammous: (08:39)
And so the way that I like to present this, is if you look at it with every other form of money that we've ever known, if people use it as a store of value, the price will rise, there will be more profit to be made from mining it. And that leads to an increase in the supply, which then leads to a drop in the price. But with Bitcoin, on the other hand, this process is a cycle. And the reason for that is that we have the first same three steps, the store of value demand increases, it causes the price to rise, it causes mining to become more profitable. But in the case of Bitcoin, if you start mining more Bitcoin, you're not able to increase the supply, there's no way of increasing the supply of Bitcoin.

Saifedean Ammous: (09:26)
So instead, what ends up happening is that more hashing power goes to mining, so more people are spending more resources on mining, and mining becomes harder, and the supply of coins stays the same. That's how the difficulty adjustment works. Instead of the reward for mining rising, the reward stays the same, but mining becomes harder. And so no matter how many people are using Bitcoin and how many people are trying to mine Bitcoin, we're only going to get a certain number of Bitcoin produced every day, around these days, it's around 900 coins, and for the next three and a half years, it's going to be 900 coins a day, regardless of how many people are trying to mine Bitcoin.

Saifedean Ammous: (10:09)
The 900 coins a day is a set reward, and the difficulty of mining adjusts in order to make sure that we continue to average around 900 coins a day. And that's how this has been working. So in other words, when mining becomes more profitable, more hashing power is going toward mining, but the supply does not increase, instead more hashing power is effectively protecting the network. So the network becomes harder to attack, it becomes more expensive to attack the Bitcoin network becomes more expensive to make the Bitcoin network unusable. And that gives Bitcoin the ability to survive longer, which makes it more attractive as a store of value which attracts more store of value demand.

Saifedean Ammous: (10:55)
And this in my mind is the only way that we can explain and understand the incredible rise in the price of bitcoin that we've seen over the last 10 years. Bitcoin has basically gone up... Well 11 years now. Bitcoin has gone up about one and a half to two billion percent in 11 years, and nothing has ever gone up like that. Ever. And I think this is really the only way to understand it, because bitcoin's supply is completely irresponsive to demand with anything else. If there's more supply, if there's more demand, we can always make more. We're always able to make more of anything else. But with Bitcoin, there's a strict fixed limit on how much we can make from it.

Saifedean Ammous: (11:38)
Because of this thing that we call difficulty adjustment, so the difficulty adjustment really is the most amazing technology in Bitcoin in my mind, it's the magic sauce that makes Bitcoin work. Because it protects the network from inflation. And it ensures the supply is auditable, and verifiable by all network members. And it converts people's inevitable incentive to increase bitcoins supply into network security. So it makes the network more secure. And it does that by using the incentive of people to increase the supply of the currency.

Saifedean Ammous: (12:11)
So it's the reason why I like to call Bitcoin and all conquering juggernaut of economic incentives. Whereas everybody competes to inflate all other monies. Whereas everybody's competing to increase the supply of every other currency that is out there, people compete to secure Bitcoin, not to inflate it. So people compete to make Bitcoin more secure, which ends up making it more attractive. So Bitcoin really solved the inflation problem in the most neat way imaginable, because instead of providing people with an incentive to increase the supply, it provides them with an incentive to make the network more secure.

Saifedean Ammous: (12:49)
And how secure is Bitcoin? Bitcoin has no single point of failure, it has no single piece of critical hardware or infrastructure, no single critical individual or organization, it basically can't be stopped. It's a protocol that is always open to anyone who wants it at any point in time, around every 10 minutes, a new block of transactions is released. And this has basically never failed in the 10 or 11 years that has been going on. And it's never confirmed a fraudulent transaction. So far, nobody has managed to spend money they don't have on the Bitcoin network.

Saifedean Ammous: (13:22)
So the hardest money that's ever been invented is basically available worldwide for anyone who can receive two megabytes of data every 10 minutes. You don't even need a computer or an internet connection. There are ways to get around that to use Bitcoin. It's purely voluntary. It does not read regulation enforcement or the police. And it's chosen and valued freely on the market. It's sound money. It's money that gets its value, because the market gives it value, not because anybody forces its value. So what is Bitcoin good for then?

Saifedean Ammous: (13:53)
Well, for me, I think the most important use case of Bitcoin is that it is a store of value. And it's an obvious use case, because it's the first strictly scarce liquid asset that we've ever had. And in fact, if you think about it, one of my favorite books is a book called The Ultimate Resource, written by economist Julian Simon. And in this book, Julian Simon explains that the ultimate resource in the world really is human time, because with human time we're able to make more of any other resource. The limit on how much we have of oil, or silver, or gold, or copper, or nickel or zinc. The limit on how much we have of all of these metals is simply how much time we dedicate toward mining and producing them. The amount of them that exists in the crust of the earth is far beyond our capability to process and consume.

Saifedean Ammous: (14:54)
And the limiting factor really is just the time that we are able to dedicate to producing those goods versus other goods, we could always make more of anything. And that's why we never run out of these metals. No matter how much we find, no matter how much we consume, we keep digging and we keep finding more. Because the limit is not how much exists on Earth, because that's so far larger than we can even ever imagine or calculate, the earth is enormous. The limit is how much time we have for other things. The limit is the opportunity cost in terms of our time, in terms of other things.

Saifedean Ammous: (15:29)
And so, before Bitcoin, anything that we chose, as a store of value in this world, had the imperfection that its supply will increase in response to it being chosen as money. But Bitcoin doesn't have that. So naturally it ends up working out really well as a store of value. And so ultimately, the only thing that is scarce is time. And Bitcoin is the second thing that is truly scarce. And so, for me that's a natural match between the two, if you want to store the value of your time in money, you would want to store it in the money that is scarce like your time.

Saifedean Ammous: (16:02)
So this is why I like to call Bitcoin the most advanced technology for transferring the value of time into the future. The second thing that Bitcoin I think is good for is that it is the decentralized free market alternative to central banking. Until the year 2009 if you wanted to send money from one country to the other, the only way that you could do it was you had to go through financial institutions that are operated by central banks. So central banks have a national monopoly on this process in every country. And they're able to monopolize the market for sending money in and out of the country. And it's had terrible consequences in many places for many people. And in many of those places, and many of those times people didn't have an alternative, because where do you go? How do you trade with people outside your country, if you can't have a bank? You can send physical gold in reliable ways that are cheap and economical.

Saifedean Ammous: (17:08)
And there was no alternative. So you have to have your savings always with the local banking system, which was also lending to the government and likely to witness significant devaluation. Bitcoin offers us the first alternative to that. It really is the first working alternative to international payment settlement. It's digital and yet it does not require the supervision and the control of national central banks.

Saifedean Ammous: (17:41)
And one important aspect that I get into detail in my book, is the issue of how Bitcoin grows and how Bitcoin scales. There is, I think, a common misconception that Bitcoin is a payment network that you can think of Bitcoin and compare it to PayPal. But in my mind I try and explain the idea that Bitcoin is actually more... Is better understood as being a settlement network, it's a network for a small number of high value transactions. And this is the way in which the network has been evolving over the past few years, it's growing in this direction, where the number of transactions conducted on Bitcoin every day has been roughly constant for maybe five, six years now at around 300,000 to 500,000 transactions a day. But the value of that is transacted continues to increase significantly. More and more value is being sent on the Bitcoin network, even though the number of transactions is the same.

Saifedean Ammous: (18:37)
So in that sense, Bitcoin is growing as a settlement network. And I think, in this regard, we're going to see it grow more in this capacity. And I think you see more and more of the businesses that are being built around Bitcoin, at this point, are focusing on this kind of use case. And an important part to this is the fact that we see it with corporations now looking into using Bitcoin as a cash settlement... As a part of their cash reserve assets, rather than thinking of using Bitcoin for payments.

Saifedean Ammous: (19:24)
So a few years ago, a lot of people used to think that when is Starbucks going to adopt Bitcoin? When is McDonald's going to adopt Bitcoin? In their mind ideals, you would be able to pay for your coffee or your burger with Bitcoin. But I think what we're seeing is that we're going to be witnessing Bitcoin transactions being performed... Bitcoin coming into those companies from the balance sheet, not from the... They're going to hold it as cash rather than accepted for small payments. And I think eventually, we will see small payments being built on Bitcoin eventually, but for now, I think that the compelling use case is to hold it and use it for large amounts of settlement rather than for daily small transactions.

Saifedean Ammous: (20:12)
So this is why in my book, I analogize Bitcoin to gold because similarly with gold, the trade was happening with a gold certificate. So we'll see second layer solutions built on Bitcoin, similar to second layer solutions built on gold, I think, and the interesting security question then for Bitcoin is whether it can resist being centralized, like gold was in central banks.

Saifedean Ammous: (20:41)
Some implications for Bitcoin I discuss in the book. One that I find extremely important is the issue of time preference. I think a problem of easy money is that it loses value and so it makes the future less certain for people. And because it makes the future less certain, it raises the cost of providing for the future. And therefore it makes it less likely for people to save for the future. And that reflects on all manner of decisions and outlooks on life which gives people more of a present focused orientation rather than a future focused orientation. I think we see the same... We see the opposite happen under hard money.

Saifedean Ammous: (21:25)
So if you think of the 19th century to today, people used to save much more in the 19th century. And if you look at what has happened as western economies went off the gold standard, you see that savings rates declined, continues to decline. The one country that continues to have higher savings rates was the last country to go off the gold standard, and that is Switzerland. So I think there's something there that suggests if we do move to a Bitcoin standard, effectively, the world would have far less debt and far more saving is the way that I would see it if you move to a hard assets.

Saifedean Ammous: (22:00)
Don't have much time to explain this in detail. But if you're familiar with the Austrian School theory of the business cycle, from that perspective, effectively easy money and the ability of governments to manipulate and central banks to extend credit, unbacked by real savings, effectively manipulating interest rate downward and increasing the money supply, that is effectively the cause of the business cycle, and inflation and recessions. And for me, this is my favorite chart to illustrate this again, look at Switzerland, up until the 1970s when they went on the gold standard, they basically had no unemployment, there were no recessions, there was really no unemployment. And then that started happening as they went off gold and started having a more conventional 20th century monetary policy.

Saifedean Ammous: (22:52)
One other important application in my mind is that it will end the... Having Bitcoin could offer us the way out of the Tower of Babel, that is the foreign exchange market. Which is trading something roughly in the sea of the size of 25 multiples of GDP, in terms of volume. All of it essentially, because we've unsolved the problem of money in the 20th century by going off gold, which was one universal international apolitical money and going to many different political monies, which effectively create the system of international partial barter around the world.

Saifedean Ammous: (23:34)
So in conclusion, I think Bitcoin, if I were to summarize what Bitcoin is, I would say Bitcoin is a technological and apolitical solution to two problems. The first is international value transfer. And the second is saving, or transferring value to the future. Bitcoin offers us essentially a technological solution for those things, it makes those things, the use of them similar to using a computer, you're able to store your value in computer in a way that is much more reliable and predictable and auditable than the traditional solutions that we have.

Saifedean Ammous: (24:12)
And I think the intriguing possibility of Bitcoin is that it offers us the prospect of a real free market in money savings, capital, and investments. That is all for the presentation. Thank you very much for inviting me. My website to saifedean.com. The Bitcoin Standard, my book is available in 24 languages now. You can find them all listed on my website. And you can also sign up to receive chapters from my two forthcoming books that I'm working on right now the Fiat Standard, which is the sequel to The Bitcoin Standard, and also a textbook in economics, Principles of Economics. Thank you very much.

John Darsie: (24:50)
Well, Saif. Thank you so much for that presentation. We already have a few questions in the queue. But I want to remind anybody who's watching, if you have any questions for the remaining 15 to 20 minutes of today's SALT Talk, if you're on Zoom with us, you can enter them in the Q&A box at the bottom of your video screen. If you're watching on Periscope on LinkedIn, or on our YouTube channel, you can email any questions you have to info@salt.org and we will try to get those in before we let Saif leave us.

John Darsie: (25:19)
The first question that's being asked and one of the reasons why we did this with you Saif is that we had some people in our community who are crypto curious but have yet to really dive in educate themselves completely about what Bitcoin is and the long term implications of cryptocurrency. So we have just a very basic follow up question from Victoria, who asks, "How is Bitcoin mined? And what's the process going to be for mining the rest of Bitcoin over the next decade and into infinity?" As we know, Bitcoin, halving works. But could you just explain what the process for mining Bitcoin is?

Saifedean Ammous: (25:53)
Yeah, the way you think of mining Bitcoin is it's almost Bitcoins are handed out, kind of like medals or trophies in a sports competition, in that they're handed out at a specific period of time. So let's say every four years, there's going to be a gold medal for the 100 meter dash. And it doesn't matter how many people compete for it all over the world. There are only going to be one metal, no matter how many people try and get it. So you can't control the supply through mining more or less. And the way that works is that the reward for mining is pre-programmed and constant. And then if more people try and compete for the reward, then all the people that are competing end up getting less and less out of the reward.

Saifedean Ammous: (26:41)
So the way that it works is that you use a computing power, you get a machine, initially you could do it on your own computer with any basic personal computer, but now it's become more sophisticated and complex, and it needs its own computer to be done economically. So you'll get this machine, which will try and solve mathematical problems to effectively win that reward.

Saifedean Ammous: (27:12)
So all these machines all over the world are mining Bitcoin by trying to find the solution to a mathematical problem. And then whoever provides the correct solution ends up winning a reward. So those rewards are handed out at a rate of six and a quarter, plus a little bit for transaction fees every 10 minutes. So there's six bitcoins being handed out every 10 minutes, roughly six to seven bitcoins more or less every 10 minutes. And that adds up to around 900 bitcoins a day, today.

Saifedean Ammous: (27:44)
So these will be handed out to people who use their computing power and their electricity to solve these mathematical problems. And the more computing power you direct towards the problem, the more likely you are to find those solutions, the more likely you are to have a profit, to make a profit. So what this leads to is that mining ends up being just a very competitive market were only the people who are the most efficient, who have the lowest cost of power, and who can secure the best hardware are able to continue to mine profitably, because it's competitive.

Saifedean Ammous: (28:22)
So the people who have the lowest electricity prices are the only ones who are going to be able to turn out profit because everybody else, they won't be making that award because it won't be economical for them. If your electricity is expensive, then that award that you make will not be worthwhile. So the point behind it is to make it so that the supply of Bitcoin is regulated by the mining process, so that it doesn't increase beyond what it is meant to be increasing at.

Saifedean Ammous: (28:53)
So the schedule right now, the schedule brings us to 21 million in around 100 years from now. We're already at 18.5 million roughly today. So we already have 18.5 million bitcoins that have already been mined. So there's only two and a half million bitcoins to be mined over the next 100 years. And the growth rate is just going to continue to decline over time.

John Darsie: (29:18)
All right, fantastic. What do you say to critics who talk about energy efficiency as it relates to mining and computing power to run the Bitcoin network? That's one criticism that's leveled at Bitcoin is that it's very energy inefficient.

Saifedean Ammous: (29:32)
I think Bitcoin is extremely energy efficient in that it is constantly punishing anybody who has expensive energy. So if you're trying to mine Bitcoin with grid power, you're not going to mine Bitcoin profitably. There are no grids that are basically competitive with a Bitcoin network, because the people that are able to be turning a profit in Bitcoin mining are those who have power that is essentially stranded, that is oversupply at places where it's not easy to move in.

Saifedean Ammous: (30:04)
And power is not easy to transport the capital power a lot. So Bitcoin is essentially a buyer of last resort of power from people who have excess power that don't know what to do with it. And that's why it's mainly mined in hydroelectric dams where they have a lot of spare capacity. And in methane fields, I think is another one where it's going to start growing, it's not now, but I think the potential for that one is enormous, because methane fields, they flare a lot... Sorry, in oil fields, they flare a lot of methane that is not economical to ship, because methane isn't very energy dense, and so it's not really economical.

Saifedean Ammous: (30:40)
And so usually they just burn it, but if you use it to mine Bitcoin, you can recover a lot of your costs. So I think Bitcoin is efficient, is highly energy efficient, uses extremely cheap energy, and it encourages innovations in finding cheaper and cheaper electricity. However, there's no denying that Bitcoin does consume a lot of energy. But I think here I find this question strange.

Saifedean Ammous: (31:04)
It's very common for people to think that consuming a lot of energy is a bad thing. But if you think that consuming a lot of energy is a bad thing, then why would you buy a washing machine? Why wouldn't you wash your clothes with your own hand? Why would you get into a car? A car consumes more energy than a bicycle and an airplane consumes more energy than both.

Saifedean Ammous: (31:23)
And we use those things precisely because they use more energy because burning energy is an extremely cost efficient way to get things done, much more cost efficient than using human input. And so for the same reason, I think that we got rid of telephone operators and we use automated telephones, Bitcoin essentially automates monetary policy and gets rid of discretionary monetary policy and automates international settlement clearance. And I can't think of a better use of electricity.

John Darsie: (32:04)
So we have a few questions around this theme of Bitcoin being digital gold, or an alternative store of value. And some people enjoyed your last slide comparing the total value of the FX market. What do you think the ultimate market cap for Bitcoin could climb to? Is it capped at basically, taking some market cap from gold, and those two assets being your two main alternative stores of value? Or how large of a market cap Do you think Bitcoin could eventually have? And what's the path to getting there?

Saifedean Ammous: (32:39)
Really, it's a scary question to consider, because you try and draw the line on where demand can stop and you keep struggling. So you could say gold, I think de-monetizing gold is a realistic goal and turning golden into an industrial metal, that can happen. So Bitcoin can eat that market. It won't mean gold will go to zero, obviously, it'll become just a expensive industrial metal.

Saifedean Ammous: (33:06)
But you have to also remember that a lot more of global markets are essentially just looking for a store of value, or they're not looking for investment that yields returns. There's a lot of money that is just looking for a store of value. And so a lot of real estate, a lot of people buy homes that they don't really need, because that beats inflation. And a lot of people invest in all kinds of things like bonds, for instance.

Saifedean Ammous: (33:38)
So Bitcoin could eat into the market for real estate, could eat into market for bonds. And so these things could lose a significant amount of the demand that comes to them. Because people don't have a solid store of value that can just offer them... That can be the base of your portfolio that you don't take risks with. And Bitcoin, if it grows into this kind of digital gold, it can offer people that. And so you can imagine, then it would reduce the demand for other markets. And then really, the sky's the limit, I guess.

John Darsie: (34:18)
So we have a few questions about Satoshi Nakamoto, who is the anonymous figure that basically created Bitcoin, there's been speculation about it being an individual or a group of people. But to this day, the identity of the people who started Bitcoin remains a question mark. And we've had a few questions like this on other digital assets, SALT Talks we've done about whether you think ultimately we'll find out who created Bitcoin, and whether you think that would enhance confidence in the system. And who you think, Satoshi Nakamoto is.

Saifedean Ammous: (34:55)
I don't know who it is. And a lot of people have spent a lot of time digging into it. And I don't think there's any satisfactory answer. I think it's hard to explain who he is or what happened. But what we know... In my mind, I think, the disappearance and there's the fact that the person who created this left is probably an essential part of what makes Bitcoin work. I think, if Bitcoin had continued... And I don't know if he did it deliberately, because he didn't indicate whether he wanted to do that. Maybe he did it deliberately, or maybe something happened.

Saifedean Ammous: (35:32)
But I think the fact that there was nobody in charge, and the project continued to survive, is what makes it extremely tough, because it's what makes the monetary policy set in stone. It's what gives it digital value. Because this is a network that is out of control of anybody. There's nobody out there who can take over this network and change the money supply.

Saifedean Ammous: (35:55)
And potentially, I think, if the owner of the guy who started it was still around, they might have had this power and they have this power, they'd set the precedent of doing something like this at an early stage. The whole thing would have become much more political. And in my mind, it would not have this value proposition. It would be far more of like an interesting startup. More than this neutral protocol, which is what Bitcoin is right now. So I think the disappearance of the creator was an enormously important factor in the growth of Bitcoin in a way in which it had become neutral and controlled by nobody.

John Darsie: (36:42)
Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but my understanding is that Satoshi whether that's a person or a group of people still owns a substantial part of the Bitcoin float that exists out in the marketplace. And in general, Bitcoin ownership is very concentrated among a small group of people who are early evangelists of the cryptocurrency. What do you say to people who level the accusation that those groups of people are simply talking their own book and trying to hype up Bitcoin as a way to enrich themselves, and maybe staying anonymous as a way to avoid accusations of conflict of interest as they try to drive Bitcoin higher?

Saifedean Ammous: (37:21)
Well, I mean, part of the mystery is that we don't know who the person is, and they haven't touched their coins. So while we don't really know whether they are his coins to begin with. But given the current value is probably something in the range of, I think, $10, $20 billion, or something like that. It's a lot of money for somebody to be sitting on. I think they probably would have wanted to cash on it earlier. So it's-

John Darsie: (37:51)
They've had a pretty nice return.

Saifedean Ammous: (37:53)
Yes, but they haven't cashed out. So that is quite mystifying but I think in terms of the early adopters, in a sense, yes. But you have to remember that as the thing goes up, as the price goes up, as demand increases, the early adopters sell, because the prices go up in ways that become life changing, and so they sell significant chunks of their assets.

Saifedean Ammous: (38:23)
Now the fact that it's insiders that are promoting it. I guess you could say that about anything but the key difference with Bitcoin. And the reason why I think it's completely meaningless to call it a Ponzi scheme, is that none of the insiders have the way of creating more liabilities to draw on the wealth, or backed by the wealth that is parked in the network.

Saifedean Ammous: (38:49)
So in a Ponzi scheme, people would bring in money into it, and then you're getting new money from new people, and you're using that to pay off the old people. So the same money is being given as liabilities out to several people, and then the whole thing comes crashing down, but nobody can do that in Bitcoin. You are the only one who can own your own keys, and nobody can generate more liabilities, nobody can make more Bitcoins.

Saifedean Ammous: (39:15)
So the rules of the game are open and transparent for everybody. And in a sense, this sounds little more than just sour grapes, like yes, some people took a risk early when you were mocking it and laughing at it and saying it was stupid. And the market found out that maybe it wasn't very stupid. So it seems to me that it is a little bit unfair to be turning around now and saying that it's unfair that the people who took the risk that you derided it and didn't take, took the reward for it.

John Darsie: (39:48)
So your book is called The Bitcoin Standard. Obviously, you're very enthusiastic about Bitcoin. Are you a Bitcoin maximalist? Meaning you think it's going to be a winner take all type scenario in the digital asset space where Bitcoin is going to be the overwhelming winner, and you're going to have maybe a few other coins out there that lag well behind Bitcoin? Do you think this is a space that's going to develop as a mature asset class, and you're going to have other coins and cryptocurrencies and digital assets that have tremendous value as well?

Saifedean Ammous: (40:17)
No, I think it's really it's Bitcoin or bust. There's really only one protocol, one neutral protocol here, and there's only neutral protocols. But I think the use case, ultimately, of the tokens that underlie value transfer, it has to be one protocol. And the only one that can make a claim for being a neutral protocol that is controlled by nobody, that isn't controlled by anybody, is Bitcoin. And that's really ultimately... It's what I see as the value proposition that... It's the guarantee that this thing should have value. The reason these digital bits of data are able to have economic value is because there's a guarantee that nobody can go and change the supply, which is trivial in my mind with all the other digital assets.

Saifedean Ammous: (41:05)
So none of them can demonstrate to me that they have anything like the resilience that Bitcoin has. Because we saw with Bitcoin in 2017, some of the most influential Bitcoin companies and some of the most influential Bitcoin developers and some of the bigger investors in Bitcoin all I tried to change one simple metric and parameter in the Bitcoin network and failed. But you don't see that happening with any of the other currencies, which are to be frank, after Bitcoin, if any of these has made a name where people have heard about it, it only made that name because it had a group of people behind it, working in a concerted effort.

Saifedean Ammous: (41:43)
And for those people, changing the supply and controlling the supply is more or less a bit of a trivial problem. And we've seen with some of the bigger ones that they've... That they don't even know what their supply is going to be like. So for me, I think the value proposition is just not there, in having any of these digital tokens attain the scarcity that is necessary for them to have reliable market value in the long run. And that's why you see that a lot of these copycat coins come into the Bitcoin space. There's a lot of hype initially, but then eventually, they crash. And essentially, they all flatline and head towards zero next to Bitcoin.

Saifedean Ammous: (42:28)
It's happened with thousands of them. And I think we're still at a point where in terms of market cap, which is a very flawed measure, Bitcoin is about 70% of the market. But in terms of real world liquidity, the real world liquidity for the other currencies, it's more likely than Bitcoin is about 90% of the total real liquidity, not just the kind of market cap, which can be easily spoofed.

Saifedean Ammous: (42:58)
So if we're talking about a world in which the market has for 11 years, after 11 years of all these thousands of competitors coming in, and they still can't get to more than 10% of the liquidity of Bitcoin, I think it's time to consider this is not Pepsi and Coca Cola. This is not different providers of different software packages. This is a neutral protocol versus really proprietary currencies. And it's more like there's the internet. And then there are other people trying to sell their own local work network as being the other internet. But there's only really one protocol for the web itself.

John Darsie: (43:44)
So you're a believer in the Austrian School of Economics. And you think that our current Keynesian, fiat monetary system is inevitably flawed and eventually going to implode as we try to inflate our way out of our problems. What do you think the ultimate path for Bitcoin is? Do you think it's something that the United States government and other global governments are going to eventually acquiesce and come up with regulation that allows it to coexist with something like the US dollar? Do you think if the system starts to collapse a little bit that they'll start to crack down on cryptocurrency with capital controls and try to prosecute people that use cryptocurrencies? What do you think the ultimate path to acceptance and mainstream use for Bitcoin is over the coming decades?

Saifedean Ammous: (44:30)
I have to say, I don't really necessarily think that this current system has to crash, it's been going around 50 years and for all I know, it could go for another 50, maybe even more. And in my mind, I don't really have much of the idea that Bitcoin is... It could be that Bitcoin is the savior from hyperinflation and it certainly was my savior from hyperinflation in Lebanon, where I used to live until recently and the currency collapsed. So I think if hyperinflation does happen, Bitcoin is a great thing to have.

Saifedean Ammous: (45:05)
However, I don't think that Bitcoin needs a hyperinflation scenario, in order for it to rise. I think this is a point that I keep trying to communicate, which is that we need to stop thinking about it, in terms of this system is going to collapse in Bitcoin is the only answer. I think we need to just think this is just a better technology, this is just a more advanced system. And it's likely to take over just because apolitical settlement that is accessible and verifiable, for anybody, anywhere around the world, at a very low cost is just a much more powerful proposition than having to go through political institutions every time you want to send and receive money. And having to go through political institutions that have a monopoly that can devalue the currency.

Saifedean Ammous: (45:53)
So I think, by being harder money and by offering international clearance independently, Bitcoin is just a new ecosystem. And in my mind, I don't see that it is necessary for the Fiat system to collapse for Bitcoin to grow. I think the two can continue to coexist for a long period of time, while Bitcoin grows. And it's not implausible in my mind that just Bitcoin continues to grow peacefully next to a relatively shrinking Fiat economy, and then effectively we upgrade to a scenario where we're using more Bitcoin.

Saifedean Ammous: (46:30)
And I think the use case, ultimately, in my mind, I like to compare it to dynamite. When dynamite comes up it changes... Or gunpowder, it changes the dynamics of power. And if you have an army of soldiers who have swords, you don't like gunpowder. So what do you do? Do you ban gunpowder? Banning gunpowder is not going to be effective, because the people who are going to fight your soldiers are not going to-

John Darsie: (46:58)
Good luck with that.

Saifedean Ammous: (47:00)
Exactly. You're just bending your own soldiers from having gunpowder. So for me, I think individuals, corporations, and governments will start just understanding the massive potential for Bitcoin as effectively digital dynamite gold. And see that their own interest is better served by using Bitcoin rather than fighting Bitcoin.

John Darsie: (47:25)
So in your view, what are the biggest risks to Bitcoin becoming this major store of value that we're talking about as a digital gold, and an alternative to other stores of value that you've described?

Saifedean Ammous: (47:37)
I think the main risk to keep an eye on is the decentralization of the network. If the number of nodes, and that's really the key metric to keep an eye on, if the number of nodes in the Bitcoin network declined significantly, then there's... Or if the cost of running a node rises significantly, then you expect that the number of nodes would decline. And as a result, you would have a smaller number of nodes. And then that becomes more concerning because it becomes more plausible that they could collude with one another, to change the supply.

Saifedean Ammous: (48:10)
So if you have a situation where there develops an asymmetry between the people using Bitcoin and the people who are able to validate the blocks, and are able to validate the consensus rules of the network, if that split becomes too big, and the number of the nodes becomes too small and concentrated, then in my mind that really compromises the value proposition, because it makes it likely that you could get some kind of collusion or it's more likely at least that you could get some kind of collusion that could alter the monetary policy. So this for me is the main risk, the decentralization.

John Darsie: (48:50)
For people who are interested in owning Bitcoin what do you think is the optimal path to buying Bitcoin that's currently available in the marketplace today? So you have some over the counter investment products that have started to emerge, but you have yet to have a SEC approved and registered ETF. For example, you have exchanges like Coinbase, Gemini, and others that you can buy and sell Bitcoin, in your view what's the most secure, safest method for buying Bitcoin today?

Saifedean Ammous: (49:20)
I mean, it's not an easy question, because it depends on who's asking it and how they want to do it. Obviously, there are many commercial options for individuals and for institutions. For my personal, I work with a company called the NYDIG, the New York digital Investment Group, and they offer a full suite of solutions, institutional grade solutions fully regulated, and they have the BitLicense.

Saifedean Ammous: (49:49)
So that would be the kind of solution that I would recommend for institutions. With individuals, I recommend, the most important thing is that you hold your own keys of Bitcoin. If you don't hold your own private keys of Bitcoin, for your Bitcoin, then these are not your bitcoins. And I recommend personally, individually holding your own Bitcoin for yourself. But obviously, that might not be feasible with institutional money, which might require more elaborate custody arrangements. And for that there's NYDIG. But yeah, I think that it's difficult to recommend something too specific, just because there are too many options. And it depends on what the person prefers. And for their own security, the best solution is the one that makes sense for you, that you're likely to stick to safely.

John Darsie: (50:45)
There you go. That's responsible advice. Dr. Ammous, Saif, it's been a pleasure to have you on, we look forward to hopefully having you at one of our in person SALT conferences here in the future, as we talked about before we started and as you can see, by all the episodes of SALT Talks that have covered digital assets, we have a growing enthusiasm and interest in the space. So we look forward to continuing our journey, both academically and potentially in practice in the future. But thanks so much for joining us, and we'll look forward to seeing you soon.

Saifedean Ammous: (51:15)
Thank you very much for having me. This was a lot of fun.

PlanB: Modeling Bitcoin’s Value with Scarcity | SALT Talks #126

“Doing nothing, you put [Bitcoin] under the mattress, that particular combination would have outperformed the S&P 500 over the last 10 years, not only in return but also in risk.”

PlanB is a Dutch institutional investor with a legal and quantitative finance background. He created the Bitcoin Stock-to-Flow (S2F) model where he uses scarcity to quantify Bitcoin value. PlanB is currently working as an investment manager in a team managing a multi-billion-dollar balance sheet.

Bitcoin has been the best performing asset of the last one, five and ten years. It represents a very asymmetrical bet, meaning the return is much higher than its volatility. The Bitcoin white paper written by the cryptocurrency’s anonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto served as the “Aha” moment, laying out the revolutionary technology in simple terms. “I liked the white paper so much. It's a very simple description, nine pages, very elegant, not that mathematical… from there you start your journey.”

It’s common among anyone considering Bitcoin to feel like they are late in getting involved. In reality, Bitcoin is still in the early innings. The asymmetric nature of Bitcoin and its growth potential could see its price go above $300k by the end of 2021.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

PlanB.jpeg

PlanB

Institutional Investor

MODERATOR

anthony_scaramucci.jpeg

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darsie: (00:07)
Hello everyone and welcome back to SALT Talks. My name is John Darsie. I'm the Managing Director of SALT which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance, technology and public policy. SALT Talks are a digital interview series with leading investors, creators and thinkers that we launched during this work from home period. And what we're trying to do on the SALT Talks is replicate the experience that we provide at our global conferences, the SALT Conference, which we host twice a year in a normal environment once in the United States and once internationally, most recently in Abu Dhabi in 2019. We're looking forward to getting back to a normal event calendar hopefully in the second half of 2021.

John Darsie: (00:50)
But what we try to do at our conferences and what we're trying to do on these talks is provide our community a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And we're breaking ground today on today's SALT Talk. It'll be a first for us here at SALT. We have an anonymous faceless speaker joining us on SALT Talks today, and that anonymous faceless speaker is PlanB.

John Darsie: (01:16)
Welcome to SALT Talks PlanB. PlanB is a Dutch institutional investor who goes by the name @100trillionUSD on Twitter. He has a legal and quantitative finance background but chooses to remain anonymous in the public sphere. He created the bitcoin stock-to-flow model for valuing the price of bitcoin where he uses scarcity to quantify what he thinks is bitcoin's real value. The stock-to-flow model is not only applicable to bitcoin but also to gold, silver, and any other type of asset. PlanB is currently working as an investment manager in a team managing a multi-billion dollar balance sheet.

John Darsie: (01:54)
So why does he call himself PlanB? PlanB refers to an alternative plan for quantitative easing, AKA printing money by central banks, negative interest rates and currency debasement in general. 100trillionUSD is a reference to the Zimbabwe 100 trillion US dollar note that came about during the 2008 period of hyperinflation.

John Darsie: (02:18)
A reminder. If you have any questions for PlanB during today's SALT Talk except questions about who his real identity is because he's not going to give that up, he's probably Satoshi and doesn't want to tell us, but if you have any other questions for PlanB during today's SALT Talk, you can enter them in the Q&A box at the bottom of your video screen on Zoom. And hosting today's talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge Capital, a global alternative investment firm. Anthony is also the chairman of SALT. And with that, I'll turn it over to Anthony for the interview.

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:49)
Well PlanB, thanks for joining us. Usually I ask people about their backgrounds, but because you like being anonymous, I'm going to jump right into my questions about your life and what you're doing now. John's accusing you of being Satoshi. Who do you think Satoshi is PlanB?

PlanB: (03:09)
Yeah. Well, first of all, thanks for having me Anthony. I'm really thrilled to be on your show. Let me get that out of the way immediately. I'm not Satoshi, and I don't wish I were because, yeah, what he did is remarkable. The invention of bitcoin and the invention of digital scarcity. I don't know who he is or she or they. Nobody knows. And I think the people that know, that will keep him anonymous and not dox him because the anonymity is very important to bitcoin.

Anthony Scaramucci: (03:50)
And let's take that a little further. I actually think that he or she or that group has already figured out a way to encrypt the way bitcoin is secure. I think that anonymity will stay secure. Just my personal opinion.

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:07)
But let's talk about bitcoin for the neo fight. Let's talk about, wow, I'm reading about bitcoin. I haven't read the bitcoin standard. I haven't read articles related to the blockchain or I haven't been to a symposium, but something is going on in bitcoin where it went to 20,000 or 19 or so thousand in 2017. It crashed down to earth at 3,000 a few years later and now it's back in that sort of let's call it 17 to 20,000 zone, I guess currently at around 18,000. Why should I get involved? Why should I take my intellectual curiosity and be drawn to bitcoin?

PlanB: (04:50)
Yeah, that's simple. Bitcoin is the best performing asset this year, the last five year and last 10 years. And not only on a return-only basis, but also on a risk-adjusted basis. So bitcoin is a very asymmetrical bet. It has the largest sharp ratio that I have ever seen in my entire 25-year career. So it has a sharp ratio of by 2.5. So return is much higher than its volatility. And I know it has extreme volatility, right? It can go 70% or 80% down in a year. It did that three times last 10 years. So it's extremely volatile. It's not for the weak hands like we call them, but it has enormous upside as well and the upside cancels the volatility out. The sharp ratio is very high. So yeah.

PlanB: (05:54)
I think the question for investors to ask is not why should I, not why should I be in bitcoin. It's rather why should I not be in bitcoin from my perspective.

Anthony Scaramucci: (06:07)
And is there a reason why someone shouldn't be in bitcoin PlanB?

PlanB: (06:11)
No. I don't think there is actually. I've heard a lot of reasons also within my company which manages a big pension balance sheet, a bank balance sheet and a life insurance balance sheet. And that is the most difficult decision for them to make of course because it's other people's money. We have legislators, regulators, central banks looking over our shoulder. But for a normal investor or a fund investor I don't think there is any good reason not to invest because the volatility is mentioned as a big risk. It is by definition risk. But it's always mentioned as something that is a reason for not investing in bitcoin.

PlanB: (06:58)
But we as investors know of course that you can manage volatility. You can size your investment. You can as a matter of fact, if you put 1% of your total investment in bitcoin and 99 in cash doing nothing, you put it under the mattress, that particular combination would outperform, would have outperformed the S&P500 over the last 10 years, not only in return but also in risk. So that's, yeah.

Anthony Scaramucci: (07:29)
Listen. It's very compelling. But when did you have your bitcoin aha moment? So I guess it's a two-part question. When did you discover bitcoin, start to do your research and analysis on it? And then when did you have your aha moment?

PlanB: (07:46)
Yeah. I like that question because it seems like everybody goes through a sort of process that takes some time and that journey for me started in 2013, early 2013. I read the white paper because it was mentioned in, I think Zero Hatch or some website. But bitcoin was mentioned, the white paper was mentioned, so I read it. And right there right then was my aha moment because I liked the white paper so much. It's a very simple description, nine pages, very elegant, not that mathematical, just in words what Satoshi did with bitcoin and I recommend everybody to read the white paper before anything else because it's the source. It leads you to all the other people and articles that are mentioned in that white paper. And from there you start your journey.

PlanB: (08:44)
So I started reading books, listening to podcasts. And I wasn't ready to invest until 2015, 2016. But in 2013 when I first saw it, it was $100 and then a couple months later in 2013 it was $1000. So I thought, "Wow. Okay. I missed it. I'm too late." And that feeling by the way never goes away. I still feel I'm too late.

PlanB: (09:12)
But yeah, that took me to the investing part, investing decision was mainly driven at that time, so 2015, 16 when I didn't have a model yet or hadn't quantified it. But it was mainly driven by the notion of scarcity, that the invention that Satoshi Nakamoto did is digital scarcity which is, yeah, sort of an impossible thing. Something can be digital but then it can be copied, so how can it be scarce? How does that work?

PlanB: (09:43)
So it's really a discovery process and it leads into very exotic worlds like cryptography, peer-to-peer networks, mining, proof of work, hashing, those kinds of terms are really, yeah, basic, really essential to get, to learn about. But then, once you start investing, you start feeling the effect of volatility of course but also of the enormous uptrend that's in the asset.

PlanB: (10:17)
So the scarcity, the 21 million is what got me in there. But it was not until 2019 that I really had the desire to have something more, more like a fundamental model that I use in investing professionally as well where I could say a little bit more mathematically about the price and the path for the next couple of years.

Anthony Scaramucci: (10:50)
You're saying something interesting. You're saying that you're too late. But are you too late though or is this the beginning really? Or are we still in the first innings of bitcoin? Yes, I know 2014 bitcoin traded at $154 per coin and it's now 18,000 and so that looks late. But when you think about the potential for bitcoin, are we still in the early innings?

PlanB: (11:15)
We are, definitely. We're not late. But it's more the feeling that everybody who goes in has the feeling that he's late. I had that feeling at, well, around 400 because I missed the hundred part and before me of course there were people entering at 10 or one or even below a dollar, right?

Anthony Scaramucci: (11:35)
Of course.

PlanB: (11:36)
But yeah, now we're very early. I think in the adoption terminology we would be in the innovator stage, not even the early adopter phase. There's not even 2.5% invested in bitcoin, so we're very, very early. And that's also what my models show because this upside is immense. Yeah, no. It's always scary to enter. You always have the feeling you're late, but you're not.

Anthony Scaramucci: (12:07)
All right. Well, it's a good point. The 21 million, I have to confess you I have not read the white paper but I will now go and read the white paper. But is there a reason for that number? Is that number arbitrary? Or I know they were trying to create scarcity. But why did they pick 21 million or does nobody know that answer?

PlanB: (12:25)
Nobody really knows. And I think it is ... It could be arbitrary. I think it is by the way. So like no. There's no good reason why it shouldn't be any other number.

Anthony Scaramucci: (12:36)
Okay. Your macro view, when you think about price trajectory for bitcoin over the next five years, what do you think it is and why are you so bullish?

PlanB: (12:47)
Yeah. My macro view is also a quant view because my background is very quantitative. I have to have numbers. That's why I made this stock-to-flow model that got me my name. And what that model shows it's based on scarcity on the 21 million and it compares to scarcity. It quantifies it to gold, real estate, silver, diamonds, et cetera, et cetera. If you look at that trajectory, what we had last 10 years, where it could go to the levels of gold and real estate, then I expect bitcoin to do another 10x or 20x.

PlanB: (13:31)
So it will go to well north of 100,000, maybe north of 300,000 before Christmas next year. And that sounds really bullish. That sounds maybe ridiculous to some people, but we've done that three times before and it's this very asymmetric return. Years of nothing, some big crashes and then an enormous bull year that I think that will happen next year and it's typically after halvings.

PlanB: (14:05)
I know you talked about this before in one of the other podcasts, but the supply of bitcoin is halved every four year. And imagine that the gold mining supply would halve. Imagine what that would do to price. That's what you see.

Anthony Scaramucci: (14:21)
So let's go into it. It's being had because this stuff is being taken out of supply. It's basically like a Van Gogh. It can't be replicated and so there's a finite supply of it and it's being taken out of supply which is increasing price. Is that fair to say?

PlanB: (14:38)
Yeah, that's right. Bitcoins are made every 10 minutes in a block. Every 10 minutes all the transactions are put together in a block and the miners make that block. And the miners that found the hash that make the block valid, they get the new bitcoins. It's 6.25 bitcoins at the moment every 10 minutes. That was 12.5. Four years before that it was 25, and it started in January 2009 when Satoshi mined the first block with 50 bitcoins every 10 minutes. So we're now at 6.25. And that will halve for the next 100 years. So yeah, supply will be taken out. If you want bitcoin, you will have to convince somebody else to give it up, to sell it to you. And of course that does something with the price.

PlanB: (15:34)
But fundamentally, from a first principle point of view, scarce assets are worth more than abundant assets. And bitcoin is the first absolute scarce asset. You cannot alter the supply, change the supply. Even when price rises, you cannot increase the supply because it's mathematically in the protocol. And that's very unique because even with gold, if there is a lot of demand, if the price rises and gold price goes let's say 2x, for sure, the mining will increase and miners will do everything to mine more gold, to print more gold if you will. Bitcoin, that cannot happen.

Anthony Scaramucci: (16:21)
You've talked about this stock-to-flow cross asset model for valuing bitcoin. You've invented it. How does that work? Describe it to a lay person.

PlanB: (16:33)
Yeah. So when I read the white paper and later also Saifedean's book, The Bitcoin Standard, I think you had him on the show yesterday.

Anthony Scaramucci: (16:42)
Yes.

PlanB: (16:44)
Beautiful book. Must read. He talks about stock-to-flow as a measure for scarcity. So there you have the two combined. Bitcoin is scarce. How do you measure scarcity? You can do it with stock-to-flow. I knew stock-to-flow from the gold community. Gold investors use stock-to-flow to measure the scarcity of gold and silver and platinum, et cetera. My insight was to relate that to the market values of gold and bitcoin and diamonds and real estate.

PlanB: (17:14)
So I plotted the stock-to-flow, the scarcity on the y-axis or the x-axis and the market value of the total market, bitcoin market, diamond market, real estate market on the y-axis, and also the historical path of bitcoin. And what you see is that there is almost perfect linear relationship between those assets and between bitcoin's path towards the scarcity of gold and real estate. So that's very interesting and mathematically very hard to deny. So yeah, it's a relation between scarcity and value, and you can exploit that.

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:02)
We have some pretty well known people, Stan Druckenmiller, Paul Tudor Jones, Bill Miller, all three are money managers that became billionaires due to their investment acumen. And now even Ray Dalio is starting to warm to crypto. We're starting to see legacy institutions like JP Morgan and Morgan Stanley write positively about bitcoin. The career risk factor seems to have faded away from supporting bitcoin at institutions. But when do you think that fade, if you will, will turn into an asset allocation recommendation for their investors? Obviously Paul Tudor Jones is already in there. So is Stan Druckenmiller and Bill Miller. But when do you think that crossover happens and it becomes more mainstream?

PlanB: (18:54)
I think it goes gradually and it has gone gradually of the last couple of years. Bitcoin is a bit exotic. It's new. So you can't ... Well, most people don't know it, but once you see it and once you get it, once you read the white paper, you get what bitcoin is, then you cannot go back. Once you've seen, you cannot unsee is what I say. And especially if you have a quantitative background. So I guess especially hedge fund guys who are used to spotting opportunities and using quantitative analysis and maybe algos to trade and invest, these investor groups are specifically open to recognizing asymmetric bets like bitcoin. So once they see it, they will go in. It's just too yummy not to.

PlanB: (19:50)
Yeah. So I think it will grow gradually. Also, the gold investors. Gold investors are of course very much into the bitcoin vision of sound money, scarcity. The only problem there is that it's a lot of older guys that don't have IT or programming or necessarily quant background. So you see the gold community divided in two groups, the old ones that want to touch the gold and feel it and want to have it physical, and the newer generation that believes in sound money, shares this view with bitcoin and actually understands what peer-to-peer is and elliptic curve encryption and all those things. So yeah, I think that's how it goes. It goes automatically and it's a momentum that cannot be stopped.

Anthony Scaramucci: (20:47)
You mentioned earlier in our conversation gold as a store of value, real estate as a store of value. The one slightly different thing about these two, and again, gold I think there are some commercial uses and use in jewelry and real estate obviously you can earn rent from real estate or you can get the pleasure of sitting in the home, et cetera. Why do you think bitcoin will rise to that level? Because it doesn't, and again, I'm just playing devil's advocate here for a second, because it doesn't have any of those two components that I just described. So why are you still comfortable with it?

PlanB: (21:33)
Yeah, I like the question. Bitcoin is much more like gold of course because it has no cash flow. It's a commodity. It has no cash flow. You cannot use cash flow models to value it like real estate. With the rent you can actually evaluate it the classic way. But what you see especially right now and in the micro environment with especially since 2008 which by the way is no coincidence that the bitcoin white paper was written in 2008 and published in 2008, that was the height of the global financial crisis of course. And since 2008 we have seen quantitative easing, massive amounts of money printing, stimulus of, well, first to save banks, now with COVID to save the economy. And all that money has to go somewhere. Of course, central banks buy bonds, they buy mortgages and interest rates go down, especially here in Europe where interest rates are negative even in countries that are, well, close to default or actually already over that line, even if those have negative interest rates.

PlanB: (22:54)
So a lot of people have and also companies, hedge funds, but also normal companies we've seen that recently have a big problem what to do with your cash. There is no yield to be made. And we have that too as an institutional investor, investing pension money. Where is the yield? Where can you earn money? There is not much places. So a lot of people go to real estate. Some people go to gold. So I guess a lot of this rise in prices of all these scarce assets, gold, real estate, diamond, silver, bitcoin also has to do with the quantitative easing, the debasement, the printing. You can actually see it in the models as well.

PlanB: (23:44)
So yeah. I think there is even in real estate where there's a lot of utility value of course because you can live in a house, even in real estate there is a big monetary premium at the moment because investors use it as a store of value for it. And you can see it for example in Amsterdam right now. I won't mention names but there is huge asset investors, billion, trillion dollar balance sheets that buy everything in Amsterdam, all the houses, just because there's nothing else where you can put your money in.

Anthony Scaramucci: (24:26)
Yeah. And to your point, if you're inflating the currency or creating more currency, well, those houses will be worth more in those currencies. And there's scarcity to it. I got a couple of more questions. I'm going to turn it over to John Darsie, my colleague here, who's got ... We've got a ton of audience participation today. But before we go to those questions, just two quick questions. Are you a bitcoin maximalist or do you like other digital currencies? Do you think there are other digital currencies that will rise to the level of bitcoin or perhaps compete with it? Or is that over? Obviously Michael Saylor was on, and he sort of felt that that was over. What's your opinion PlanB?

PlanB: (25:11)
Yeah. I'm absolutely a bitcoin maximalist. I think it's winner takes all game, and I think a lot of the confusion there comes from the fact that some people see bitcoin and other coins as products or companies. And you can have multiple products and some product will win and the other product will lose or multiple companies can coexist together which is a very logical view. But bitcoin in my view is not a company. It's a protocol. It's more like TCP/IP. It's more like POP IMAP or HTTP. It's a protocol. And of course you can only have one protocol, especially a money protocol. Why? In my eyes it doesn't make sense to have ... to still have in 2020 and beyond multiple currencies like we have today where it's much, much more efficient to have one monetary protocol which is bitcoin. And yeah. I'm what they call a maximalist, but I don't like the term by the way.

Anthony Scaramucci: (26:21)
Tell me why.

PlanB: (26:23)
I don't know. It was invented by Vitalik Buterin, the inventor of Ethereum coin. It was meant in a bad way. Maximalists sounds like terrorists. It doesn't sound very good. So I'm ...

Anthony Scaramucci: (26:45)
I'll have to start switching my vernacular. I appreciate you giving me some of that etymology of the name. My last question. Then I'm going to turn it over to John. Do you think there'll be a bitcoin ETF in our future?

PlanB: (27:00)
Yeah, we already have one. It's called MicroStrategy.

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:03)
Right, yeah, amen.

PlanB: (27:05)
It's defacto ETF, right? It's listed and it has a big chunk of bitcoin in there. But no. Yeah. I don't know. We should have a bitcoin ETF. It's very strange we don't have one. And once we get it, maybe in a couple of years, but they're stalling it. I don't know for what reason. So there's all kinds of other products, exchange-headed notes, exchange-traded commodities but no exchange traded fund yet. I'm sure we'll get there, but maybe it takes some years to ... Yeah, for some reason they don't allow it yet.

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:47)
John, I'm going to let you take over. I love the name. I got to get one of these hats PlanB. So when this is over, I got to send you my home address, okay? I got to be walking around my town with this hat on so people will have to ask me what that means.

PlanB: (28:03)
I'll get you one.

Anthony Scaramucci: (28:04)
All right. That's a deal. All right, go ahead John. I know you got tons of questions.

John Darsie: (28:08)
Yep. All right PlanB. So Anthony referred earlier to the fact that a lot of big names in the investment management industry are now espousing the virtues of bitcoin and in many cases buying it either in their hedge fund portfolios or in their personal portfolios. How do you think the evolution of the base of asset owners for bitcoin that now includes so many strong hands like a Paul Tudor Jones or a Bill Miller or a Stan Druckenmiller, how do you think that affects the way bitcoin will trade and ultimately could potentially suppress volatility as it experiences its next bull run?

PlanB: (28:42)
Yeah, great question. Two questions actually. I'll start with how it will progress. I think it will progress and it has progressed in a way that the easier it is for an investor to decide, the earlier he goes in. So if you're a high net worth individual that can decide over your own money and don't need some shareholders or employees or accountants to convince, you just do it with a little bit. You start small and you grow into it. And if you have a fund for participants, you can do it and you can start selling that and there's people that want to go into the fund. If it would be an exchange traded fund, you would have a huge crowd. But look at Grayscale which is a trust entity, right? It's interest structure. Huge demand, over 10 billion in cryptocurrencies under management.

PlanB: (29:44)
And lately you see for example Michael Saylor's company, MicroStrategy. I know you had him on your show. But he is a listed company, has of course a lot of accountants, legal questions and shareholders to deal with and his board. So it's very natural that he comes later into the game because he has to convince all those people.

PlanB: (30:11)
The last group of investors that will enter in my opinion will be, well, like my employer, the institutional investors that manage bank balance sheets, life insurance balance sheets, and pension balance sheets because they have the regulators, the central banks that have to okay the new type of investment. And that will be a long and very, yeah, tedious process. So yeah.

PlanB: (30:42)
And then the second part of your question, what will do that with price? Of course if adoption grows, if adoption increases and demand increases while at the same time supply decreases because of the halving and the scarcity, stock-to-flow goes up, price will go up. It has to go. So yeah, very interesting times.

John Darsie: (31:11)
You did a recent poll on Twitter about basically crowdsourcing answers on what people think are the biggest risks to bitcoin. Could you tell us the results of that poll and also what you think personally are the biggest risks to bitcoin?

PlanB: (31:26)
Yes. I like Twitter very much because especially when you have a large following, you can very easily gouge the market for questions and sentiments. So I did the poll two days ago. It was answered by more than 13,000 people. The biggest risk that people see is government ban or regulation. That's 34% of the people think that's the biggest risk to bitcoin. And I tend to agree because governments have been against bitcoin and openly, but also trying to ... especially trying to kill the predecessors of bitcoin. Bitcoin was not the first digital currency. It was the fourth or fifth of even the sixth. All the others were shut down by government because it was not peer-to-peer or the inventor was not anonymous so they just shut them down. Well, look what they did to Libra from Facebook, Facebook's coin.

PlanB: (32:37)
So in a way bitcoin was especially designed for this risk to ... It's quite impossible to ban or to kill bitcoin by a government because if a government does it, it will just go on in another country. Of course, governments can make it very, very difficult with tax laws, with know your customer and anti-money laundering laws. And that's what they're doing at the moment. It's a bit. But they do that with every invention, every technological improvement. When the cars were invented, there was this rule that if you had a car, you also had to employ a person that walked in front of the car with a red flag because otherwise there would be danger for the pedestrians and the cyclists.

PlanB: (33:25)
So every new technology brings its own suite of stupid regulation, but in the end that regulation will improve, be more reasonable, be more just better for the general population and also countries will of course be different than that. There will be countries that want to be the next Silicon Valley, crypto valley if you will. Singapore is there. Switzerland is there, et cetera, et cetera. And there's companies that are less ... Yeah, that don't have much with protecting property rights. It's more the socialists, the countries, yeah, that will have more problems with this.

John Darsie: (34:12)
As a quick follow-up to that, one of our viewers is asking and they're saying that in the past gold has been made illegal to hold by the public. In that type of scenario where a country comes out and says it's illegal for our citizens to own bitcoin, obviously there's going to be plenty of citizens that do own it, have you studied what a similar outcome would be if people declared it illegal to hold bitcoin if we went through a period of legal prohibition?

PlanB: (34:37)
Yes. Yeah. So the United States made it illegal for US citizens to have gold. That was I think in 1933, just before they did the Bretton Woods and gold was of course increased in price a lot. So yeah. Normally what you see if something is forbidden, is made illegal, there'll be black markets and the price of it will go up. So it's much better to legalize it. You see it with other things as well. It's much better to legalize it, to control it, to take a little bit of tax and profits from it than to make it illegal because it will transform into something you don't want as a government. It will be stronger because of the ban.

PlanB: (35:34)
And of course, if you ban it as a company, then the businesses will go away. In a way you see that in the Netherlands at the moment. They're making it very ... So there is a legal guy head of finance at the moment in the Netherlands, and he has no technical background. So he doesn't really get bitcoin and he's completely into anti-money laundering and know your customer. That's his thing. So he has made that so strict. And I think it's the strictest in the world where you have to even make a copy of your wallet so your own wallet where you want to receive the bitcoin. What that means is all the companies that are in a country go away. For example Daily Bid, the biggest option in exchange, and that's a Dutch company, moved to Panama with all the profit, with all the employment.

PlanB: (36:31)
So there will be a very interesting game, theoretical game there of countries that ban it and others that welcome it. That's how the new world will be shaped.

John Darsie: (36:43)
So you talked about how MicroStrategy is effectively now a bitcoin ETF and they're sort of a pioneer in terms of taking corporate treasury money and investing it into bitcoin as an alternative to cash or other corporate treasury type of investments. Do you expect to see other corporates follow suit?

John Darsie: (37:00)
I think about all these countries in the United States for example that have millions upon hundreds of millions of dollars in cash on their balance sheets that are domiciled in foreign countries that aren't really accomplishing much for the firm. Do you expect to see those types of companies especially in the tech arena where I think bitcoin has a little bit higher adoption rate? Do you expect to see more of those companies start to follow suit?

PlanB: (37:25)
Yes, absolutely. I think we're seeing it already. And it's even easier for non-listed companies. So if you're a private company, you can put your excess cash in bitcoin or whatever asset you like without dealing too much with all the things the listed company has to deal with. But even listed companies now that Michael Saylor shows the way that it can be done.

John Darsie: (37:53)
And you talk about career risk. People were scared to be the first mover, but now somebody's done it effectively and it's reduced some of the stigma around it I think.

PlanB: (38:02)
Yeah, yeah. I mean MicroStrategy is a small company, right? It was. Before they invested in bitcoin, it was 1.5 billion dollar market cap. I don't know what it is today. It will be much higher. But that's small compared to the real cash rich companies that you mentioned as well, Google, Apple, Facebook, et cetera. So yeah, they all ... We all have to put the same problem, what to do with your money in an environment that money is debased basically by quantitative easing. So yeah.

John Darsie: (38:36)
We have two questions that came in within a minute of each other and I'll combine them from JJ and from Josephine. And they're asking are you fully convinced that bitcoin supply is indeed capped at 21 million, and what stops bitcoin's core developers, the miners, the node validators from all agreeing to increase the circulated supply of bitcoin? They're questioning whether in Satoshi's white paper explicitly says that the bitcoin supply is immutable.

PlanB: (39:03)
Yes. I'm actually glad that question is asked because it's still out there. Let me first say you can only ask that question if you don't get bitcoin yet. If you have not read the white paper or did not fully understand the white paper because it's an essential thing of bitcoin that it cannot be increased, unless everybody agrees with it. But changing the monetary parameters of bitcoin protocol, the 21 million, is technically very easy. You can just copy the code. Right? It's on GitHub, it's open source like Linux and all the other open source software. So it's very easy to copy the software and change the parameter of 21 million to 42 or whatever number. But you cannot copy the network around it. So the miners, the users, the node operators, the developers, the investors, all the exchanges.

PlanB: (40:08)
So in other words, if you copy the code, change that number or make a totally ... an entirely new bitcoin. If you do that, that would be like changing the rules of chess. You can do it but you would be playing alone.

John Darsie: (40:29)
Right. Talk about quantum computing, if you will, for a second. We asked Raoul Pal who you may know and we had on a SALT Talk a few months ago about. In his view one of the real legitimate threats to bitcoin and he mentioned quantum computing. Is that a risk in your mind, and what are bitcoin developers and the bitcoin network doing to create quantum computing basically firewalls that could potentially disrupt the network?

PlanB: (40:56)
Yeah. Quantum computing was mentioned as the second risk in that poll we talked about earlier. 21% of the people think that is a big risk after government banning. So yeah, I'm not an expert on quantum computing. I know what it is. I read a lot of papers about it, so I have some view. My view is that first of all we're not there yet. So most papers quote a time range of 2025 to 2035 for the first quantum computer to do something that is useful, some small thing, let alone cracking the private keys that are used in bitcoin and a lot of other security applications of course.

PlanB: (41:49)
So yeah. I think it's ... But the risk is there of course. A lot of teams trying to build a quantum computer. We saw a lot of news lately about Chinese scientists that have made a breakthrough in quantum computing. Actually I talked to some guys that own companies that make quantum computers to get a better understanding of this, and I talked to the cryptographers that are very close to bitcoin core development about what the risks are and what I see is two worlds. It's the world of the investors in those companies that make quantum computing and the researchers that are very bullish, that are very optimistic. They'll be able to do it one day.

PlanB: (42:36)
And there's the cryptographic guys, especially the bitcoin guys that say, "Okay, it's far away." And even if they can do it, then there are all sorts of other things that they'll crack first because all the banking systems will crack before bitcoin because their security is much lower than bitcoin.

John Darsie: (42:57)
Yeah. There are a lot of issues that will arise if we reach full quantum computing capability from a national security or a global anti-proliferation standpoint as well.

PlanB: (43:08)
Yeah, exactly, exactly. So yeah. And even that, right, if it's there, you can change the algorithm. You could go to stronger encryption. It's already there.

John Darsie: (43:20)
Right.

PlanB: (43:21)
Military grade strong. But you can make it even stronger.

John Darsie: (43:26)
Well, Elon Musk will have us living on Mars by then so I'm not quite as concerned. How would you react to accusations-

Anthony Scaramucci: (43:34)
We'd be living on Mars with the Martians, you know that right, because we ... The Israeli scientists said that there are aliens living there already.

John Darsie: (43:40)
Yeah, I'll tell you a story PlanB. Anthony, he goes to work in the government. He only was there for 11 days, but on the first day what do you think Anthony Scaramucci did when he got in government? He wanted to find out about the aliens.

PlanB: (43:52)
Of course.

John Darsie: (43:53)
And there's nothing there. So does that tell you that there's no aliens?

Anthony Scaramucci: (43:57)
PlanB, that's confidential, okay? Don't listen to this nonsense.

PlanB: (44:00)
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay.

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:00)
Don't listen to this nonsense.

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:03)
All right. So thank you so much for joining us. You're terrific. I appreciate the opportunity to spend time with you. I'm going to take you up. I'm going to come with a PlanA hat. I'm going to meet you at an Amsterdam restaurant with your PlanB hat. This way I know who you are. You wear the PlanB hat. I'll be able to identify it, and we'll have dinner one night.

PlanB: (44:21)
Great. Thanks for having me guys.

John Darsie: (44:23)
Thanks so much for joining us PlanB.

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:25)
Terrific.

Cameron & Tyler Winklevoss: Why Bitcoin Is Superior to Gold | SALT Talks #118

“Bitcoin is the only asset in the galaxy that actually has a fixed supply and no technological breakthrough will change that.”

Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss co-founded Gemini, a cryptocurrency exchange and custodian, to empower the individual through crypto. Gemini is a New York Trust company that allows customers to buy, sell, and store cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin, Bitcoin cash, Ether, Zcash, and Litecoin.

While being identical twins, Cameron is left-handed and Tyler is right-handed. This seemingly creates a complementary skillset between the two. Utilizing the unique partnership has led to a life full of start-ups that always seek to solve for a problem. This started with the creation of the high school rowing team, then with roles coming up with the idea for Facebook, and ultimately forays in the crypto asset space. Predicting global currency inflation caused by money printing and stimulus spending, investors will need to find protection. Gold was historically the best way to guard against inflation, but Bitcoin offers an even better solution. “Bitcoin is basically the expression of gold in that digital sense. When you line up all the properties, it's not really a fair fight. Bitcoin is far superior to gold across the board.”

The growth of Bitcoin is inevitable as it lives on the Internet and is accessible wherever someone has a connection. Bitcoin will be able to coexist alongside existing government-backed currencies and will ultimately see its mainstream acceptance. Gemini serves as a crypto platform where individuals can more easily access this new alternative asset class.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKERS

Joint+Headshot+-+Winklevoss,+Cameron+&+Tyler.jpeg

Cameron Winklevoss

Co-Founder

Gemini

Joint+Headshot+-+Winklevoss,+Cameron+&+Tyler.jpeg

Tyler Winklevoss

Co-Founder

Gemini

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darsie: (00:07)
Hello everyone, and welcome back to SALT Talks. My name is John Darsie. I'm the Managing Director of SALT, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance, technology, and public policy. SALT Talks are a digital interview series that we launched during this work-from-home period with leading investors, creators, and thinkers.

John Darsie: (00:29)
What we're trying to do during these SALT Talks is replicate the experience that we provide at our Global SALT Conferences, which we host annually, one in the United States and one abroad. Obviously, this year has been a little bit challenging for the conference industry, so we've been doing these SALT Talks instead. They've been a lot of fun and a massive success. Thank you, for everybody who's been tuning into the talks. What we're trying to do on these talks and at our conferences is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And perhaps there's no idea bigger right now that's sweeping into the mainstream than Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies.

John Darsie: (01:08)
So we're very excited today, on a day when Bitcoin is crossing its previous all-time high, to welcome Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss onto SALT Talks. Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss co-founded Gemini, which is cryptocurrency exchange and custodian to empower the individual through crypto. Gemini is a New York Trust company that allows customers to buy, sell, and store crypto such as Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Ether, Zcash, and Litecoin.

John Darsie: (01:36)
They graduated from Harvard University with degrees in economics in 2004, and earned their MBAs from Oxford University in 2010. Together, they represented the United States at the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing, in China, placing sixth in men's pair events. Cameron and Tyler have been angel investors and entrepreneurs in emerging technologies since 2003. Most of you probably know the backstory about their involvement in the founding of Facebook, which we maybe will get into a little bit during today's talk as well. They began investing in Bitcoin in 2012, and launched Gemini in 2015. So they were early on in this Bitcoin wave that we're seeing today.

John Darsie: (02:18)
Just a reminder, if you have any questions for Cameron or Tyler during today's SALT Talk, you can enter them in the Q and A box at the bottom of your video screen on Zoom. Hosting today's talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge Capital, a global alternative investment firm. Anthony is also the chairman of SALT. And with that, I will turn it over to Anthony for the interview.

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:39)
Guys, I appreciate you greatly being on. It's fun to get to know the two of you. I can tell you have our combined sense of humor, which is very dangerous, I might add.

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:50)
I usually ask the question of, what do we need to know about you guys that's not on the internet, what do we find about you on Wikipedia? What's something that your mom would tell us about you that she hasn't told anybody? You want to start, Tyler?

Tyler Winklevoss: (03:13)
Sure. You might be able to find this on the internet, but I'll start with this anyway. I am a righty, Cameron's a lefty. We're mirror image twins, we use different sides of our brains. I think that's why we've been such a good team for a long time. We grew up playing piano. Cameron now plays electric guitar. I continue to play piano, so that's sort of a difference. For better or worse, a lot about us and our life is actually out there on the internet. It's very public.

Anthony Scaramucci: (03:45)
That's interesting. You're identical twins, but you're powered up on different sides of the brains. Pretty interesting, I haven't heard that before about twins. But that obviously gives you complementary skillsets.

Anthony Scaramucci: (03:58)
If you had to describe... Let's say this was a job interview, Tyler, not that you guys need real job, God forbid. You've had two of the more amazing careers in America. But let's say this was a job interview and you are both coming in at the same time. What are your skillsets? What's Tyler Winklevoss's skillset as opposed to Cameron's?

Tyler Winklevoss: (04:19)
I probably gravitate to more strategy vision type stuff, so a little bit more higher altitude. And Cameron sort of gravitates towards more operational stuff, a little bit lower altitude. But to be frank, we definitely go back and forth and trade place on where we're flying. But I would say I'm a little bit more, I guess left-brained, because I'm right-handed. I tend to maybe be a little bit more organized, a little bit more OCD, like shirt tucked in. And Cameron traditionally has been a little bit more of the goofier twin and a little less shirt tucked in.

Anthony Scaramucci: (05:02)
I can tell that just by the way the bed is made behind you. I know that's a hotel room, but Cameron told me off-air that you made the bed yourself without the maid.

Tyler Winklevoss: (05:10)
I wish. If I could, I would. Yeah.

Cameron Winklevoss: (05:14)
I categorically disagree with all of that. No, I'm kidding. I think Tyler captured it pretty well. We're both flying at slightly different altitudes, but relatively pretty close. If Tyler's at 30, I'm at 25, and vice-versa. But I think we, because of the differences, we do tend to complement each other pretty well. So we don't find ourselves just ratifying each other and coming to the same conclusion. If we do come to the same conclusion, it's maybe from different angles or different paths. It makes it pretty interesting and a good sort of discourse in debate, and keeps things lively, for sure.

Anthony Scaramucci: (05:55)
Well, you've been in two pretty famous books and one reasonably famous movie. Ben Mezrich, who I think you guys know, has spoken at the SALT Conference. A few years ago, he handed me his book, Bitcoin Billionaires and insisted that I read it. You guys were kind enough to come to the SALT Conference. I like Bitcoin Billionaires better than the first book. I think all of us would probably agree on that. What is it about the two of you that you were able to see the future, both in terms of Facebook and where we are right now with the cryptocurrencies?

Cameron Winklevoss: (06:33)
I think it often comes down to looking at something and then being dissatisfied with the answer, or frustrated. We actually sort of joke. Our first startup was in high school. We wanted to try the sport of rowing, but there was no rowing team at our high school. So we looked around and found a club. We grew up in Greenwich, Connecticut, but we found a rowing club in Westport, Connecticut about 45 minutes away. We just started to learn how to row there. And then we went to the headmaster and asked if we could start the rowing team, and we did. Today, I think there's probably at least 500 or more kids in that area who row every afternoon. Every high school in the area has a rowing team. We simply asked this question, "Hey, why isn't there a rowing team?" There wasn't really a good answer for it. There's a lot of rowers in Greenwich, or former rowers. But I think a lot of times people just went to boarding school or did whatever, and just assumed the status quo, that was it. We sort of didn't accept that answer.

Cameron Winklevoss: (07:37)
Fast forward to when we got to Harvard. We were juniors and basically found ourselves almost done with college and barely scratching the surface in terms of meeting people and all the amazing things that you set out to when you first get to an amazing place like Harvard, and then you find it's almost already done. Harvard is in Cambridge. There's many schools and all these people, but you never really cross paths. You sort of get stuck in your lane. So we said, "Is there a way to create a technical solution where our fingers can do the walking and we can basically solve for time and geography and create a social network?" That really came out of an authentic frustration or problem local to us or true to us, that then had scale well beyond.

Anthony Scaramucci: (08:34)
I'm an old-timer, unfortunately. We've had two or three Bitcoin maximalists on the air with us, and I'm starting to believe in Bitcoin. But I have still levels of skepticism that I think old-timers have with Bitcoin. I'm not the Ray Dalio level of skepticism, but I'm not a Bitcoin maximalist because I don't understand it. I want you to explain it to me because you've got incredible audience participation. I might add that this could be the highest rated SALT Talk that we've had, so congratulations to both of you.

Cameron Winklevoss: (09:11)
Cool.

Tyler Winklevoss: (09:11)
Wow.

Anthony Scaramucci: (09:11)
You've got a ton of people on. Some of them know about Bitcoin, some of them don't know, and some of them are not sure. Take it from the top, guys. Why is it such an important asset, and why is it the asset or one of the big assets of the future?

Tyler Winklevoss: (09:29)
Sure. Well, we think of Bitcoin as gold 2.0. If you look at the characteristics that make gold valuable, the fact that it's scarce, that it's portable, divisible, all of the money characteristics of gold... and then you place Bitcoin against it side by side, Bitcoin either matches or does better. The supply is actually known and it's fixed. You can send it around the world. You can send an email. It's the first form of money that was purposely built for the internet, so it's internet gold. We think that that's a super big idea. And in the backdrop of all the money printing, the stimulus spending, the debt accumulation of governments in fiat regimes around the world, inflation's coming. I think everyone agrees with that, very high inflation. And so, what is your best protection? If it was the 1970s, like Paul Tudor Jones said, he would buy and did buy gold. That was before the invention of the personal computer and the internet.

Tyler Winklevoss: (10:34)
Today, we have Bitcoin. It's actually better than gold. The supply of gold is actually increasing. Two-thirds of gold has been mined since the 1950s. As technology increases, similar to what fracking did for oil and natural gas, the same can actually happen to gold. It's still precious, but it's not fixed. Bitcoin is the only asset in the galaxy that actually has a fixed supply and no technological breakthrough will change that, and it works on the internet like your email. When we came across that, we're like, "That's a really big deal." Money is the greatest social network of all time. The idea of a gold 2.0, Bitcoin being gold 2.0, seemed like a huge idea.

Anthony Scaramucci: (11:23)
The skeptics would say that it's a code on the internet, it's a blockchain, it's a mathematical code. It's not backed by a government. It's not backed by an army. It's not tied to somebody's sovereign nation. And obviously, I know all the travails and potential tragedies of fiat currency. So then why is it valuable as a device? Is it the ledger aspect of it? What creates the value in your mind?

Cameron Winklevoss: (12:00)
Well, that's an interesting point. Bitcoin is not actually forced upon anybody. There's no legal requirement, unlike fiat currencies which I think makes Bitcoin's growth over the past decade even more impressive. Because there's nobody saying, "Hey, you need to pay your taxes in Bitcoin. You need to use Bitcoin in commerce." People are buying it for the properties that Tyler outlined.

Cameron Winklevoss: (12:27)
In terms of backing the currency, the Bitcoin mining network is the strongest computer network in the world. And they basically audit and verify transactions, and act as sort of the referees in the Bitcoin ecosystem. So it's a very powerful computer group or army, if you will, that's not to be underestimated. But if you look at the ability, it's basically programmable money, and everything's going digital and streaming. The idea that people would want a piece of hardware like gold today or even in the future, seems really antiquated. Everybody's looking to get software and money that moves like email. Bitcoin is basically the expression of gold in that digital sense. When you line up all the properties, it's not really a fair fight. Bitcoin is far superior to gold just across the board.

John Darsie: (13:27)
It's the Netflix to gold blockbuster.

Cameron Winklevoss: (13:30)
Exactly.

Tyler Winklevoss: (13:30)
There you go.

Anthony Scaramucci: (13:31)
No, no. I like that. I want to keep going on this if you guys don't mind, because I'm hoping that by the end of this conversation, we're going to convert more people to where you guys are. I think I need to confess to you that I'm probably less of a skeptic on Bitcoin than I'm leading on right now, but I just want to play devil's advocate for the purposes of the beginning part of our conversation.

Anthony Scaramucci: (13:54)
Let's talk about regulation and the potential specter of regulation for Bitcoin. Some countries have said, "Okay, no Bitcoin in our country." Other countries are worried about Bitcoin taking over their ability to... let's use the word manipulate their currency. Or in the case of fiat currencies and the production of money and money supply, Bitcoin coming up against that could disrupt governmental policy in certain countries. And so, are you worried about any of that? Are you worried that somebody could say be decree, "We ban Bitcoin in our country."?

Cameron Winklevoss: (14:35)
I think some regimes are definitely going to try and stop Bitcoin. But to stop Bitcoin, you really have to stop the internet. I think that's a losing proposition. I think that it's really an alternative. Bitcoin's not trying to really disrupt, it's just offering this other system. Bitcoin didn't force the federal government to run deficits over the past decade, or run a debt to GDP ratio of 135%. That's the US mismanagement, our own doing. At least now we have a hard money alternative like Bitcoin. Previously it was of course, gold. Bitcoin's different because it has the emerging properties and it could overtake gold which gives it just a much bigger asymmetric payoff over the next decade than gold. Gold wouldn't be a bad investment, it's just not going to be anything close to what Bitcoin is.

Cameron Winklevoss: (15:31)
A lot of people, at least the early days, there's a lot of rhetoric around disrupt the banksters and all that stuff. At Gemini, we're a New York Trust company. We're regulated by the New York State Department of Financial Services. We also have licenses and approvals in all the other states. So we work actively with the government and regulators. We're a financial institution and we're engaging. We also partner with banks like JPMorgan. We really want to work with banks. We're not trying to be a bank, we're just a crypto platform. That's kind of our viewpoint, but sometimes the rhetoric makes it like us versus them and this fight that I don't think is there.

Tyler Winklevoss: (16:14)
The risk of trying to clamp or quash Bitcoin is too great, as Cameron mentioned. You have to become like North Korea and basically cut yourself off from the internet. Bitcoin even can permeate the great firewall of China. Because it's so decentralized, it works on the internet. And to shut the internet off, you'd shut so many drivers of the economy like big tech, that it's just to risky. So regulators decided, at least in the US and a lot of other jurisdictions, it's better to work with it and work with companies who want to get compliant like Gemini, and do things the right way.

Anthony Scaramucci: (16:51)
My product development team wanted me to tell you that at SkyBridge, we're operating Node. Apparently, that makes us very cool. So I just thought I would mention that to you guys.

Cameron Winklevoss: (17:03)
That's awesome.

Anthony Scaramucci: (17:04)
I'm not exactly sure what it means.

John Darsie: (17:07)
We're part of that army defending the network that Tyler was talking about.

Cameron Winklevoss: (17:11)
You guys are contributing to the Bitcoin ecosystem by running a node. That's really cool.

Anthony Scaramucci: (17:17)
All right. We're out there with our Node. I want to keep going on this line of thought for a second. Peter Thiel... there was a book I read 25 years ago called The Sovereign Individual. It was written by James Davidson and Walter Rees-Mogg. Peter Thiel repurposed the book recently. It's in paperback, you can buy it on Amazon. He wrote in the preface that AI to him is about hegemony and it's about totalitarianism and control, where you can actually see the facial cues of your citizens and then you can socially score them... and Bitcoin is about liberty and libertarianism and decentralization. Do you agree with that? What are your thoughts on that?

Cameron Winklevoss: (18:06)
I agree. Bitcoin, the technology, is obviously apolitical. But we believe that it empowers individuals and gives them greater independence, choice and opportunity. That's a big part of Gemini's mission, is helping people get into crypto so they have more opportunity.

Cameron Winklevoss: (18:24)
There's a place in crypto called decentralized finance, which is trying to build permissionless pieces of the financial system like lending, borrowing, trading. It's really exciting. It's obviously quite new. But it's really about decentralizing and creating permissionless and trustless financial services, unlike the current system which is centralized and you basically are dealing with a lot of gatekeepers and there's access problems. If you want to invest, you have to be an accredited investor to invest in a lot of interesting deals. There's plenty of people who are sophisticated who don't have $1 million to their name that I'm sure would like to invest, but they don't have access to capital markets in that way, whereas crypto doesn't have that access problem.

Cameron Winklevoss: (19:12)
It's very liberating and it's very much a movement as much as a technology. Obviously, there's elements of it that appeal to libertarians. There's elements I'm sure that appeal to other groups. But in general, this is a movement about the individual and decentralizing what are traditionally centralized stacks in the financial sector.

Anthony Scaramucci: (19:39)
People, as of right now... I mean, some people would say, "Well, gold, you can make into jewelry." Or there are some manufacturing aspects to gold. It doesn't seem to be the case for Bitcoin. I'm not sure if that's a big deal one way or another, you could address that.

Anthony Scaramucci: (19:57)
But the secondary issue in addition to that, that I think people are worried about is it's not really accepted yet. Maybe you can buy a Tesla with Bitcoin, but I can't pay my utility bill with Bitcoin, at least not here in New York right now. One is, the usability of the currency as another alternative. Maybe you can pushback and say, "Well, dollars can't be used for anything else." And then secondarily, when do you think it becomes more available to be used as a tradable mechanism, which is ideally what currency's about?

Tyler Winklevoss: (20:42)
I don't think it necessarily needs to be. If it's gold 2.0 and it's going to disrupt the gold, right? The market cap of above ground gold is nine trillion. Right now, Bitcoin's market cap is somewhere above 300 billion. So if it just disrupts gold alone, there's a 25 to 30 X from here conservatively appreciation.

Tyler Winklevoss: (21:06)
Gold's not really being used as a currency right now. It basically sits under vaults under the Thames River in mostly ETFs. I think even if it disrupts gold, it doesn't have to be spent to have a lot of value and to appreciate from here from now. Because I don't buy a cup of coffee or go to McDonald's with a bar of gold. You can, but you don't. It's a sort of value. You want to spend things that are more like currencies that lose their value over time. The dollar has lost a lot of purchasing power since the '70s, like 90% of its purchasing power. You want to spend dollars because they're becoming less valuable. You don't necessarily want to sell your share of Amazon stock because it probably will go up, or Google. And the same is true with Bitcoin.

Tyler Winklevoss: (21:57)
It's an emergent sort of value, so it's appreciating or holding value. So you want to preserve your wealth in stores of value, and you want to spend things like currencies that lose their value. It's very hard to be both ends of the spectrum with money. It's sort of like LeBron James is an amazing athlete, Nadia Comaneci is an amazing gymnast. They both would be pretty terrible at each other's sports. I think if you pick one part of the problem space and you really excel, I think that's enough. And the Bitcoin gold 2.0 story is definitely enough, I think.

Cameron Winklevoss: (22:37)
Nothing highlights that better than the Bitcoin pizza, which was the... I think it was two Bitcoin pizzas. Basically, it's the first Bitcoin transaction where somebody traded two Papa John's pizzas for 10,000 Bitcoin. At today's prices, I think those are $200 million pizzas, if I'm doing my math correctly. They must have been really good slices of pizza. But that really underscores why you don't really want to use Bitcoin as a currency and spend it. You want to hold it, or hodle is the parlance that Bitcoiners use and people in crypto to say, "Hey, I'm hodling my Bitcoin."

Anthony Scaramucci: (23:15)
Well first off, I want to compliment both of you on you decorum and your gentlemanliness. If I was on a SALT Talk with my brother, I'd be karate chopping him at the Adam's apple and interrupting him every five seconds, but you guys are in perfect syncopation. I feel like I'm in the rowing boat with the two of you. You don't even interrupt each other, which is-

Tyler Winklevoss: (23:35)
You're like the coxswain.

Anthony Scaramucci: (23:37)
Yeah, exactly.

Cameron Winklevoss: (23:37)
Yeah.

Anthony Scaramucci: (23:39)
I say that as an Italian who interrupts everybody. All right, so you're winning me over. You're winning me over now. I'm now thinking I need to own some of this, and so now I want you to tell me about Gemini. I want you to tell me about the value proposition at Gemini. And you've got many thousands of people that are listening to you. So tell us how we do business with Gemini. Who are your clients? Who should be your clients? Let's say that I'm a potential prospect. Pitch me as a prospect.

Cameron Winklevoss: (24:11)
Okay. The easiest way to get to Gemini is gemini.com. We have a mobile app as well as a web interface. We really cater to the entire spectrum of customers. We're trying to make it simple, reliable, and safe to buy Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as well as store. We're a platform where you can buy, sell, as well as store. That's sort of the essence of it.

Cameron Winklevoss: (24:36)
We've been operational for about five-plus years, and we're a New York Trust company. Most of our staff is located in Manhattan, or was pre-COVID. Obviously, we're a little more remote posture now. We're also open in Europe, the UK, Singapore and other parts of Asia. That's the core of the business, is building this sort of regulated on-ramp into Bitcoin and cryptocurrency. Because I think a lot of people, they sort of learn about Bitcoin and say, "Hey, look. I get it. I believe in this. I understand what's happening to the dollar. I understand the mismanagement. There is going to be a debt reckoning. I want to protect my value, but I don't know how to do it."

Cameron Winklevoss: (25:17)
There's no Bitcoin ETF yet. And we're trying to create basically a very easy experience like opening up a bank account online or a brokerage account. It's just that simple. You come, you onboard, and you're ready to go. We also have a lot of audits, SOC 2 and SOC 1, so that we can have conversations with institutions and get them comfortable with the necessary compliance requirements and things like that.

Anthony Scaramucci: (25:46)
Okay. So it's an easy solution for somebody to plug into your website, figure out a way to get a long Bitcoin, and they can store it with you guys very safely. Is that fair to say?

Cameron Winklevoss: (25:58)
That's right. It's as easy as going to your brokerage account. You sign up, you place your trade. We also have an execution desk, so we can execute the trade for you, give you that kind of experience. And then we have a cold storage system. If you say, "Hey, I want to go long $10 million worth of Bitcoin and I'm not going to really touch it for a couple of years, I want it in offline storage so it's not internet connected." Literally, a hacker can't even access it. These computer are called HSMs, hardware security modules. They literally never touch the internet. Those store the private keys, which is like your password to your Bitcoin. We have a custodial service where you can basically put your Bitcoin into cold storage and hold it there very securely.

Anthony Scaramucci: (26:50)
Let's say I want to send my Bitcoins to John Darsie. This is obviously a ridiculous hypothetical. Because I just want you to know, John Darsie, I would never send you my Bitcoins.

John Darsie: (27:01)
I'm looking forward to Cameron and Tyler expounding on the idea of you being the coxswain in the back of their rowboat. I want them to explain what that person does and what that person generally looks like.

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:13)
Let me tell you, at my weight after Thanksgiving, we'd be hydroplaning. These poor guys, despite their arms, they wouldn't be able to reach with the level of hydroplaning we'd be doing. But let's get back to the conversation, Darsie. Okay, put yourself back on mute for one more second, okay?

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:29)
Is it traceable? I'm sending my Bitcoin out. I want to pay somebody in Bitcoin. Let's say I want to pay somebody and I don't want people to know about it, is it something that's traceable?

Cameron Winklevoss: (27:40)
The Bitcoin blockchain is an open ledger, and it's very much traceable. We do have to follow the blockchain for compliance requirements and stuff. There was a false narrative for a while around Bitcoin being truly anonymous and only used for illicit activity. I think that scared a lot of people off, but it was really not true at all. That is potentially one of the things about Bitcoin is it's actually very open. It's not a good place if you're trying to squirrel away money or commit bad activity. I mean, there are privacy coins like Zcash that offer commercial privacy and things like that. Bitcoin is very much an open ledger system.

Tyler Winklevoss: (28:26)
Right, but there is one detail there that... let's say you had a Gemini account and you sent it to John, the world would see it leaving Gemini because they know addresses associated with Gemini. But they may not know John's address, so it would just see Bitcoin moving from one address to the other. That's why we call it pseudonymous. Everyone sees the flow of funds, but people don't necessarily whose names are associated with which Bitcoin addresses.

Anthony Scaramucci: (28:52)
It's an important thing to bring up to everybody, because I want to dispel that notion that this is just a funky way for charlatans and money launderers to transact around the world.

Cameron Winklevoss: (29:08)
Yeah. Another point... sorry.

Tyler Winklevoss: (29:11)
Paul Tudor Jones, Stan Druckenmiller, they obviously see something in Bitcoin beyond the illicit activity narrative.

Cameron Winklevoss: (29:18)
I think it's really important to note that the legal classification of Bitcoin, there was an order in 2015 called the Coinflip Order. It was an enforcement order that the CFTC filed against a company called Coinflip. A judge in the Southern District... Eastern or Southern, one of the two in New York, confirmed that order that Bitcoin is legally a commodity under the CEA Commodities Exchange Act. That is the federal legal characterization of Bitcoin, and that was established five years ago. A lot of people still don't know that.

Cameron Winklevoss: (29:57)
I recently read a Twitter stream by Ray Dalio where he listed out a couple of the things that he had issues with, with Bitcoin. One of which that he didn't think it would make a very good currency, which we've addressed a few minutes ago. We don't think it actually needs to be, just like gold doesn't need to be a good currency. He also worried about the legal classification. And as I mentioned, Bitcoin has been legal in the US on a federal level and it's treated as money transmission on the state level, for many years now. We legally operate in all 50 states, as well as many other major Western places in Europe and jurisdictions in Asia. But a lot of people I think just don't know that.

Cameron Winklevoss: (30:43)
So one of the biggest challenges we face is simply, education. When I saw that, I tweeted back at him. I was like, "Hey, here's... Let me address these points here." Because people like Ray Dalio, he understands gold. He understands inflation far better than most people on the planet. If you listen to his talking points, he basically stops just short of Bitcoin. Hopefully, we can get him over the hump if anybody listening, let's just tweet at Ray and get him excited about Bitcoin.

Anthony Scaramucci: (31:17)
That's going to be my last question, and then I'm going to turn it over to John because we've got an amazing stack of audience participation questions here. What do we say to the guys? You mentioned a little bit on Ray Dalio, Nouriel Roubini. What do you say to the people who can't get their arms around this at this moment? And by the way, there were probably people like that guys, related to Facebook or Amazon. I was there when Apple was on the verge of bankruptcy and Gil Amelio was trying to recruit a gentleman by the name of Steve Jobs back to Apple Computer. What do you say to the doubters? What's the overarching thing that you would say?

Cameron Winklevoss: (32:02)
There are some doubters like Nouriel who we call no-coiners. They don't have any Bitcoin, and I think that's what sort of biases them against it. The same with Peter Schiff, he is obviously long gold. They're just very stubborn and not really willing to hear the merits. But for everybody else who's willing and open to have that conversation, I think a lot of the talking points really are what we've laid out in this conversation, which is that Bitcoin is gold 2.0. If you believe in gold and you like gold, you're long gold, you invest in gold, then you should have Bitcoin in your portfolio because it is gold for the internet.

Cameron Winklevoss: (32:43)
I think we have literally be saying these talking points since 2012. We gave a presentation at the Value Investors Congress or Conference. Was that in 2013, Tyler, or 2014? All I know is the price was $132 when we gave the presentation that day. That room was filled with buy-side experts, some of the greatest investing minds in the world. Obviously, we know what the price today is. It hit $20,000. It's the same thesis, the same talking points. We just keep kind of repeating them in different ways, and that really hasn't changed. I think people just sort of have to...

Cameron Winklevoss: (33:31)
I think the aha moment for a lot of people was the pandemic. They saw the stimulus spending. They saw the money printing. And they see the deficit and they're like, "This is going down a path and it's now accelerated down a path. How do we get back out?" The election, it doesn't matter with respect to money printing because both parties can agree that they're addicted to the money printer and they're both going to try and print their way out of the next problem. We've basically used and abused all of the tools at our disposal, and I think that has been a big aha moment for a lot of people.

Tyler Winklevoss: (34:11)
I have yet to hear a convincing criticism that's credible. It's always ad hominems. It's like, "Oh, it's too lapsed, it's rat poison. It's a fraud. It's a Ponzi scheme." But that's not really convincing to me. If I hear an argument that's convincing, I'll let you know. But we've been at this for eight years-

Anthony Scaramucci: (34:31)
Cameron, what's the most convincing argument that you've heard, and what's your dispelling of it? What's the most convincing?

Cameron Winklevoss: (34:39)
The easy criticism to lobby against Bitcoin is that it's volatile. And it's volatile because it's an emerging store of value. It's literally 10, 11 years old. When you put it side by side with gold, which is basically 3,000 plus multi-millennia track record, it obviously doesn't have that track record and it obviously is going to have volatility because it is a nascent store of value. However, it's gone from literally white paper in 2008, to close to $400 billion in market cap in that short period of time.

Cameron Winklevoss: (35:18)
Technology adoption curves are only accelerating. If you look at the number of smartphones and devices, there's more of those on this planet than people. And so if you don't think that Bitcoin adoption is going to continue and accelerate, you're probably mistaken. If you talk to any Gen Zer, they don't want gold. They don't say, "Oh, it's shiny. It's this cool object that I saw in movies and I grew up with and I'm familiar with." They're not familiar with that. They live online.

Anthony Scaramucci: (35:48)
Don't pick on us old people, okay? Don't pick on us old people. It's harder to change the old habits.

John Darsie: (35:56)
It's Anthony's nap time. Anthony, you can go have your dinner and then take your nap.

Anthony Scaramucci: (36:01)
The dude's relentless. You know why he's so relentless? I have buried this guy on about 50 other SALT Talk. Okay, go ahead, Darsie. I know you'll finally ask these questions. Now Darsie, I know you're trying to shine with all your Bitcoin acumen and everything. Go ahead, you got the stage.

John Darsie: (36:19)
Yeah, I just wish they'd had called me in 2014 when Bitcoin was at $132 and evangelized it to me then. But I guess at $20,000, it's still in the early stages. I'll forgive you guys for that.

Tyler Winklevoss: (36:31)
Yeah. Our prediction is that Bitcoin conservatively will be worth $500,000 a Bitcoin. At $20,000, it's still super early.

Anthony Scaramucci: (36:42)
Your timeframe on something like that is what, over the next decade?

Tyler Winklevoss: (36:46)
Yeah. It could be sooner, next five years. Like Cameron said, the technology adoption curves are just so fast. What Bitcoin's achieved in ten years, the next five years. We say that Bitcoin or crypto is like dog years. A day is like a week, a week's a month. It moves so fast.

Anthony Scaramucci: (37:07)
Both Michael Saylor and Ron Paul, who we've interviewed them both, said those numbers. That would get you to the market cap of gold more or less, right? Is that what you're thinking about?

Tyler Winklevoss: (37:19)
That's how we back into it, yeah.

Anthony Scaramucci: (37:20)
Go ahead, John. I know you got-

John Darsie: (37:23)
Yeah. Would you guys consider yourselves... I think I know the answer, but I'd like you talk about it a little bit more. Bitcoin maximalist, meaning that you think there's going to be a winner takes all type of environment in the world of cryptocurrencies. Just like you see gold as the dominant player as a store of value among other precious metals, although silver obviously has a large market cap as well. Do you think Bitcoin is going to be the dominant player? Do you think there's other currencies, digital assets out there that could potentially usurp Bitcoin or at least live alongside Bitcoin as these dominant store of values?

Cameron Winklevoss: (37:59)
I think for the store of value piece of the puzzle, I think if Bitcoin's to lose, there may be a silver to Bitcoin's gold. But I don't think that there's generally multiple stores of value. But we're definitely not maximalist in the sense that we only believe in and love Bitcoin. Obviously, we hold a lot of Bitcoin, we want Bitcoin to work, we hope it works.

Cameron Winklevoss: (38:24)
We also hold Ether and other cryptocurrencies. And we're very bullish on Ethereum and the DeFi projects that have been built on top of Ethereum and much of what's going on there. We're long to space. Obviously, there are some projects that don't have a lot of merit, but there's definitely a few that have already shown a tremendous amount of promise. Bitcoin being one of them, Ethereum being another. Sort of like the world's digital computer, Ethereum or Ether, the currency. Think of it as digital oil that powers this super computer where you can run applications and all kinds of cool programming, smart contracts. And then Filecoin's a new coin that just launched and it's a decentralized data storage network. Think of Amazon S3 centralized storage bucket or Microsoft Azure. Filecoin is basically unbundling, decentralizing that. Just like Ethereum is a decentralized operating system in the cloud and Bitcoin's obviously decentralized digital gold.

John Darsie: (39:32)
Right. You guys have a stable coin called the Gemini coin. I want to talk about stable coins for a second for people who are less informed about it. What's the purpose of the existence of stable coins? How is your coin unique to other stable coins that are out there, including something like the Libra project that Facebook is working on?

Tyler Winklevoss: (39:51)
Yeah. The idea with the stable coin is to bring dollars under the blockchain. If you open a Gemini account, wire cash in, you can withdraw that cash to the Ethereum blockchain to any address, we wrap it. It's called the Gemini dollar, and it gives you a way to spend dollars on the blockchain. We're regulated by the New York Department of Financial Services. We issue it through them, we're licensed to do that. But it's a centralized stable coin, and that's kind of the one on one. We bank the cap, the dollars, are held at State Street in Goldman Sachs. We've gotten security audits. We built a constellation of trust around this. There are definitely other stable coins like Tether that are apparently not fully backed by dollars or are not regulated.

Tyler Winklevoss: (40:41)
Gemini dollar is basically the institutional grade version of the stable coin that's regulated, that's compliant, that's issued by Gemini. But essentially, we want to bring dollars onto the blockchain, or give dollars cryptocurrency characteristics. Right now, your dollars work on banking hours. So if you want to send money to London on a Friday night from New York, you've got to wait til Monday. If it's a bank holiday, it gets there Tuesday. The fastest way to do that is actually to take a bag of cash, hop on a plane at JFK and take the red-eye. That's kind of crazy because we know money is basically information.

Tyler Winklevoss: (41:19)
We know how email works 24/7/365, yet your dollars don't work like that. And that's trying to get from New York to London. Try and get from New York to Sri Lanka. When's it getting there? What's it cost? What's the friction? Maybe it's a 10% fee. Money really doesn't work. We kind of wish it worked like email worked like our money because we'd get some more free time back. But that's the essence of the Gemini dollar.

John Darsie: (41:50)
You guys have said that you think every major tech company will eventually launch their own crypto-like offering. What purpose would that serve, and what exactly would that look like?

Cameron Winklevoss: (42:02)
I think if you look at airline miles, those are effectively closed loop currency systems. You have American miles, you sort of have a currency on their platform. I don't believe you can trade those miles for other miles, but I think that there's ways where you can build incentives and loyalty.

Cameron Winklevoss: (42:24)
Another interesting place is eGaming. A lot of the items that you win or own in the virtual world are in walled gardens, if you will. You can't take that shield or item that you've worked really hard and side one game to another. We think there will be interoperability between gaming. You have communities like Fortnite where there's like 200 million people around the world playing against each other. They are going to want to interact at some point. How do you collect funds from all these different people, and what is that digital native currency that powers those worlds? We think cryptocurrency is really technology, the only technology that can do that in the current system. We think there's intersections in a couple of different areas.

John Darsie: (43:15)
Tyler, do you have anything to add? Or we'll move onto the next question.

Tyler Winklevoss: (43:18)
Yeah. No, we can move on.

John Darsie: (43:20)
All right. In terms of security, going back to devil's advocate type of questions... People talk about the security issue, that Mt. Gox was a famous case of millions of dollars of Bitcoins being stolen. How far have we come in five years in terms of institutional grade custody and also, institutional grade security around owning Bitcoins on a major exchange like a Gemini or a Coinbase?

Tyler Winklevoss: (43:48)
I think we've come really far. And ultimately, we actually built Gemini because of our experience at Mt. Gox. To be clear, Mt. Gox is a company problem, right? It's not a Bitcoin problem. There's never been a Bitcoin hack, but the companies that hold your Bitcoins, similar to a bank that holds your dollars, can have issues. Gemini has never had an issue. Coinbase has never had an issue. Kraken has never had an issue as far as I know. There's a lot of great names and players that have been around for years that have never had any incidence of merit.

Tyler Winklevoss: (44:23)
There are Wild West operations and some people can try their hands there, but I think no one's surprised when those go under. There's no regulation, there's not best practice of security. They don't do the SOC 1, the SOC 2 audits. They don't do security pen testing. All the things that our regulators make sure we do when we say we do it. They come into our office for a month, five or six examiners. They sit there and they kick the tires and they make sure we're actually doing what we say we do. We do it anyway, but it's great to have them doing it. And you can hear from them, not just take it from us. I think we've come a long way, but there are the Wild West operations. You've just got to be aware of who you're dealing with.

John Darsie: (45:09)
Are you guys Satoshi?

Cameron Winklevoss: (45:12)
No comment.

John Darsie: (45:14)
All right. We have a question from an audience member though about your opinion on whether we'll ever know who created Bitcoin and whether doing so would add any level of confidence to mainstream investors who are looking to invest in the space.

Tyler Winklevoss: (45:29)
I know-

Cameron Winklevoss: (45:29)
I think that's-

Tyler Winklevoss: (45:29)
Go ahead.

Cameron Winklevoss: (45:29)
Go ahead.

Tyler Winklevoss: (45:29)
You first.

Cameron Winklevoss: (45:35)
All right. I think that's really the beauty and the strength of Bitcoin. When you first learn that we don't know who the trader is, you're like, "That doesn't make any sense. That's kind of crazy." And then you realize it's all about the source code. There's no inside baseball. Anybody in the world can look at the source code or the ledger and understand what Bitcoin is and what it does and how it transacts.

Cameron Winklevoss: (45:59)
Therefore, you don't have this founder or person that people are looking towards or this Jesus-like figure. You don't have the Fed chairman or a group of people making decisions behind closed doors and then presenting it to the public. It is not that kind of system, and that is really I think the elegance in what attracts so many people to it. It's this open system. Everybody knows the rule set. You know where the goalposts are, and you can opt in or you can opt out.

John Darsie: (46:31)
I ask this question, Tyler, of everybody who comes on to talk about cryptocurrencies, but about the idea of central bank digital currencies. You guys are not Bitcoin maximalists. You believe distributed finance is a movement that's here to stay.

John Darsie: (46:50)
What do you think the impact of central bank digital currencies is going to be on an asset like Bitcoin? Do you think it's additive or do you think if government starts stepping in and launching their own digital currencies, that it might detract from something like Bitcoin which is fully independent?

Tyler Winklevoss: (47:06)
I think it's additive, because it's still fiat currency as far as I understand it. The money printing that's going on is basically turning cash into toilet paper. Right? Cash is trash. Whether it's digital or it's paper, it's still the same thing. It's the perfect foil for Bitcoin because Bitcoin's hard money, the supply is fixed. The more fiat regimes print or whatever, whether or not they make it digital or paper or whatever, I think it's semantics. Maybe it's a little bit more functional toilet paper that works like your email. But ultimately at the end of the day, it's still toilet paper and Bitcoin's digital gold.

Cameron Winklevoss: (47:46)
The real question is, when a central bank is going to buy Bitcoin. We're already seeing it with corporate treasuries. You guys, I think you had Michael Saylor on. He's obviously brilliant. I think he's made one of the brilliant trade of the next decade. That trade still exists, it's out in the open for others to take at $20,000 Bitcoin. We saw this three years ago and we're back here again with so much more maturity in the ecosystem. And now we're seeing treasuries, corporate treasuries, putting money towards Bitcoin to protect the value. It soon will be irresponsible not to have some of your treasury out of dollars or out of fiat, into something like Bitcoin.

Cameron Winklevoss: (48:29)
And then the question is, when is the first central bank going to take that lead? If you look at the gold buying among central banks, I think they bought more in the last two years than they have since the '60s. They see what's going on, they know what's going on. Don't listen to them. Watch what they do. And they're buying gold, because that's all they know how to do. That's what they've been doing since inception. Right? That's their muscle memory. But somebody is going to dip their toe into Bitcoin. Some really smart central banker and group is going to say, "Well gee, if we accumulate our position before every other country, we're in a really good spot." They're going to quietly silently build their position and then talk their book. You just want to make sure you're not the person when the music turns off and you don't have a seat on the Bitcoin network, and the way you buy a seat is by buying Bitcoin.

John Darsie: (49:24)
For people out there who are kicking themselves for not buying Bitcoin at $5,000 per coin when it dipped a few years ago after its initial basic rise into the mainstream, it's not too late.

Cameron Winklevoss: (49:38)
Do you know, that's-

Anthony Scaramucci: (49:39)
Ask why it dipped, though. Because I think it's important, guys. Why did it dip?

John Darsie: (49:42)
Yeah, why is it different now? Why did it have such a... It lost 80% of its value then.

Cameron Winklevoss: (49:47)
Right.

John Darsie: (49:48)
Thanksgiving this year, it lost 10%. But it seems like the dip is being bought and it's much more durable.

Cameron Winklevoss: (49:54)
I think that this time it's different, it's a different fact set. In 2017, it was very much a retail phenomenon. People got super excited, and a lot of people ploughed in. But the institutions really weren't there in a big way yet. Some were, and partners and founders at hedge funds and things were quietly getting in. This time around, you have people like Paul Tudor Jones and people like Michael Saylor who are buying. And they're not buying millions, they're buying tens and hundreds of millions. This has been happening quietly at least over the past six months during the pandemic.

Cameron Winklevoss: (50:32)
We anecdotally have these conversations all day long, conversations that even two years ago wouldn't happen. Or the person would like to learn about Bitcoin, but wasn't really sincere about putting on that position quite yet. So you have stronger hands right now, that's a big part of it. You have a much more mature ecosystem. Regulations are a little bit clearer. And the macro picture has gotten so much worse. It's horrible. I think Mnuchin's saying that, "Oh, we think that the deficit at whatever, 20-plus, 28 trillion, is manageable." What's manageable about that? How do you manage that? The math... the interest payments just will compound and it just won't work.

John Darsie: (51:19)
Well, Cameron and Tyler, we could go on for a lot longer I'm sure, but we'll leave it there for today. We hope to have on hopefully in the next few months. You were actually at our SALT Conference as Anthony mentioned, what, five or so years ago. Again, very early in the Bitcoin story. People had chances to jump on, and as you allude to it, could still be early.

Cameron Winklevoss: (51:39)
Yeah. Just to point a further point on it in closing... When we spoke at SALT, I believe the market cap for Ethereum was $1 billion. And today I think it's, I don't know, it's 50 X. I don't know. It would be interesting to see, to time stamp this conversation and see where the prices are next time we talk.

Anthony Scaramucci: (52:03)
I'm hoping that we're a good luck charm for you guys. I hope that's what that implies.

Tyler Winklevoss: (52:07)
You really are.

Cameron Winklevoss: (52:07)
I think, absolutely. I mean, we went on Squawk earlier today and Bitcoin was at $18.5, and an hour or two later it hit an all-time high. So let's see what happens in the next hour.

Anthony Scaramucci: (52:22)
As long as it's going up, guys, we're taking full credit. If it's going down, I'm blaming it on Joe Curran. I just want to make sure everybody knows that.

Cameron Winklevoss: (52:29)
Deal. Deal.

Anthony Scaramucci: (52:30)
I did learn something from my old boss, by the way. Just so you know, about where you put the blame on thing on things. Just kidding. But in all seriousness guys, thanks so much for joining us. We'd love to get you back on. And I'm looking forward to the opportunity for SkyBridge to do business with you guys sometime in the near future.

Cameron Winklevoss: (52:50)
Great, really looking forward to it.

Tyler Winklevoss: (52:52)
Likewise. Thanks for having us on, guys.

Michael Saylor: “Bitcoin is a Dominant Monetary Network” | SALT Talks #109

“Google is an information network. Facebook is a social network. Bitcoin is a monetary network.”

Michael Saylor is a technologist, entrepreneur, business executive, philanthropist, and best-selling author. He currently serves as Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Office of MicroStrategy, Inc.

As we approached 2010, companies like Apple, Facebook and Amazon were poised to transform the world. The analog world we once lived in would soon fit in the palm of a hand. Apple was replacing Canon; Facebook and Instagram were replacing Kodak; Amazon was replacing retail stores. In the process these companies became exponentially more valuable than the ones they eliminated. “Software networks are dematerializing everything in the world.”

Bitcoin represents a similar transformation in the financial space. Similar to the likes of Amazon, Apple and Facebook, Bitcoin has proven itself the winner in the crypto asset space and will continue its inevitable climb. Institutions and major players in the financial space are already coming around to Bitcoin which will accelerate its adoption and growth.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Michael Saylor.jpeg

Michael Saylor

Chairman of the Board & Chief Executive Officer

MicroStrategy

MODERATOR

anthony_scaramucci.jpeg

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darsie: (00:06)
Hello, everyone. Welcome back to SALT Talks. My name is John Darsie, the Managing Director of SALT, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance, technology, and public policy. What we're trying to do during these SALT Talks is provide interviews with leading investors, creators, and thinkers. It's trying to replicate the experience we provide to our global conference series, the SALT Conference, which provides a platform for ideas that we think are shaping the future and a window into the mind of subject matter experts. We're very excited today to welcome Michael Saylor to SALT Talks.

John Darsie: (00:43)
Michael is a technologist, an entrepreneur, a business executive, and a philanthropist, as well as being a best-selling author. He currently serves as the Chairman of the Board of Directors and as the Chief Executive Officer for MicroStrategy. Since co-founding the company at the age of 24, Michael has built MicroStrategy into a global leader in business intelligence, mobile software, and cloud-based services. In 2012, he authored the book The Mobile Wave: How Mobile Intelligence Will Change Everything, which earned a spot on The New York Times Best Seller list.

John Darsie: (01:14)
Michael attended MIT receiving an SB in Aeronautics and Astronautics and an SB in Science, Technology and Society. Just a reminder, if you have any questions for Michael during today's SALT Talk, you can enter them in the Q&A box at the bottom of your video screen. Hosting today's talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the Founder and Managing Partner of SkyBridge Capital, which is a global alternative investment firm. Anthony is also the Chairman of SALT. With that, I'll turn it over to Anthony for the interview.

Anthony Scaramucci: (01:43)
Well, John, thank you. Mike, I got to tell you, I was so pleased when you accepted our invitation. Thank you. Welcome to SALT, and welcome to SALT Talks. Hopefully, we'll get you to one of our live events one day when we can get back away from the pandemic. But before we get started, you got this beautiful ship in the background. You're crushing John Darsie, who prides himself in his room ratings. So, I'm very happy that you're here with this beautiful room rating. But tell us about your background. Tell us about your family's background. I know you come from a military family. Give us some sense for your upbringing and what got you on the arc of your professional journey.

Michael Saylor: (02:22)
My father was a career noncommissioned officer in the Air Force. We spent 30 years. He rose from the beginning to be Chief Master Sergeant. We lived on military bases, air force bases everywhere in the world. Then he spent 10 years as a government servant working on the F-16 program. So, I come substantially from an Air Force background. I grew up in Dayton, Ohio, and in high school, where they invented the airplane. I became very enamored with science fiction. I read every science fiction author, Robert Heinlein, Arthur C. Clarke, Isaac Asimov.

Michael Saylor: (03:04)
By the time I graduated, every self-respecting individual, every dude of my generation either wanted to be a rock star, astronaut, fighter pilot, maybe professor, or CEO. So, I went to MIT on an Air Force scholarship. I studied aeronautical engineering and spaceship design. I learned to fly in the Air Force, Lackland Air Force Base. My senior year, I ran into two flukes, the United States won the Cold War, Reagan drew down the military. I was diagnosed mistakenly with benign heart murmur.

Michael Saylor: (03:48)
The result of that is I didn't go into the Air Force to fly jets and become the astronaut, which was one of my career paths. I ended up going out into the business world. I thought I'd get a PhD. I took a job. The job blew up. I got another job. When I was about to go back to college, the people I was working for gave me the chance to start MicroStrategy. They financed the entire business. So, I started a company at 24. I thought when it fails, I'll get a PhD. It never failed. I'm still stuck here. So, that's how I got to be in the software business. It wasn't of my own doing. I really wanted to be an astronaut.

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:28)
Do you think you'll ever take a trip into space, Mike?

Michael Saylor: (04:33)
We'll see. I'm holding out hope. Go SpaceX!

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:39)
I see his base. Yeah, we're investors in SpaceX, because we love that company. We're obviously cheerleaders for what's going to happen this weekend with their launch and cheerleaders for Elon's company. Talk us through The Mobile Wave and how mobile intelligence has changed the world, a fascinating book. What's interesting about your book, even though it was written eight years ago, it is still very current. So, I would recommend everybody on this SALT Talk to read the book, very compelling stuff. But tell us a little bit about how it's changed the world, mobile intelligence.

Michael Saylor: (05:17)
In 2007, Apple came for with the iPhone, but it was a toy. There was no cut and paste. There is no App Store. By 2009, the iPhone 3 was not a toy anymore. It was a business tool. I became enamored with the idea of software leaping off of a computer onto a handset. I thought when software goes from solid state to vapor state and now it's around us and with us and we sleep with it 24/7/365, maybe it means something different.

Michael Saylor: (05:48)
So, when I wrote The Mobile Wave, the observation was software networks are dematerializing everything in the world. They're dematerializing money and identity and everything you hold in your hand, the photograph and the camera and the recorder and the video. If software dematerializes everything, then I can take a map from Rand McNally and make it a magic map. Google Maps is a magic map that tells you where to drive, how to drive, whether you should go there, the directions to take. It's in the palm of your hand. It even talks to you. Rand McNally was a simple 20th century map. Rand McNally is worth 50 million bucks. Google Maps is worth $50 billion.

Michael Saylor: (06:36)
Apple dematerialized Kodak, maybe Instagram did. You went from taking photos on a Canon camera and storing them in a shoe box or a photo album to Facebook and Instagram and the iPhone. It wasn't worth the same. It wasn't worth 10 times as much. It was worth 1,000 times as much. So, the conclusion of the mobile way was the world's going to change the network. Google's an information network. Facebook's a social network. Apple's a mobile network. Amazon's a retail network. They're going to eat the world. They're going to destroy 15,000 other companies that are competing with them, because Apple is able to ship a better camera to a billion people overnight for a nickel.

Michael Saylor: (07:21)
Nobody in the history of the world could ever upgrade or ship a product for no variable cost to the entire planet for a nickel. Yet, that's what Google does. That's what Facebook does. That's what Apple does. The part of Amazon that works well is that dematerialization of the retail storefront to a billion people for a nickel. Well, the conclusion is buy Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Google. I wrote the book. Anthony, nobody read the book. I mean, some people read the book. I got 50 people-

Anthony Scaramucci: (07:51)
What do you mean? Darsie and I read it, because we're get ready for you, man. I knew I was going to be out punched in terms of IQ and brain powers. I had to read the damn thing.

Michael Saylor: (08:01)
Eight years later. When I wrote the book, probably 50,000 or 100,000 people read the book. I made 50,000 in royalties from the book. I didn't invest my company into Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Google. I took $50 million of my own money. I bought it. I bought it when everybody said, "You're forced to own Apple. You should diversify into all the other computer companies. What is this Facebook thing? You're foolish to own that. What is this Google thing? It's overvalued. It's overpriced." Well, I converted the $50 million into $500 million. Anybody could have done it. If you had bought any of those companies in the past decade, you couldn't lose money.

Michael Saylor: (08:41)
So, it made me conclude a couple of things. One thing, if you want to make money in the tech era, you find the dominant digital network, the one that's worth $100 billion that's crushed everybody. You can't buy MySpace. You might hit BlackBerry or MySpace or Yahoo or something like that. If you buy too soon, you might miss it. But after it's $100 billion dollars and the market has decided Apple's the winner, Google's the winner, Facebook's the winner, Amazon's the winner.

Michael Saylor: (09:15)
I know it's pretty obvious Amazon was the winner in 2013 when it was trading at 300 bucks, Anthony. Everybody on Wall Street said, "What is this stupid company? They don't make any money. We don't buy into it." They would sell you Amazon for 300 bucks, but you could have bought it. You could buy all those things. You would have got a 10X, 20X gain on it. You just wait until the 99% of the world that disagrees with you, that cynical and skeptical and ignorant and they don't understand it and they're afraid of it.

Michael Saylor: (09:45)
As it gradually dawns on them that Google's an information network, Facebook's a social network, Apple's a mobile network, Amazon's a retail network, Microsoft's an enterprise software network, when you finally figure it out, you're like, "Oh, these guys can serve up a billion people for a nickel. Their variable cost is zero. They've got overwhelming crushing advantages."

Michael Saylor: (10:12)
So, summary of The Mobile Wave, I had that experience. It made me very successful as a personal investor. My company didn't invest in it. 2020 came and I swore to myself, if I ever saw this again, I wasn't going to write a book. I was going to buy as much of that thing as I could personally, as much of that thing as I could corporately, and then I was just going to tweet about it. So, that's basically the tie in or what leads us up to the virtual wave and my interest in Bitcoin.

Anthony Scaramucci: (10:48)
So, let's talk about that, because you started out as a Bitcoin skeptic. I've listened to a lot of your interviews. There was a tweet in 2012, where you likened it to a form of online gambling. And then you had the slow conversion into becoming what I would say one of the more exceptional Bitcoin evangelist. I mean, I would describe you be like that based on a lot of the stuff that you've said. But now you're putting your money alongside of your ideas and your mouth, you've announced a $425 million investment in Bitcoin from the MicroStrategy cash reserve. So, could you take us through your personal odyssey from skeptic, "This is online gambling," to "Okay, wait a minute. This is a lot like Microsoft, Facebook, and Amazon"?

Michael Saylor: (11:36)
Sure, I mean, in the early days of Bitcoin, Bitcoin's like an open source project. There's no company behind it. It's an emergent phenomenon in cyberspace. As it emerged, the early days, it was very uncertain and scary and complicated. So, how will the IRS tax it? Will the government ban it? Will it be illegal to hold it? The early exchanges were failing. Mt. Gox failed. The early use cases were Silk Road. The early question of, "Is it a security or not?" Right? You went through all of these tests for Bitcoin. It could have been destroyed, because it was banned. It could have been destroyed, because it was hijacked by bad exchanges. It could have been destroyed, because it was forked. Everybody said, "Well, either someone else is going to copy it or the government will ban it."

Michael Saylor: (12:41)
Over the last eight years, what happened is it was copied 6,500 times, Anthony. It's the winner of the crypto war. So, how do you get comfortable with it? Well, after it's been attacked 6,500 times by clones, and they've all failed. When it emerged to be 95% of all of the proof of work networks... 95% of all the monetary energy in the crypto asset space is on the Bitcoin network. ... then you know it's Facebook, it's not MySpace. So, we had to watch it get to a point of maturity, where it's season. We had to watch all of these bad exchanges failed and all the bad actors failed. We had to watch the development of a regulatory apparatus.

Michael Saylor: (13:28)
So, now you have KYC regulation on the exchanges in the US. You have clarity with regard to how it's taxed. You have clarity with regard to what it is and isn't. I think people are starting to understand it's not a currency. It's not a payment network. It's a bank in cyberspace that allows billions of people to store their money. It gives them a simple, straightforward, affordable, secure savings account for people that can't set up their own hedge fund and don't know and can't get into a hedge fund. They just want to put their money in a bank.

Michael Saylor: (14:11)
The politicians and the country has destroyed the savings account over the past 30 years. When I was a kid, you put your money in a savings account, get 5% interest, and everybody believed that the money was going to be more valuable in the future. You wouldn't lose your money. That option's been deprived. So, Bitcoin has emerged from casino gambling scary to the savings account or savings and loan at the end of the universe. That's the journey of the 10 years, and that's why I could get excited about it in the year 2020.

Anthony Scaramucci: (14:49)
You tweeted a lot about that this morning, which I shared with my team. I guess the question I have is and you said it, but I want to hear it again. You had MySpace. You had Yahoo. They got hopped over by Facebook and Google. There's not a coin out there that could hop Bitcoin. Is it or no?

Michael Saylor: (15:13)
They tried 6,500 times, Anthony, over a decade. Everybody and their brother thought, "Man, could I copy this?" The problem is Bitcoin's the only one with the immaculate conception. It's truly decentralized. It's the money. It's the crypto asset of the people, right? There's not an example of a digital network that hit 100 billion dollars in market cap that was vanquished subsequently. Lots of billion dollar things failed, lots of $2 billion things fail. But once you get to $100 billion dollars, I think the market has spoken.

Anthony Scaramucci: (15:55)
Right. I think it's well said. There was a book 20 years ago, James Dale Davidson and a guy named... I think it was William Rees-Mogg. His son is now in the parliament in the UK. I'd have to get the exact title of his last name, but the book was called The Sovereign Individual. I read the book 20 years ago. Peter Thiel decided that that was a big book for him. So, he's repurposed it and helped to get published again in a paperback form.

Anthony Scaramucci: (16:28)
So, I went [inaudible 00:16:29]. I hadn't read it in 20 years. Let me go back and read it. I bought it. Thiel writes in the foreword, something that I want to ask you about. He says that "AI, you think of the CCP AI. It helps people score you socially. It helps people identify your facial tics. AI is about centralization and command and control. But Bitcoin and the asset associated with digital currency is a libertarian ideal. It is about personal and individual freedom. That's how he started the book, The Sovereign Individual. I'm wondering about your reaction to that. Do you agree with him?

Michael Saylor: (17:09)
I do agree with him. I think that the thing that makes people that own and invest in Bitcoin passionate about it is because it really does enforce the concept of freedom and truth and liberty and sovereignty for the individual. Let's just take one interesting example. You're an investor, you have a bunch of money, you want to leave it for your granddaughter 30 years from now. Your choices are gold or Bitcoin. Oh, this is the real problem, $10 trillion in gold, hundreds of billions of dollars in Bitcoin. Well, if you actually choose gold, you have to put your gold in a bank and trust the counterparty to take care of that gold. No, are you going to bury it under your mattress?

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:00)
It's stored somewhere. That's that shoe box. That's that Kodak's shoe box that you were referring to earlier.

Michael Saylor: (18:07)
Yeah, pretty much, you're putting it in a bank vault. Now, you've surrendered all your monetary energy. Money is monetary energy. You've surrendered your life energy to a bank, a counterparty trustee. In the last hundred years, they all fail. Every bank fails. You're trusting a company or you're trusting a country. 95% of the cities in the world, the banks failed over 100 years. But the countries and the regimes fail too, so you're trusting in a country or a company and a counterparty. On the other hand, if you actually buy Bitcoin, you have the option, not the obligation, but you have the option to take custody of those keys. That's advantages for you in two reasons.

Michael Saylor: (18:59)
One, you can switch custodians quickly. In half an hour, you can move your money from one bank to another bank, one country to another country. That keeps everybody honest. It's useful in a capitalist world if you have options and no one's holding you over a barrel. The second is, I can hold a gun to your head, pull the trigger, kill you, and take your gold. But if I hold the gun to your head and pull the trigger, I can't get your Bitcoin. I could just kill you.

Michael Saylor: (19:29)
There's a very important subtlety there, which is at the end of the day, you control your life force. It shifts the balance of power back to the individual versus the bank, the custodian, the country, anybody that would coerce you and steal your life force from you. In that way, it's a libertarian idea, but it's also a capitalistic idea. It's also just a matter of decency to the individual and sovereignty to the individual.

Anthony Scaramucci: (20:05)
I'm sure you thought about this, I'm just interested to get your iteration process in making that large of an investment. You had to be thinking, "Okay, what could go wrong? What's the risk management?" Tell us what you think could have gone wrong, and then tell us how you intellectually and cognitively overcame what you thought the issues could be for something like Bitcoin,

Michael Saylor: (20:26)
Anthony, I think this gets at the big issue. The number one problem every investor in the world is facing right now... There's $250 trillion or more worth of this problem. ... is I have monetary energy. Where's my store of value? How am I going to conserve my monetary energy in the current macroeconomic climate? As long as the central banks are expanding the broad money supply and to expanded by 5.5% a year for 10 years. This year, it expanded by 24%. If the monetary supply expands by 10 to 15% a year for the next three to four years, the banks are sucking the oxygen out of the room. They're sucking 10 to 15% of the purchasing power from all of your investments.

Michael Saylor: (21:18)
I mean, if I'm holding cash and I have 500 million in cash and I'm looking at losing 15% of the purchasing power every year for five years, the risk was I'm going to lose 75% if I do nothing, okay? It made it easy for me to take another decision, because I expected that doing nothing with money, with cash is losing half to 75% of your purchasing power. It's not a problem if the money supply is not expanding, right? The expansion of the monetary supply is like I'm sucking 5% of the option out of your room every year or every month. How long will it be before you leave?

Michael Saylor: (21:55)
Now, what do I do with that? Well, I got to find a store of value. A bond is only a store of value if the coupon is higher than the rate of monetary expansion, unless I have expectation that the interest rate will fall. So, a 5% bond can work as long as you keep cranking down the interest rates. But when interest rates get to zero, unless you go negative, bonds don't hold value. Everybody in the bond market has figured this out. Either interest rates go negative or you got to exit.

Michael Saylor: (22:26)
Now, how about stocks? Stock can hold value if the cash flow per share grows faster than the rate of monetary expansion. Google Amazon, Facebook, they work in the last decade, because they're growing 20% and the money supply is expanding 5%. But if the money supply expands by 15%, how many equities are going to expand cash flow per share by 20%? By the way, how do you do that if you're not? You have to leverage up, right? So, if I'm growing 5% a year cash flows, I have to borrow money. I go short the dollar. I borrow billions. I buy my stock back. My cash flow per share goes above the hurdle rates, and I can hold value.

Michael Saylor: (23:09)
What happens when you're fully leveraged up, Anthony? Everybody's at the end of the line. I've leveraged up as far as I can go. Interest rates are as low as they can go. How many companies are going to grow their cash flow greater than the rate of monetary expansion? Well, you crank in your estimate for money supply. Bonds are a problem. Stocks are a problem. Cash is a problem. Now you got to go to precious metals. Am I going to buy gold? The miners are going to create 2, 3% more gold every year. The gold supply as centralized. There's counterparty risks. The central bankers hypothecated and create gold derivatives. There's no scarcity with gold. Under the best case in 100 years, you're going to lose 85% of your money when they just print 2% more gold a year.

Michael Saylor: (23:58)
Under the worst case, you're going to lose it all from a counterparty risk. In the mid case, you're going to lose 90%, 95%, because people keep generating gold derivatives. This is why gold is breaking down against the Fed balance sheet. You can see it breaking down on the charts this year. It's not working. If gold goes through $100,000 an ounce, gold miners are going to frack gold like there's no tomorrow. It's a commodity. Commodities make awful money, because human beings can create more. So, you work your way through bonds, stocks, and gold. What's left? Crypto, find a digital asset you can't print more of.

Michael Saylor: (24:37)
Well, they're 6,500 choices. There's one that's the winner. It turns out that the winner is the one that no company controls, no country controls. It's capped at 21 million. Because it's 21 million, what do you have here, Anthony? You have a software network engineered to collect, store, and channel monetary energy without power loss. It's like Facebook for money or eBay for money, but here's the difference.

Michael Saylor: (25:07)
It takes you 30 years to buy everything you're ever going to buy on eBay. The reason eBay works is because it has all the liquidity of stuff you might buy, but it takes you 30 years to buy it. Bitcoin is a savings network. It's a monitoring network. If you're a billionaire, you put a billion dollars on the network, you put it on the network in a week. I bought $600 million worth of this stuff in a quarter, Anthony.

Michael Saylor: (25:35)
I put 20 years of earnings into the network upfront, because as soon as you figure it out, you realize that it's going to be the highest real return versus all the alternatives. Do I want to have my money sitting in a Fiat instrument, which is a bond or a stock that's going to be debased by expansion of the money supply; or do I want to put it into an absolutely scarce digital asset, which is going to float with the expansion, the monetary supply?

Anthony Scaramucci: (26:06)
Are you worried about the volatility, because it has experienced some volatility over the years?

Michael Saylor: (26:11)
LeBron James started playing basketball like age eight or nine. The first 10 years, he was brilliant. Everybody knew he is brilliant, but he was a little bit volatile. He was a little bit erratic. From age 18, to 28, he crushed everything and everybody in his past. Great superstar athletes have a volatile first decade. It was volatile. There were crooked exchanges that were hacked.

Anthony Scaramucci: (26:32)
They couldn't have evolved until three decades. I mean, there are some superstars that evolved. I just want to give that as a disclaimer on the side.

Michael Saylor: (26:40)
There are some, but my point really is looking backwards at the first decade of a superstar's life and then extrapolating forward to the next decade isn't necessarily the most rational thing. For example, Apple computer was a totally different stock from 1998 to 2007. And then from 2010 to 2020, it was a bit different. If you look at what's happening now, institutions are discovering Bitcoin and there are adults in the room. When they're buying, they're not buying 100,000 at a time and they're not being manipulated on these early exchanges. You're talking about people putting $100 million.

Michael Saylor: (27:27)
For example, for me to buy $600 million, it took me 14 days trading every three seconds, Anthony. I was sitting there ready to buy everything you would sell me for 14 days straight every second for two weeks, me, one guy, one actor. Now, what happens when there's 100 actors like me in the Bitcoin market?

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:51)
Yeah, I think you're making a very compelling case. I appreciate you taking all my questions, because there's a lot of people on this SALT conversation that are coming up the learning curve. They appreciate all the work that you've done. In fact, frankly, they're able to leverage all of the genius that you've put into this. I'm going to turn it over to John Darsie who has a series of questions from our audience. We got a tremendous amount of audience participation, Michael. So, I'm going to let him ask a few questions here.

Michael Saylor: (28:24)
All right, bring it on.

John Darsie: (28:26)
All right. So, you have a very interesting concept, Michael, about Bitcoin being a store of energy in a thermodynamic type of sense. Could you walk us through that metaphor, what you mean by that?

Michael Saylor: (28:39)
Okay, look, it's totally strange to have a financial instrument, which is scarce and capped, because you can print more tech stocks, you can print more bonds, you can mine more gold, you can issue more fiat currency. On the other hand, in the engineering world, when you're designing pneumatic systems or hydraulic systems, nobody ever built a pneumatic system with a leak, a hydraulic system with a leak. Your swimming pool doesn't even work with a leak, right? Everybody knows if there's a leak in the fuselage of the airplane, it's not going to fly, it's going to explode. So, you don't have a leak in a nuclear reactor. Do you ever try to go across the ocean and a ship with a leak?

Michael Saylor: (29:21)
Okay, the idea of a closed system is basic to every freshman in engineering. I'm an MIT engineer. We talk about something called adiabatic lapse. An adiabatic system is no leak. A closed system is when you have mass in the system that can either leave or can be added, and all you can do is inject energy. So, Bitcoin is the classic textbook closed system. There's 21 million coins, virtual bars of gold in the system. You can't remove any, you can't add any. There's no inflation.

Michael Saylor: (29:58)
On the other hand, what you can do is you can heat it up. If you're buying Bitcoin above the 4-year or the 200-week moving average, you're heating up the system. If you're buying it below the 200-week moving average, you're cooling down the system. The entire thing's like a massive monetary battery, a capacitor. It's storing energy. What we've done is created a system where I can take $100 million of monetary energy, I can put it into the Bitcoin network. It'll sit there for as long as you can imagine, and there's no power loss. That's the genius of it.

Michael Saylor: (30:37)
If I told you I was going to inject another million Bitcoin or two or three million Bitcoin, I'm bleeding off, I'm diluting the energy. So, when I describe it as a closed system, what I'm saying is for the first time in the history of man, we created a monetary energy network that will store the energy over time with no power loss. We've never had a money. We've never had a thing that could do that. Gold didn't do that. Copper, silver doesn't do that. Fiat doesn't do that. Stocks and bonds don't do that. So, it's really an engineering breakthrough.

John Darsie: (31:17)
So, you have this degree in aeronautics that we mentioned earlier, but you also have a degree in the history of science. You've talked about how you've studied different technological leaps throughout history. Do you think Bitcoin is a technological leap and the blockchain technology that underlies Bitcoin is a technological leap akin to the start of the internet, akin to the start of the automobile? What does that mean for the banking system as a whole? You've talked about how this isn't a store of value or a currency. It's a bank that lives in cyberspace. Do you think Bitcoin, blockchain technology is ultimately going to swallow the entire banking system?

Michael Saylor: (31:58)
What I think is that Bitcoin is an elemental force similar to steel or electricity or oil. John D. Rockefeller found a way to channel chemical energy via oil, created standard oil, changed the world, drove down the cost of energy by three orders of magnitude, and everything changed. Take away steel, right? Andrew Carnegie came up with steel. There's no New York City without steel. Build the building more than four floors, there is nothing without steel. It created the entire modern civil engineering era.

Michael Saylor: (32:33)
Andrew Mellon brought forth aluminum. That's why he became rich, aluminum. Try to build an airplane without aluminum. There is no aviation industry without aluminum. Electricity, think about the world without electricity. The Romans had aqueducts. The city of 500,000 people shrinks to 25,000 people if you turn the aqueduct off. It's channeling hydraulic energy.

Michael Saylor: (33:00)
Bitcoin is pure monetary energy. For the first time in the history of the world, we figured out how to create a software network that will store and channel monetary energy with no power loss. That's a million times better than a gold network. I bet it's better than electrical network. If I want to hold $500 million of electricity and I put in the battery, I lose 2% a month. There's a 24% inflation rate on electric battery. You can only move electricity 500 miles and you lose 6% in the first transaction. Try to move $500 million of electricity from New York to Tokyo. Here's how you do it. You take the $500 million converted to Bitcoin, send a Bitcoin to Tokyo for three bucks, convert it back into electricity.

Michael Saylor: (33:53)
By the way, the magic is not just that I did the transfer for $3, instead of $300,000 with gold. It would take you a month and 300 grand to do it in gold. The magic is I can put the $500 million 30 years into the future and not lose a nickel of the energy, right? That's the beauty of this entire network. It's a network to channel monetary energy, which is the apex energy. Monetary energy is the sum of kinetic energy, potential energy, chemical energy, electrical energy, nuclear energy. All energies flow to monetary energy. We have a software network or a technology network for monetary energy.

Michael Saylor: (34:40)
One last point, Google's an information network. It's worth a trillion dollars, because it channels information and video. Facebook's a social network. It's worth nearly a trillion dollars, because it channels social energy. People couldn't conceive of it. Bitcoin is a monetary network. It collects and channels monetary energy. It's a little bit more valuable than collecting all your photographs from a shoe box. It's a little bit more valuable than posting photos to your friends and family on the holidays. We're talking about tens of thousands of billion dollar entities. They've all got a problem. Their monetary energy is being debased by 10 to 20% a year by the expansion of the monetary supply. They're all stampeding toward a solution. Is that going to be derivatives or equities or bonds? What is the solution?

Michael Saylor: (35:42)
Bitcoin is the first perfected crypto asset that serves as a long term store of monetary energy. That's what's going on here. It's an invention. John D. Rockefeller became the richest man in the world, because he collected, stored, and channeled chemical energy. It's a simple idea. 99% of the world doesn't understand it. They're new to it. It's inconceivable, because Facebook was an inconceivable idea a decade ago. So, that's where we are with this, something exciting, new, powerful. It's the elemental structure of a totally new set of financial systems. Yes.

John Darsie: (36:35)
So, building upon that, just before we came live, the Federal Reserve Chairman Jay Powell responded to a question about a central bank digital currency, which has gotten a lot of buzz lately. We asked Raoul Pal about this last Friday. He had an interesting answer. We talked to Marty Chavez, the former Chief Information Officer at Goldman Sachs, who's thought a lot about what you could do if you did create a central bank digital currency. You could relate it to something like modern monetary theory or stimulus packages.

John Darsie: (37:04)
If you gave everyone a central bank digital wallet, you could instantly transfer government money into their bank account and target individual people based on who you need to send money to and how you want that money to circulate through the economy. Do you think central bank digital currencies have a future? What is the future of Bitcoin living alongside potential central bank digital currencies?

Michael Saylor: (37:28)
I wrote about money as software in The Mobile Wave in 2012. You could see it coming. Today, you see Apple Pay, PayPal, Square Cash, Alipay. Big tech companies are moving money around. It's clear that governments are going to at some point grapple with it. I listened to the same interview. What I heard Christine Lagarde say was, "We'll make a decision in January, February. If we do something, it's two to four years." So, we're talking four years out for the EU. I heard Jay Powell say, "We got to study it, make sure we get it right." That felt to me like more than four years.

Michael Saylor: (38:09)
So, my view is everybody knows that digital technology matters. They know they can't ignore it. The government's aren't going to move as fast as the big tech companies. China's going to move fastest. Big tech will move second fast. The governments will be 5 to 10 years out. I wouldn't be holding my breath in the next 36 months.

Michael Saylor: (38:31)
Now, how it relates to Bitcoin. Bitcoin is not a currency. It's not a payment network, right? Currency is the province of the government, always has been, always will be. The IRS set the tax code for currency. You can't use Bitcoin as a currency, because the tax code is hostile to it. It would generate 100,000 accounting entries and tax obligations for no reason whatsoever. So, there's no point in Bitcoin being thought of that. Bitcoin is not a payment network. Apple Pay and Square Cash and PayPal and Alipay are payment networks. They work well. They work a billion times better than Bitcoin or any crypto will ever work.

Michael Saylor: (39:13)
So, crypto's inappropriate as a currency, even though people call it cryptocurrency. It's a wrong choice of words. We should move it out of the lexicon. We should refer to as crypto asset. Crypto is an awesome technology for creating a scarce asset as a store of value. The $250 trillion problem is store my value, I just want to put my money in a piggy bank in cyberspace and have nobody take it. It's a very simple idea. Then if I want to spend money, I'm going to convert 5% of it to Apple Pay or Square Cash or PayPal or Alipay. I'm going to move it around and fiat currency on those rails in a responsible, legal, efficient, fun fashion.

Michael Saylor: (40:04)
Let the governments be the governments. Let the big tech companies do what they do best. Bitcoin is going to solve this last very simple issue, which is I just need pharmaceutical grade, synthetic, safe haven asset, synthetic gold with none of the hangover of gold, none of the bad problems, none of the problems with mining and hypothecation and centralization and corruption, but all of the good parts of it. I put my money in there. A decade from now, I've still got it and it hasn't been inflated away.

John Darsie: (40:41)
You didn't even touch on flying to asteroids and mining gold on asteroids, which they think potentially is going to be possible in the next decade. There's an asteroid out there they think is worth $10 quintillion, trillion, bajillion worth of gold.

Michael Saylor: (40:56)
Yeah, you just bring us back to the fundamental issue. In the finance world, it's very rare to be able to buy anything you can't print more of. But in the engineering world, it's very rare to find a machine that works unless you plugged all the leaks, unless it respects conservation of energy, the first law of thermodynamics, and it's a closed system. By the way, Bitcoin is the singularity, where engineering, science and technology smashes into finance. For the first time, we can finally apply Isaac Newton's laws and the laws of thermodynamics to protecting our money. Who wouldn't like to have a monetary system that works?

John Darsie: (41:43)
So, a less charitable characterization of your recent Bitcoin evangelism would be that you've now put $425 million worth of MicroStrategy reserves into bitcoin. You've personally bought Bitcoin. You're now talking your book. You realize that if Michael Saylor and Paul Tudor Jones and Alan Howard and all these other really wealthy, influential, smart people are talking up this asset, ultimately, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and it goes higher.

John Darsie: (42:13)
Your cost basis, I believe, is somewhere around 10,000, 11,000 in Bitcoin. Do you think you'll continue as a company and as an individual to continue to buy Bitcoin at higher prices as you generate more cash from your business? Do you expect other Fortune 1,000 companies to follow your lead?

Michael Saylor: (42:31)
Well, I would answer the question by pointing out that I think it's important that people of character and conviction articulate the benefits of Bitcoin to the masses. There are billions of people on this planet that are living in a regime where the currency is collapsing, one billion that we just saw last month. For them, this is a lifeboat against the currency collapse. If you're living in Argentina or Venezuela or Turkey or Lebanon or most of Africa, if you don't have this, then what choice do you have? I mean, they don't have the option to put their money with a hedge fund in Connecticut, right? They don't have an option to hire some professional money manager and convert it to dollars.

Michael Saylor: (43:18)
So, as Jack Dorsey said, this is an instrument of economic empowerment. There are billions of people on the planet who have been deprived of a savings account where they won't lose all their stuff. So, we're going through a transition where people aren't sure what this is. I think it's a moral imperative to stand up and say to people, "It's a good thing. It's a thing that's going to make the world better for billions of people that don't have a choice."

Michael Saylor: (43:47)
If you're going to criticize Bitcoin, what are you going to do to solve the problems of everybody on the planet that doesn't have liquid wealth and hedge funds in the United States with options? Because it's morally incumbent upon you to give them something to cling to in the event of a currency flood. So, the reason we're talking about it is because it's the right thing to do for the world.

Michael Saylor: (44:11)
As for what I think going forward, I think that if your choice is invest your money in bonds that are going to yield 2% while the monetary supply expands by 15%, you're looking at -13% real yield if you're calculating asset inflation, right? So that doesn't make any sense. If I'm going to put my money into equities, I'm going to gamble, I've got to rebalance my equity portfolio every quarter based upon performance and competition and a million moving parts. That doesn't make sense. If I leave my money in cash fiat currency and I know that all the banks are going to print 10 or 20% more every year, that doesn't make sense.

Michael Saylor: (44:59)
So, the only idea of adopting the Bitcoin standard is very simple. I'm going to sweep my excess cash flows into a savings bank in cyberspace that's run by incorruptible software that has no agenda other than to just store my value for 100 years. There's no CEO of Bitcoin. No one can print more Bitcoin. No one can use Bitcoin to do an acquisition or a dilutive acquisition. No one can be based to Bitcoin. It's a very simple idea.

Michael Saylor: (45:32)
Take your monetary energy, encrypt it into a cyberspace bank that's going to hold it in a vacuum, where the power won't bleed off, and then wait. Because in a world where everybody's dissipating energy, John, the rational strategy is preserve your energy. Everybody else is dissipating energy either by trading around or by holding bonds that can't keep up with the real rate of monetary expansion or by taking risks. What am I going to do, buy $500 million worth of liquid arts indexes? Scarce art index?

John Darsie: (46:18)
Baseball cards.

Michael Saylor: (46:20)
Put yourself in the place of someone that drives a truck for a living. What advice are you going to give them, right? My 82-year-old father, he can't be a hedge fund guy. He can't be picking stocks to buy and sell in a balanced portfolio with exposure to developing countries and with currency hedges on. It's going to short the 30-year bond and it'll play the yield. It's too complicated. There's billions and billions of people, they just have money, and they want to not lose their money. So, that's our strategy.

Michael Saylor: (46:58)
We're just going to try to preserve our money. We're going to do it by betting on the only obvious thing we can find in the world that is not correlate. Everything else is for the most part a fiat instrument. If the monetary supply expands, it's going to be diluted. So, you either got to buy the only Picasso, you got to buy scarce art or things that cannot be produced; or you buy bitcoin, because Bitcoin is that scarce crypto asset that's got hundreds of millions of dollars behind it.

John Darsie: (47:35)
Well, I'm going to play devil's advocate again on behalf of a couple of members of our audience who might not be as bought into Bitcoin. You described Bitcoin as the cryptocurrency or the asset class of the people, but what about people in third world countries who don't have access to the internet or the computing power or people who say that it takes a tremendous amount of energy to mine Bitcoin and run the Bitcoin network? What do you say to those people as detractors of Bitcoin?

Michael Saylor: (48:03)
Okay, well, first of all, I think just more people have access to a mobile phone than have access to running water on this planet. You can actually buy and sell and utilize Bitcoin from a mobile phone that costs 50 bucks. It's the most egalitarian thing in the world. People in Africa can't go and invest in hedge funds on Wall Street, but what they can do is they can get their hands on Bitcoin. Bitcoin trades 24/7/365 in every currency at every language on Earth. There's never been an asset in the history of the world that's harder working. Apple stock works 35 hours a week. Bitcoin works 168 hours a week. So, it truly is a global asset, an egalitarian asset running on mobile networks that reach everybody.

Michael Saylor: (48:56)
With regard to the energy issue, it consumes 1/10th of the energy that gold miners consume. It consumes like 1/1,000th of the energy that the financial establishment consumes. The only energy that gets used in Bitcoin mining is the marginal energy at the edge of the network that otherwise would have been thrown away. People that are flaring natural gas, people that have shot in fossil fuels, people that have hydraulic or hydroelectric power that otherwise would go to waste.

Michael Saylor: (49:29)
So, I think that the energy argument is silly fraud, because at the end of the day, Bitcoin is something like a million times more efficient from an energy point of view than moving your money around in gold or by trying to store it in Fort Knox. If you look at all the inefficiencies of all of the other traditional financial approaches, none of them are so efficient as to what Bitcoin does.

John Darsie: (50:02)
So, let's close. I want to talk about something completely different, which is Saylor Academy. You basically put all of your philanthropic efforts towards the cause of education. You believe that there's unequal access to education in the country, in the world. You've put a lot of money towards building a free educational platform, Saylor Academy. Could you talk about why you think access to education is so important and why you've put so much effort towards building Saylor Academy?

Michael Saylor: (50:30)
Well, look, when I went to MIT, my entire family's life savings for 200 years were depleted in the first four weeks of class. That was before education started getting really expensive. It's actually gone up from there. But my recollection is getting a good education cost more money than a middle class family could come up with.

Michael Saylor: (50:52)
On the other hand, I sat in physics classes and I learned stuff that Isaac Newton wrote about Principia Mathematica in the 18th century. So, it occurs to me that in a world where most of the math and calculus and science is out there and has been around for quite a while, it's in the public domain. Why is it you have to impoverish yourself to learn? Why isn't it free? I mean, why can't we upload it via open source and give it away to the world? Because there's about 10 million people with PhDs in the world, but if you really want to solve the problems of the world, you need to get Master's Degrees and PhDs and you need to teach people how to cure cancer and how to create rocket propulsion. That's not going to happen without education getting to be orders of magnitude cheaper.

Michael Saylor: (51:41)
So, given the fact that algebra and geometry got invented 2,000 years ago, why is it that we spend so much money manually teaching people algebra and calculus? Because we could have one automated professor, upload them to Google or upload them to YouTube and let it run and educate a billion people for a nickel. Wouldn't it be great if we had a billion people on the planet that had a PhD? I mean, it'll cost about $1 million a person. So, we need to come up with a million times a billion in order to do it. It's not going to happen the conventional way.

Michael Saylor: (52:21)
So, my passion around Saylor Academy is you can give away science, technology, engineering, mathematics, education for free to the entire world if you want to, if you have a will to do it. So, we decided we're going to do that. I think we signed up 80,000 students last quarter. Boy, it's not easy to give away stuff for free. So, if you can tell everybody that wants a free college education just to go to saylor.org and they'll see it there, then please do.

Michael Saylor: (52:57)
There's not a lot of things that I'm sure of in life, but I feel like making education free for everybody forever is a good thing. John, I don't have any heirs. I don't have any children. When I die, all my money goes into a foundation. The foundation's mission is simple. It's like giveaway education to everybody forever, right? What? How about the education necessary to go to Mars or fly faster than light or cure cancer or make the world a better place?

Anthony Scaramucci: (53:29)
Darsie, Darsie, don't even try. You have no chance of being adopted by Saylor, okay? So, don't even try.

John Darsie: (53:33)
Yeah, that's where I was going with this.

Anthony Scaramucci: (53:35)
I know you were thinking that. Let him give the money away to these people that need it, okay? Don't be greedy.

John Darsie: (53:40)
You sound a lot like Sal Khan. We had Sal Khan, Khan Academy on an early SALT Talk. He's been to several of our conferences. He talks about the same thing where he could go out and he could make a lot of money from this platform that he's built, but it's much more important to him to provide greater access to the educational tools that he's helped build. You and him have a very noble cause. You're helping a lot of people. So, we're very grateful for that.

Michael Saylor: (54:07)
Thanks.

John Darsie: (54:07)
Do you have any words from Michael before we let him go? We went into SALT Talks over time here, because there was too much-

Anthony Scaramucci: (54:12)
No, listen, it's a fascinating conversation, Michael. I hope that we get a chance to see you in person soon. I appreciate you coming on. There's a lot of exciting things ahead for you and MicroStrategy, but also for the world as we continue to exponentially innovate and make things faster, more efficient, smaller. The dematerialization of the world, I think, is so fascinating. I got my entire library on my iPhone, Michael. Who would have thought that when we were growing up?

Michael Saylor: (54:40)
Yeah, it's a wonderful world we live in if we can harness technology to be a force of good. I think Bitcoin is harnessing technology to be a force of good. For the first time in the history of the world, we've got a monetary network that doesn't bleed power, right? That's incredibly empowering to the billions and billions of years that are looking for technology to make their life better. That's the wonder of the year 2020.

Anthony Scaramucci: (55:06)
Well, I'm looking forward to be a part of that future with you. I think we said this, but we've got a note established at SkyBridge to keep up that effort to keep the light shining. So, thank you again for everything. Hope we get a chance to see you soon, Michael. God bless.

Michael Saylor: (55:24)
Thanks for having me, Anthony. Thanks for having me, John.

Raoul Pal of Real Vision Finance: ​Is Bitcoin a Hedge Against Inflation? | SALT Talks #102

“I always live in the future, so I'm always aiming for something. You don't know which path you could take, but it increases your probability of getting there.”

A former hedge fund manager who retired at 36, Raoul Pal is a co-founder of Real Vision, a financial media company offering in-depth video interviews and research publications from the world’s best investors.

Bitcoin appeals to three different types of people: Libertarians like its decentralized and anonymous nature; technologists see its potential as an engineering solution to the financial system; early adopter investors identify its value as an uninflatable store of value. Bitcoin serves as hedge against inflation caused by fiat currency. “What's clever is this money can't be devalued. You can't create more of it. There's only 21 million Bitcoins.”

Bitcoin basically amounts to a mathematical formula that guarantees there will never be more than 21 million Bitcoins. The decentralized structure, run on about 10,000 different nodes and recorded on the blockchain, ensures it can never be changed. Bitcoin is the only asset with a completely knowable supply.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Raoul Pal.jpeg

Raoul Pal

Co-Founder

Real Vision

MODERATOR

anthony_scaramucci.jpeg

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darsie: (00:07)
Hello, everyone, and welcome back to SALT Talks. My name is John Darsie. I'm the Managing Director of SALT, which is a global thought leadership forum at the intersection of finance, technology, and public policy. SALT Talks ... Excuse you, Anthony. SALT Talks are a digital interview series that we launched during this work from home period with leading investors, creators, and thinkers. What we're trying to do on these SALT Talks is replicate the experience that we provide at our global conferences, the SALT Conference, which we host annually in the United States and then an annual event internationally as well, most recently in Abu Dhabi in December of 2019. What we do at those conferences and what we do on these talks is try to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future.

John Darsie: (00:55)
Today's talk is going to focus on one of those big ideas largely and also, in the context of discussing that big idea, bitcoin and cryptocurrency, talk about some more of the interesting economic and worldviews of our guest today, who is Raoul Pal. He's a former hedge fund manager who retired at the age of 36, and Raoul's the co-founder of Real Vision, which is a financial media company offering in-depth video interviews and research publications from the world's best investors. He ran a successful global macro hedge fund, co-managed Goldman Sachs' Hedge Funds Sales Business and Equities and Equity Derivatives in Europe, and helped design the BBC TV program Million Dollar Traders, which trained participants in investment and risk management strategies.

John Darsie: (01:40)
Raoul retired from managing client money and now lives in the Cayman Islands. He's currently in Little Cayman, which I think he's figured things out. The rest of us need to follow suit with him. I don't know what we're thinking sitting here in New York as it gets cold. But from the Cayman Islands, he manages Real Vision and he writes his newsletter, the Global Macro Investor, which is a very highly regarded original research service for hedge funds, family offices, sovereign wealth funds, and other elite investors. Just a reminder for anyone on today's talk, if you have any questions for Raoul during today's talk, enter then in the Q&A box at the bottom of your video screen on Zoom. Hosting today's talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge Capital, a global alternative investment firm. Anthony's also the chairman of SALT. With that, I'll turn it over to Anthony for the interview.

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:29)
Well, it's great to have you on, Raoul. I got to tell you, our careers did overlap for a little while, so I know [Noam 00:02:36], I know Jonathan Green, I know Pierre, all those guys.

Raoul Pal: (02:40)
All the old gang.

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:41)
I know the whole gang. In fact, I'll make you laugh before I get started. Noam taught me how to flip underwritings. I don't know if you remember that whole thing that was going on in the 1990s, but that was a big career move for me. It was quite profitable. We don't have to get into that right now. But I want to go to you for a second and your personal journey, which is extremely impressive. You're growing up where? What did your parents do? How did you end up getting into the business that you ended up in? How did you realize that this was going to be the career journey that you were taking?

Raoul Pal: (03:16)
I grew up in England, but my father was a first generation Indian immigrant. My mother was Dutch. They met on a blind date in Birmingham. So I grew up in England, just outside of London. I grew up in the '80s, and the '80s was all about Porsches, stripey shirts, red braces, champagne.

Anthony Scaramucci: (03:39)
Camden Palace. You said North London, Camden ... I was hanging out at Camden Palace. You and I probably overlapped.

Raoul Pal: (03:45)
And so-

Anthony Scaramucci: (03:46)
I was probably trying to cut your rug in stepping in front of those girls.

Raoul Pal: (03:50)
Exactly.

Anthony Scaramucci: (03:51)
You look like you're a little bit taller than me, so I could've kneed you properly. Okay, so you grew up in the '80s. Go ahead. We're talking Boy George, Camden Palace.

Raoul Pal: (03:59)
Yeah, Boy George and Wham!. I was a big Wham! boy at that point.

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:05)
Of course.

Raoul Pal: (04:10)
But what was at that time, I was at university and I went to a pretty crappy university, the only one that would accept me because I'd discovered girls and cars and pubs. So I got into university, and I was graduating and speaking to a friend of my father. My father was in marketing. He then ran a management consulting firm. But he was international marketing director of Xerox based out of Europe. He wanted me to go into marketing. I saw this flashy world of finance. I had written my dissertation about junk bonds, basically copying the Drexel Burnham Lambert booklet about it.

Raoul Pal: (04:41)
Somebody said to me, a friend of my father's said, "So what do you want to do," and I said, "Well, it's kind of marketing or finance." He said, "Let me give you a bit of advice. You can go and work for Mars in marketing, and they're amazing, and they'll give you free Mars Bars, or you can go work for a bank and get free money." I was like, "Okay, that's what I need to do." It took me a while to get there because I graduated in the recession of 1990. I went to a terrible university, got a decent degree in economics and law but from a bad university. So I hustled my way through and eventually got into a UK prestigious brokering firm called James Capel, part of HSBC.

Anthony Scaramucci: (05:19)
Sure, I remember.

Raoul Pal: (05:19)
I landed on the stock index derivatives desk, knew nothing about futures and options. My baptism by fire was my boss left off six months and I was head of the desk, and that was my career started.

Anthony Scaramucci: (05:30)
I got to ask you this question because I always have to ask myself this question, and so since you're cheaper than my therapist, maybe you can provide some insight here. You're not an establishment guy, I don't think, when I look at your life, your career, the Gas Monkey t-shirt. Yet you're going to Goldman Sachs and places like NatWest, and so what attracted you to them? By the way, I don't see myself as an establishment guy either, so this is why I'm asking. Then how do you go from there to where you are now?

Raoul Pal: (06:01)
Because [crosstalk 00:06:02]-

Anthony Scaramucci: (06:01)
Was that a transitory step and you always had in your mind you were going to do what you're doing? Tell us.

Raoul Pal: (06:07)
Yeah, I always live in the future, so I'm always aiming for something. I have a very clear plan because that's how you get there. You don't know which path you could take, but it increases your probability of getting there. What I identified quickly is that if you go to someone like Goldman Sachs, it's full of the same people wearing the same clothes, who went to the same universities with the same friends, who all worked in investment banks every summer, and that's all they know. So if you come in with character and somebody who's traveled the world or you have a passion for something different, then you stand out. Even my name, right?

Raoul Pal: (06:43)
So I would call up people like Paul Tudor Jones and just call him up, and you'd get to his assistant and you say, "Is Paul there?" They say, "Who's speaking?" You say, "Raoul," because you can't say Raoul Pal because it's a bloody mouthful, so you just say Raoul. She's going to say, "Hey, Paul, it's Raoul on the phone." He thinks he's your best friend already. So all of these little things means that to be an anti-establishment figure within the establishment increases your chance of success.

Anthony Scaramucci: (07:04)
So you make this big, bold move. You discover something called bitcoin. When do you discover bitcoin, and when do you realize that bitcoin is something that you need to make a big part of your life?

Raoul Pal: (07:20)
Yeah, fascinating. I was in Europe in 2012 and 2009. I was living in Spain. In 2012, we almost lost our banking system. We had riots in the streets.

Anthony Scaramucci: (07:30)
Yes, I remember.

Raoul Pal: (07:30)
The whole thing was a mess. I was writing about it for Global Macro Investor. I kind of knew it was going on. We had a round table in Spain with a bunch of Global Macro Investor clients, and one of my clients came along and presented his trade idea, which was bitcoin. It was that moment I was going around with some people that you will know trying to set up the world's safest bank, realizing we had a problem in the financial system and it hadn't been solved. The moment I saw bitcoin by another ex-Goldman guy who ran a hedge fund, I realized that this might be the answer to a lot of the fragilities in the banking system and the store of value and that kind of thing. I was very early into it. I think by 2012, I'd written the first Macro article about how to value bitcoin and basically just brought a load of people with me on that journey of discover because like everybody who comes into the space, you think it understand it, then you realize you know nothing, and then eventually on the other side, you have an understanding of how big this really is.

Anthony Scaramucci: (08:33)
So let's talk about how big it really is. Let's say that I'm a bitcoin skeptic. I'm not, by the way. I see its destiny. Peter Thiel said something to me that I'll share with you. I'd love to get your reaction to it. He said, "While bitcoin is libertarian, bitcoin is freedom and decentralization, AI could be used to track to social norms and to start grading people's lifestyles, and that's more authoritarianism and more centralization of government. But bitcoin is the full expression of political and financial freedom." So, one, I would like to get your reaction to that statement, and then, number two, I'd like you to address bitcoin skeptics, if you don't mind. What don't they see about bitcoin that you do?

Raoul Pal: (09:26)
So there are three kinds of ... Going back to Peter Thiel, there's three kinds of people that make up the bitcoin crowd. Libertarians, because of its decentralized nature and its pseudo-anonymity. It's not totally anonymous, so it's not this drug currency, but what it gives you is some freedom to move around the world because it's owned by nobody, there's no CEO to throw into prison. There's nothing you can do about it. It just exists. The other side were the technologists. They looked at this and, using engineering minds, saw what had happened in 2008 and said, "Maybe we can engineer something to create a better financial system," and they loved the maths behind it. Then there's a bunch of people like me and the early adopters like Dan Morehead, John Burbank, all of these guys from the hedge fund world, who realized that it was the answer to a lot of the problems we had. I think Peter Thiel's right, but that's only part of the story.

Raoul Pal: (10:28)
Why it's so big is because we live in a digital world. Whether we like it or not, everything we do now is pretty much digital. You and I are now talking digitally. This was something that didn't exist five years ago, but we're doing it now. The Internet has never had an ability to have a money layer embedded into it that works in the same function. We have to go via our bank and use a credit card and all of this stuff. Bitcoin gets rid of all of that, as does the whole cryptocurrency revolution. It allows the instant transfer of money. But what's also clever about it is this money can't be devalued. You can't create more of it. There's only 21 million bitcoins.

Anthony Scaramucci: (11:08)
Okay, let me stop you right there, Raoul. Why? Because a lot of people are fearful of that, they don't understand it.

Raoul Pal: (11:14)
Sure.

Anthony Scaramucci: (11:14)
I know the explanation, but you want you to explain in your language why can't Mr. Satoshi or Mrs. Satoshi just say, "I got you all hooked into this thing, here's another 21 million coins?"

Raoul Pal: (11:26)
Yes. So the premise of bitcoin is basically a mathematical formula, a cryptographic formula that is sold by computers. It takes a lot of computing power, and so cleverly, that formula gets more difficult over time. Every time you solve it, you get rewarded, so it's like behavioral economics. You get rewarded a mining token, a bitcoin. The number of those bitcoins are restricted by the formula, which can never be changed. Why can it never be changed? Because it's not centralized, so it can't be Anthony saying, "Well, we're going to change the number today." It's actually run on about 10,000 different nodes and all of these miners, and it's all recorded on this thing called a blockchain. So nobody can change anything. It's set in stone. It's impossible to change the number of coins or the algorithm, and that's what makes it interesting.

Raoul Pal: (12:20)
Unlike gold, for example, where you can get what we've just seen in Russia, this huge find, so suddenly there's a new supply of gold. That's what blew up Spain when they discovered the Americas. They brought all the gold back, they thought they were rich, but they devalued everything because there was an excess supply of gold. You can't do it with bitcoin. It's the only asset where it's completely knowable. We live in a world, you and I, of supply and demand. That's what we understand. Well, there is no change in supply. You've got a fixed supply commodity. It never changes, which is the same with art, and a lot of people watching this will understand, there is only one Monet Lilies or whatever it is, and so that's why they trade at huge premiums. So bitcoin is this. It's like having a Monet that's fractional, so it goes down to eight decimal places, and instantly transferrable and storable. That starts to sound like very interesting money.

Anthony Scaramucci: (13:20)
Okay, so you're a big bull. I listen to your podcast, and so you see this going to a million dollars a coin. Is that fair of me to say that? I don't want to-

Raoul Pal: (13:32)
Yes. No, I mean-

Anthony Scaramucci: (13:34)
... [crosstalk 00:13:34] exaggerate, so-

Raoul Pal: (13:35)
Yes, so, again, let's look at it in the terms of institutional investors. It's currently a 200 billion dollar market cap. It's basically a mid-sized S&P company at this stage. So it's meaningless, really. But if you look at the distribution of price returns and how skewed it's been to the upside, the ability for this to go up 50X is normal. Every time we have the big bull cycles, which are driven by a reduction in supply that's mathematically derived in advance, what we find is bitcoin goes up a lot because the demand remains steady or it goes up and supply falls. So to get to a million dollars, that's pretty straightforward, and you're at about a trillion dollar market cap then or, sorry, 10 trillion dollar market cap. 10 trillion dollar market cap in terms of an asset, that's a reasonable size. It's not huge. Gold alone is an 11 trillion dollar market cap.

Raoul Pal: (14:35)
So if it's a real asset, it's still in price discovery mode. We haven't actually got to what's its real market cap. That's what gives it this ridiculous skewed upside. In addition to it, it also operates on a Metcalfe's Law. Because it's a distributed platform, essentially, the more participants that become in it, the more its worth. It looks like technology and money combined. These kind of things, we've never seen before. We've never dealt with an asset like this, which is why it's been the best performing asset of all time, the best performing asset in 10 years and five years.

Anthony Scaramucci: (15:12)
Well, you had a spill. I think you traded at 20,000 and 3000 in a five-year period of time, and now it's back to 15, I guess, or-

Raoul Pal: (15:22)
Yeah.

Anthony Scaramucci: (15:23)
... [crosstalk 00:15:23]. So what do you think caused that spell?

Raoul Pal: (15:27)
Well, the spill, again, its actually very cyclical. Like all commodities, we understand that commodities tend to be cyclical. So what happens is it's driven by the mathematical formula called the halving, where they halve the mining supply to make it more difficult. As you start getting closer to the 21 million coins, they make it more and more difficult over time for these computers to talk.

Anthony Scaramucci: (15:49)
Where are we right now in terms of mining, the number of coins that have been mined?

Raoul Pal: (15:52)
I'm not sure exactly where we are, but I think we've mined about 19 million. There's very little left, so it becomes incredibly hard to mine the rest. So you need more technology to do it. As we do that, you get this period where you get speculative boom because demand starts bringing more people in. Then, after a while, the demand ... The people turn to sellers, and it's just a cyclical phenomena, and it usually crashes significantly, 90%. You have to have-

Anthony Scaramucci: (16:27)
You think you're going to see another crash, 15 to 3000?

Raoul Pal: (16:30)
No, I don't. I think how the price will evolve this time, we're in the next wave up. The halving happened in May. The chances are we probably hit something like 100 to 200,000 on this wave, which will be probably by the end of 2021, 2022. Then we'll correct somewhat, but there's a difference coming now. Don't forget, this was driven by retail. This is the only asset that's been driven by retail from the ground up, by its very distributed nature. But the next time around, the institutions are going to be in, the investment banks, the asset managers, the RIAs, the hedge funds, and that's going to give much more price stability, so the volatility of bitcoin itself is going to collapse. So we won't get a 90% drawdown. Maybe we'll get a 50%. Well, that's normal in terms of most asset prices when they have a cyclical bear market.

Anthony Scaramucci: (17:20)
So let's talk about something that's conjoined in my mind to bitcoin and perhaps it is in your mind, is massive deficit spending by governments, and concomitant to that massive deficit spending is monetary easing and the expansion of monetary supply and all of that other stuff. So let's overlay that going on at the same time that you have this bitcoin development, and tell me your thoughts on those two subjects.

Raoul Pal: (17:51)
Well, to put it in the simplest form, the central banks are undertaking quantitative easing at an extreme level, as we all know. I'm not telling anybody anything new. Bitcoin is programmed to quantitatively tighten. So you've got two divergent paths. If you want to look at ... We're all used to using gold as an offset to central bank printing and maybe equities as well. So how are they done against the central bank balance sheet? I've looked at this. I took the four largest central bank balance sheets, the ECB, the Fed, the PBOC, and the BOJ. You put those four together and create an index and then divide assets by them. Gold did a pretty good job, but it's basically underperformed by 50%, so the amount of money in supply has outperformed what gold should've done. The equity market has done a bit better but not perfectly. But bitcoin, well, it's massively outperforming central bank balance sheets as well.

Raoul Pal: (18:59)
The reason behind that, it's a store of value but it's also a call option on a future financial system. That's the important function that bitcoin has. It has two roles. If it was just a store of value, it'd look more like gold. But it doesn't because every week they can build on top of it and it's creating a whole ecosystem around it, including the central banks with their central bank digital currencies. So, yes, the point being is the only answer for this massive debt bubble that we've got is more printing, and the only outcome is bitcoin goes higher. It will significantly outperform gold because of the fact that, a., it hasn't achieved its full market cap by it's still in price discovery mode and it's also a very disruptive technology. Gold can't create a payment platform or a store of value or a trusted source of storing things on the blockchain. It can't do any of these, but bitcoin can.

Anthony Scaramucci: (19:50)
Okay, it's fascinating. So we are now in a situation where you had bitcoin, you have this phenomena taking place. Literally, we keep dipping into quantitative easing. I have my own thoughts about it. I mean, I think Haynes is right in so many ways, but when you do all this deficit spending, you weaken the middle class and you weaken the lower class. That's the reason why you're having this systemic rise in populism, because my dad was a crane operator, Raoul. He had an hourly wage, and if you have inflation, guess what happens to that hourly wage? Your real purchasing power goes down.

Anthony Scaramucci: (20:25)
If you have this type of inflation, it's asset inflation. So if I'm a wealthy person, I have a big building, and the dollar amount of the building goes up, I still have that asset. But if you're working a wage, the money in your bank account is going like this, and that is pain in our system. It's causing your old country to Brexit. It's causing this upheaval in my country. So my question to you, which I don't necessarily have the answer to, what happens to equity markets in an environment like this?

Raoul Pal: (21:01)
Well, actually, just before we get into that, really interesting because I'm actually writing a whole article about this with Global Macro Investor breaking the entire medium income down, comparing it to asset pricing, and looking at what happened. Basically, between Bretton Woods, the Baby Boomers entering the labor force all at the same time, so competing for jobs, plus the WTO, plus China entering WTO, and then quantitative easing have basically destroyed wages. They've all deflated except anybody who earned over $200,000 a year. Everybody else has seen wage deflation. So it's a killer, and so you're dead right.

Raoul Pal: (21:40)
Equities in this, the problem is, a., these people don't have much money, so if we're trying to look at the little guy, they don't have savings to invest in equities, and with equities at all-time high valuations, what is the upside? Well, maybe it offsets quantitative easing, but maybe it doesn't. Maybe the economic cycle catches up with equities. So the future expected returns that most people look at for equities, whether it's Grantham, Mayo, or any of these guys, are kind of negative for the next 10 years. That's why crypto has become so powerful amongst retail investors because they see for once they were ahead of the institutions and they have a real chance of actually offsetting some of the losses elsewhere. It has a passionate amount of supporters because of this. They realize it's a chance for them, and that's great.

Anthony Scaramucci: (22:34)
I like it. I think it's very interesting. So it's also tied into my next question, then. John Darsie, who's a ... I don't know if he's a Millennial, a Quintennial, I don't know what the hell he's doing, but he thinks he's a lot better than us because he's in a different generation, Raoul, so we'll get to him in a moment. But he's got a ton of questions because all these guys know more about bitcoin than me, so they like giving it to me, as you ... But before I get to him, the 60/40 portfolio, is that dead?

Raoul Pal: (23:09)
Look, bonds just act like cash. I'm still bullish bonds, and I think they actually had a negative interest rate. I think the US will follow the rest of the world because of the structural issues going on, whether it's demographics, deflation, debt, a number of things. But regardless of that, the real juice in that trade is gone. So, therefore, what offsets volatility? Now, it works like cash, so it does help somewhat, but it doesn't add to the balance sheet when things go wrong. So it is somewhat dead, and people are looking for answers. Gold is one of them, and I think a lot of people are starting to think, "Okay, should I increase my allocation to gold to give me some of that cushion within my portfolio," and others have looked at bitcoin.

Raoul Pal: (23:51)
Adding a 1% allocation to bitcoin makes a dramatically different reward profile for almost any portfolio because it's so uncorrelated. And uncorrelated returns, as you know, not easy in this world. That's why equity longshore hedge funds have had such a tough time. Even macro guys have had such a tough time. Everything's correlated. But this whole world, not only of bitcoin but tokens and other cryptocurrencies, genuinely less correlated, and that means it's higher alpha. That's really interesting. That's why it's attracting so many of the really smart guys from our industry who move across to the crypto industry, because alpha exists.

Anthony Scaramucci: (24:30)
All right, Mr. Darsie, I know you're dying to ask questions, and-

John Darsie: (24:35)
You actually did a decent job today, Anthony.

Anthony Scaramucci: (24:37)
Raoul, I got to just tell you something. Raoul. Raoul, I got to just tell you something. I am so happy that you have a full head of hair because usually we get these bald old guys on this show, and Darsie really tries to go all Rico Suave on them, you know what I'm saying? So just to let you know that. Okay, but go ahead, Darsie, go ahead.

John Darsie: (24:51)
Well, I appreciate it, Anthony. Further to Anthony's question about the 60/40 portfolio, which I think we can all agree is outdated at the very least, I know you're not here to give constructing portfolios. How should they think about building a modern portfolio? Let's say the average investor with about a million dollar in savings, do you think they should be overweight bitcoin in a significant way, or do you think it fits in as just a small part of an asset [crosstalk 00:25:17]-

Raoul Pal: (25:17)
Well, it depends on the age group. If it's you, John, then-

John Darsie: (25:20)
Yeah. How about me?

Raoul Pal: (25:21)
Well, listen, and I've talked a lot about this, and this is really serious, your opportunity to put your money in your 401(k) and buy equities at all-time record valuations is not a good bet. For you to buy property for price gains is not a good bet. Versus your income and versus what's happening to prices, it's very expensive. Now, if you want to buy a house, which I recommend to live in, because lifestyle is the ultimate token that we work for, but outside of that, if we're just talking about investment, your house is not an investment. Property's too expensive. Credit yield, all-time low, yields, all-time low. Okay, what the hell do you do to generate wealth? Sure, you earn income, but how can you compound your income?

Raoul Pal: (26:08)
I can only find crypto. I think VC investing as well, but most young people can't do it. So building a business is one of the most important things I think people should do if they can do it because you can take risk when you're young and hence why you can take bitcoin as a risk when you're young. If you think of the opportunities that the Baby Boomers got given in 1980, 1982 when the bulk of them joined the labor force and started peak earnings, they started hitting their 30s, they got equities at a P of 6, bond deals at 18%, and property had been destroyed after the inflation of the '70s, and there was no debt. They had four aces given to them.

Raoul Pal: (26:53)
You've got all four aces, but they're in the crypto space. That's where you've got 50X [inaudible 00:26:59], bigger than the Baby Boomers ever had because you're getting the nexus of not only an underpriced asset class, but you're also getting the future of technology combined with it. Those things never happen. It's like investing in VC at the same time as buying Russian equities in 1990 when everybody hated them. The magnitude of this is enormous. So that's why I think you should be aggressive as you could be, because maybe I'm wrong, maybe Raoul's a total idiot, and you lose 50% of your savings. It doesn't matter because you've got an income and you've got a future ahead of you. But if you're 70 years old, well, I wouldn't do it.

John Darsie: (27:40)
Like Anthony.

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:43)
Hey, let me tell you something, Raoul. I'm actually 105 years old, and I think I look fantastic, okay, so-

Raoul Pal: (27:49)
I think you don't look a day over 100.

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:51)
I'm taking that as a compliment, okay? Keep going, Darsie.

John Darsie: (27:56)
Yeah, well-

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:56)
Keep going.

John Darsie: (27:56)
Absolutely. And I want to talk to about-

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:58)
And, Raoul, just so you know, we pay his bonus in dollars, okay, and they're cheapening every second of this podcast, so keep going, Darsie, go ahead.

John Darsie: (28:06)
I might start demanding my bonus in bitcoin at this rate.

Raoul Pal: (28:09)
You should, though.

John Darsie: (28:11)
But I want to talk about-

Anthony Scaramucci: (28:11)
Me, too. Me, too.

John Darsie: (28:11)
... bitcoin as a currency. So you talk a lot about fiat currencies and the inherent risks of fiat currencies and how they really historically have a short shelf life. Could you talk a little bit about historically how long fiat currencies generally last and what the future of the US dollar is in your mind?

Raoul Pal: (28:28)
I can't remember the exact numbers, but, essentially, most fiat currency regimes don't last 100 years, many 50, many less. If you look at Brazil, in my lifetime, about three or four of them. What happens is banks and governments are incentivized to destroy their own currency to pay their own debts. Right? That's what quantitative easing is. So they're always incentivized to do it. This perverse incentive means that they always go away. Everybody ends up with too much debt, tries to print their way out of it, and then the currency, eventually people lose faith in it. That's why gold has been around so long, because you can't do that with it. Bitcoin, as I've talked about to Anthony before, you can't do that. So it stops anybody screwing around with it.

Anthony Scaramucci: (29:16)
I got to interrupt for one second. Is there another currency that could hop over bitcoin? Is the bitcoin the Yahoo and there's another currency that could be the Google?

Raoul Pal: (29:23)
Yeah, so looking at the network adoption effects, it's highly unlikely. It is a theorem. Could it become bigger in market cap as people build out a whole financial system, define stuff? Potentially. But as pristine collateral, which bitcoin is, as the reserve asset, I don't think it's going to be displaced. But there are other massive opportunities in this space regardless.

John Darsie: (29:47)
So I want to talk about that a little bit. We had a very interesting guy, Marty Chavez, who you may know, who spent-

Raoul Pal: (29:53)
I know Marty from Goldman.

John Darsie: (29:54)
... many years at Goldman. He was the chief information officer when he left. He's on the board of a few crypto organizations. He offered such a balanced view of the space that I thought it was very fascinating. He talked about the idea of central bank digital currencies and digital currencies that are backed by governments. I thought it was interesting, the way he framed it, talking about, let's say, a stimulus package that the US government wants to pass out to its citizens. Today, they're having to wire money into bank accounts via the IRS, they're mailing checks, there's a lot of waste inherent in that. One, do you think we'll see central bank digital currencies? What do you think the potential is for that? How will they work, and what impact, also, do you think that would have on bitcoin if you had government-backed digital currencies?

Raoul Pal: (30:41)
I've been following this for a long time. The Bank of England, the BIS, the IMF, the ECB, the Fed, the PBOC, the BOJ, Australia, Singapore have all written white papers on it. It's happening, and it's coming, and I think China's just launching as we speak. I think Sweden's got a pilot scheme going. I think Singapore's about to launch. Bermuda's just launched. Look, this is happening, fact. The question is, is how it happens. What does it mean? Well, it's really interesting. Firstly, the IMF two weeks ago had this big debate, Jay Powell was there, everybody's there. They're talking about the new Bretton Woods. So what are you saying?

Raoul Pal: (31:29)
What they're actually saying is that they understand we're in unprecedented times and everybody needs to fiscally stimulate and nobody's got the money to do it. Their proposal, hidden beneath their wording, is, "Okay, let's move to central bank digital currencies, make an agreement amongst all nations, and allow us, let's say, all to print another 50% because then there's no one currency versus another." The idea is you're devaluing everything at the same time, but it doesn't show. Okay, so that's what they're thinking of.

Raoul Pal: (32:02)
But then the bigger revolution, and many of these guys ... Benoir Coeure from the ECB who's now the BIS spends a lot talking about this. Some central banks will just have a digital currency that'll be a means a payment. So I can just flip you a dollar, straightforward, nothing else attached. But the incentive schemes for the government, much like printing money, the actual incentive scheme is to create programmable money. So programmable money gets around the problem of monetary policy, which has now stopped. We've got monetary printing or interest rates negative. That's all we've got left, and neither of them are really working. So monetary and fiscal policy, if you listen to Jay Powell and the ECB, they're screaming every day, "We need fiscal, we need fiscal."

Raoul Pal: (32:52)
Well, this way, it puts fiscal in the hands of the central bank or the central bank in the hands of the government because they can give you a different stimulus to me. They can say, "Raoul, you're an older saver. We're going to penalize you with negative interest rates. But we want to help John out, and we're going to give him a cash payment so he can pay his student loan," both at the same time. So we can use behavioral economics to run economies, which is game-changing. Now, if you understand how behavioral economics has changed the Internet, we all use Google or Facebook or whatever or even Twitter, it's all behavioral economics. So it's all about incentive systems. You can define incentive systems to different people. We're going to see a completely wholesale change in how we run monetary policy, fiscal policy, and the relationship between central banks and governments.

Raoul Pal: (33:45)
All of that fits in with bitcoin because bitcoin is ... As Anthony said at the beginning, it's this libertarian thing. It's the life raft. If you don't agree with your government, you've got somewhere to go, much like people use gold for now. If you're in Brazil and they're printing too much money or they're going to lose control because of the budget deficit, oh, well, I'll buy some gold. But bitcoin links in so perfectly with digital currencies because it's all instantaneous. So in the digital world, they're called on-ramps and off-ramps. This is incredibly constructive. All of the white papers acknowledge bitcoin, how this whole fintech revolution, cryptocurrency revolution, DeFi revolution is all part of where they have to go. So there's no chance of them banning it. They actually want to integrate with it.

John Darsie: (34:35)
Well, that's a good segue to my next question about the risks associated with bitcoin. You talked about, and we talked about before the call went live, about how asymmetric this opportunity set is for people buying bitcoin today. Could it maybe go to zero in certain scenarios? Yes, but it doesn't seem likely. What are the risks or the elements of security that people were concerned about after the Mt. Gox hack and things of that nature? Are those still risks of buying bitcoin, and what do you see as the biggest risk to cryptocurrencies?

Raoul Pal: (35:07)
So if you understand that bitcoin is the network effect in money form, it's extraordinary. But that's what it is. It's Metcalfe's Law in money. So what is that built on? It's built on one thing only, which bitcoin excels at better than any other instrument ever invented. That's trust. Because of its distributed nature, I don't need to take your word from it and we don't need a notary because we've got 10,000 nodes all confirming it. What we know is that anything that's on the blockchain is now 100% trusted.

Raoul Pal: (35:43)
So the trust element takes away the risk of something that is a network effect because, usually, it's because either it doesn't give you a benefit, i.e., the price doesn't go up, or if it's Facebook, you don't find your friends on it, whatever it may be doesn't work. But once you get to a certain point where people trust it, it's very difficult to get rid of it. That's why even after it had these big cycles, because it was still a relatively thin market, it goes down 90%, the trust never went. People still knew it's this pristine asset, this incredible asset that can't be screwed around with. So it just drives trust again, and the more people adopt it, more trust. I don't think there's any risk of zero.

Raoul Pal: (36:25)
The arguments go quantum computing. If they figure out quantum computing, they could break the cryptographic keys. Well, there's too much money in this space, and people are already aware of this, so there's all anti-quantum layers being built, there's a bunch of other stuff. So that's not going to be an issue. The other really weak argument is, well, if they shut down the electricity, there's no bitcoin. Well, we've got other problem if the entire world's Internet or electricity goes down, so I'm not worried about that one. By the way, you can still store it on a piece of paper, your crypto-key. You actually don't need a computer. So that's okay, too.

Raoul Pal: (37:04)
The last one is governments will ban it. Well, first up, explain that the IMF, the BIS, the ECB, the Bank of England, the Fed have all regulated it and said in their white papers, "This is part of the future, this is where it's going." So there is no noise of that coming, but maybe one day, it's a 10 trillion dollar asset class. They're not going to ban a 200 million dollar asset class, not even a trillion dollar asset class. It's still smaller than Google at that point, and Google is much more nefarious than bitcoin is. They own all the world's data. So let's say it gets to 10 trillion dollars, my million dollar price target. How are they going to ban it?

Raoul Pal: (37:44)
Let's go through that, and this is really crucial. So the IMF say, "We don't want to have this currency, it's destabilizing to central bank currencies," and everyone goes, "Okay, fine." They say, "Anybody owning it will be banned. You can't have a wallet." Problem is, is we live in a globalized world and this is on the Internet. There's no borders. There's no gold in a vault. This is borderless, semi-anonymous, and instantaneous. So all it takes is for Brazil ... And we've seen this in healthcare when it came to genetic testing. Brazil and Israel said, "We'll allow it." Guess what? A bunch of scientists go over there, they do it from there. Game theory always suggests that somebody will go against that ban because they can make all the money because we're actually dealing with money here. So it's incredibly lucrative to capture that market share.

Raoul Pal: (38:41)
The other part of this is as the central bank digital currencies come, there are going to be ... And my guess is that in the next two years, we'll see one of the small Latin American nations, maybe one of the Caribbean nations, put bitcoin into their reserves because they're so fed up with having [crosstalk 00:38:58] currency-

John Darsie: (38:57)
Yeah, like MicroStrategy.

Raoul Pal: (38:57)
Like what?

John Darsie: (38:59)
Yeah, like MicroStrategy did, Michael Saylor did with their reserves.

Raoul Pal: (39:03)
That's right. And then one of them will say, "You know what? We're just going to use bitcoin as our currency," as opposed to having a currency board with the dollar like we have in Cayman. They're totally fungible here here, so it's not a peg, so it can't break. But if it was the vagary of the dollar being expensive or weak that they have to deal with, what if you just say, "Okay, bitcoin is the currency we want to peg ourselves against?" You're away from that whole currency system and [crosstalk 00:39:31].

John Darsie: (39:31)
Yeah, I think China's journey as it relates to bitcoin and cryptocurrencies is an interesting and informative one, is that early on in the rise of bitcoin, the way I understand it is that Chinese that were evading capital controls and pulling money out of the country accounted for a significant portion of the trading volume of bitcoin. The Chinese made some noise about wanting to regulate it, but then they realized the power of that type of technology if it's leveraged by the state. So they obviously haven't banned it and are working on their own digital currency.

Raoul Pal: (40:03)
Russia did the same, and we've seen similar things elsewhere, and they looked at banning it and then realized it didn't make sense, and they've all walked away from it. I think the probability of it being banned on a global basis is low. Will Turkey try and ban it? Of course they will because their currency keeps collapsing every day, like they banned gold. But does it work? It's never worked. Capital controls have never, ever worked. India tried to ban it as well. Guess what? It's coming back. India's integrating it with their banking system now. So it's not going away. It's only going to get bigger.

John Darsie: (40:48)
In your view, and you might talk about how you own it and how you store it, what's the best way for a retail investor or an institution to buy, own, and store securely cryptocurrencies and bitcoin today?

Raoul Pal: (41:00)
Yeah, so here's one of the truisms in life. Anything that's slightly hard to do usually has better rewards. Emerging market investing, the more frontier you get, the higher the rewards are. So crypto right now, to do it perfectly, you need to open a brokerage account with an exchange, do your KYC. Well, we're all kind of used to that. Then you go on and buy it. There are some brokers who will do it. So if you're an institution, you're a hedge fund, you can get somebody to do it for you, so that's pretty straightforward. The problem is the custody because it's a bearer asset and we gave up bearer. We used to have bearer bonds and bearer equities. There's a few left. I think Nestle have still got some bearer equities and bearer bonds left, and a few companies do, but there aren't many.

Raoul Pal: (41:44)
So now you're like, "Okay, do I leave it on the exchange?" Well, we've all heard [inaudible 00:41:50]. People can hack exchanges like they can hack banks. So you're like, "Okay, so I need to store it somewhere safe." You can buy a cold wallet or a hard wallet, and that basically is a little unit that has your keys on it. It doesn't actually store your currency. It's not like a USB. But it's basically your codes to unlock it. So to do that, that's a safe way, and then you can put it in a safe. I store mine in a gold vault, in a proper secure gold vault. Then it's safe, I don't have to worry about it, nobody can come to my house and try and get it. I don't have it. But it's as simple as that. You can still check your balances online. It's not like you can't see it. You own it. It's all in your name.

Raoul Pal: (42:38)
Now, let's say you're an institution and you don't want to go to a family office. Well, Fidelity have just set up a whole custody business, so if you don't trust Fidelity, well, you might as well give up. The US have just approved it as a custody asset for a whole group of banks. What does custody asset mean? So any hedge funds listening to this, what that means is prime broking. Prime broking's coming, and it'll be here, my guess, early next year. So prime broking bitcoin, that's coming, too. The whole custody issue goes away. It's actually harder for individuals because you have trust one of the wallet providers, et cetera. But that whole space is getting better and better. You can also buy insurance against it. So all of these things that were hard in the beginning are now actually relatively straightforward.

John Darsie: (43:27)
All right. It's something at SkyBridge and with SALT, we have a growing interest in the space given some of the adoption we're seeing, so we look forward to being in touch with you and other leaders in the space as we figure out exactly how we're going to get involved. But, Raoul, we're going to leave it there. We could probably have a 10-part series and not cover all the interesting topics that we could talk about. We really encourage you to sign up for Real Vision. It's the media entity that Raoul launched that has tons of fascinating things on macroeconomics, financial markets, and bitcoin. So we would definitely encourage all of our community to sign up for Real Vision, and, Raoul, we really appreciate your time.

Raoul Pal: (44:00)
Good talk. Really enjoyed it.

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:02)
Raoul, I just want you to know, I have a mechanism in my computer that's slowing down his Internet service so that he sounds like Godzilla at the end of this thing, okay? It's just something I do to him once in a while, just to be cheeky.

Raoul Pal: (44:14)
Just to bring him down a peg, right?

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:16)
Yeah, I got to bring him down a peg, and-

Raoul Pal: (44:18)
I get it.

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:18)
... just to use a British word I love from Thomas the Tank Engine, just to be a little cheeky, you know what I'm saying? But thank you so much. We really, really enjoyed it. I'd love to get together with you at that bar behind you. I hear you mix one hell of a gin and tonic, so I want to sit at the bar with you someday when the world is safe.

Raoul Pal: (44:38)
I look forward to it, my friend. Take care.

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:40)
Great to see you. Thank you for joining SALT Talks.

Raoul Pal: (44:42)
Really appreciate it.

Chamath Palihapitiya: The State of Venture Capital | SALT Talks #2

“There needs to be a reimagining of how the infrastructure of the world should look and should work.”

Chamath Palihapitiya, Founder & Chief Executive Officer of Social Capital, believes there is a dispersion occurring in both the public and private markets between the “have’s” and the “have-nots.” The cycle of building a company and profiting from it is broken, as it now takes too long to see a profit.

Politically, he believes there will be a changing of the guard come 2024. “Politically, this is the last gasp for Boomers.” There will be new alternatives on both sides but in general, there will be a shift to the left. Things like higher education cannot become akin to luxury goods.

How do we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic successfully? Chamath gives us the metaphor of a patient brought to the ER with a gunshot wound. Stop the bleeding (put money in the hands of the people), conduct the surgery (incentivize good behavior by companies) and rehabilitate to 100% health (attack structural issues).

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

chamath-portrait.jpeg

Chamath Palihapitiya

CEO

Social Capital

MODERATOR

Headshot+-+Scaramucci%2C+Anthony.jpeg

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darsie (00:09):

Welcome to SALT Talks, a series of digital interviews with the world's foremost thinkers, creators and entrepreneurs. Today, we are very thrilled to be welcoming Chamath Palihapitiya to Salt Talks, but just as we do at our global conferences, we try to provide a platform, both for big ideas and to provide our audience a window into the minds of leading a business executives, entrepreneurs, and innovators. Chamath as you may know, is the founder of Social Capital. He is also a part owner of the Golden State Warriors, and now the chairman of Virgin Galactic, which he took public by a special purpose acquisition vehicle, which Anthony and Chamath will likely talk about today. But I want to turn it over to Anthony Scaramucci who's going to be doing the interview. Anthony, as most of is the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge Capital, a leading alternative investment firm, as well as the chairman of SALT. Anthony, I'll let you take it away.

Anthony Scaramucci (01:06):

Okay, well, John, I appreciate it. Chamath, I'm going to dig right into it with you. We're going to make this a Chris 45 minutes if that's okay. And you've got a lot of philosophical thoughts about inequality, your personal journey to where you are now. And I was just wondering if you could give us a good two or three minute explanation of how you've gotten to where you are and where are you exactly on the whole idea of inequality where we need to go?

Chamath Palihapitiya (01:36):

Sure. I'm a Sri Lankan by birth. I'm 43 years old. I was born in '76 in Columbus, Sri Lanka. My parents immigrated to Canada when I was six. My dad worked in the embassy there, and at the time there was a civil war between the Singhalese and the Tamils. We were Singhalese, and it was not safe for my father and our family to go back. So then we stayed in Canada. This will give you a sense of where I'm coming from, but we claimed refugee status because my father's life was threatened. We got refugee status, grew up on social assistance, on welfare and in Canada, parents tried hard to work off and on. My mom was a housekeeper. I went to college in Canada, again, relatively cheaply, did an engineering degree at University of Waterloo. And after a year working at an investment bank, after an engineering degree, I traded interest rate derivatives at Bank of Montreal. I moved to California, I worked at a series of startups, and I ended up working at AOL Rose through the ranks of AOL.

Chamath Palihapitiya (02:53):

In my mid twenties was running a division there then came back to the West Coast, joined Facebook early on, helped them scale their business, was one of the principal executives in its seminal growth phase, led the growth of the business. And then in 2011, I started investing full-time at Social Capital. And in 2017, really unwound a lot of the typical LPGP relationships and then transformed the business to be more of a technology holding company with this idea that we would use a permanent capital base to buy and hold long duration assets, and then take them public and eventually take social capital public. That's my life in a nutshell.

Chamath Palihapitiya (03:43):

My political philosophy is, I would say, ideologically promiscuous. There are some very firm beliefs that I have about a social safety net because I directly benefited from it. And then there are some very strong beliefs I have about open markets and capitalism, because I've been a direct beneficiary of those. And it would be a lie to basically say that I've come to these conclusions more from an academic perspective, these are very much lived experiences. And so I think that I'm probably a centrist who believes in extremely free open markets, thoughtful longterm allocation of capital, but a strict code of ethics around the social safety infrastructure we provide to our fellow citizens so that the rest of us who want to compete in the open markets can do so without the fear of revolution.

Anthony Scaramucci (04:40):

Are you a UBI Fan like Andrew Yang or?

Chamath Palihapitiya (04:44):

It's interesting. I would not have claimed myself to be a UBI fan until this pandemic. I think that those are tools that are really important in exigent circumstances and I would put the pandemic as the most obvious case for where UBI makes sense. It comes in part from a social safety net perspective, but the much larger motivation from my belief in UBI is one around how to ... and what I think we are in right now, which is a deflationary supercycle quite honestly. And we are in for decades of Japanese style malaise unless we jumpstart the economy. And I think the most obvious way which people refuse to admit is that, we're consumer driven, led GDP growth country and we need to get enough money into the hands of people where they aren't psychologically incentivized to save, but to spend.

Anthony Scaramucci (05:45):

Talk about the deflation supercycle for a second, because you think some of that is being induced by the fed and some people actually, there's a lot of people listening in that are in the financial services industry. They think the fed's creation is creating inflation. I personally don't. I do see the deflationary cycle in terms of the excess factory, labor, all that stuff, but define that supercycle for people. And why do you think that is perhaps intractable?

Chamath Palihapitiya (06:13):

I think this is a ... by the way you're framing is actually excellent. It's exactly that. We're on the track to something that I think is intractable because the accelerant of deflation is the fed and the printing of money, but the inception of this deflationary cycle is actually in tech businesses. So let's just take a step back and look at the five best tech businesses in the world, and think about the incentives that they create in the consumer's mind and have done, especially in the last decade. If you wanted social connection, you can go to Facebook and get an enormity of that for free. If you want information and access to content that basically crushes any asymmetry that anybody else would have over you, you can get that from Google for free. If you wanted to entertain yourself with video content and not pay $130 to your MSO cable provider, you can get that from Netflix or YouTube, essentially close to free.

Chamath Palihapitiya (07:16):

If you want to communicate across channels and not have to pay a telecom provider, you can get that from Microsoft and Facebook and Google, essentially for free. If you want things that are cheap and available in instantaneous seconds and minutes, if you wait long enough for Amazon, they'll give you that also essentially for free. So what has been happening slowly is that these enormous companies have created tons of value, but by doing it in ways that have ingrained in the consumer, that cheaper, faster, and better is always on the horizon. And so for you to wait, you get rewarded. And so what that does is an incentive to save money. And so when you look at what happened in the savings rate after the great financial crisis, I think a lot of what happened was if you even assume that the quantitative easing had some trickle down effect and that money got into the hands of consumers, they didn't see the need to spend it, Anthony.

Chamath Palihapitiya (08:14):

They were like, I'm just going to save this because you know what? I have exactly what I want and incremental things I want will just be cheaper tomorrow. And so why spend this money today? And it gave them some amount of psychological safety. So we've been reinforcing that mechanic for a decade coming into this crisis. And then on top of that, you add trillions and trillions of dollars. What happens then is people now look at that money and they say, "Well, I never needed the money before, as much as I, I'm going to need it today versus tomorrow. So I'm just going to save." And so what people think is, "Well, I need to put this to work in a place where I can actually save and compound." So then you see this asset bubble inflate.

Chamath Palihapitiya (08:53):

So I think that this duality working together. Technology on the one hand drives the entire world to believe in deflation, to want deflation because you're getting value. And then the monetary supply basically reinforces that that money, which becomes a less and less useful commodity should go back into the asset markets, because it's not something that is a useful instrument today, and it will become increasingly less useful tomorrow. So when you put those two factors together, that's what's creating this supercycle.

Anthony Scaramucci (09:23):

Yeah. I see all of that and I think it's a brilliant analysis of it, but the one fear if your essential bank or that you're having deflation is debt repayment and the economic term that emerged in the 1930s called debt destruction. So let me just give you the math. I'm a person that has a $50,000 income or $60,000 income. I've got $200,000 of debt. In that deflationary supercycle, wages are also going down Chamath. And so let's give you this example. I'm going from 60 to $30,000. Look at what just happened to my debt. Moreover, let's say I'm a government, I'm sitting on $24 trillion of debt, but I'm in a deflationary supercycle. I'm now forced to pay the debt back with dollars that are worth more than the dollars that I borrowed. And that makes it almost impossible. So what do you say about the collision between deflation and the debt cycle that we're in?

Chamath Palihapitiya (10:21):

Well, that's exactly what is going to happen. I've spent a lot of time playing poker, I played blackjack. I've been in Vegas a lot. And I remember one time I was playing blackjack and the person beside me was clapping and the dealer said to him, "Hope is not a strategy." And I would say that central bankers wanting inflation because they realize that this is happening also is not a strategy. This is why I think going back to UBI to close the loop is really quite an interesting idea in a moment like this, because I think what it has the ability to do is to get enough money into the hands of consumers that exceeds the nominal marginal value of that saved dollar. And that's when you will actually start to see more spending. And in that more spending, because you've gone through a few years or in this case decades now of deflation, demand can very quickly outstrip supply and then you restart the inflationary cycle.

Chamath Palihapitiya (11:23):

And I think that that would be wonderful. We've all read Paul Tudor Jones's letter net by now. I think even central bankers would say the best way to manage all these debts is through an inflationary cycle. Everybody wants it. I think the question is, how do you start it? And I think that knowing that there's so much money supply there, the only way to drive the velocity of money in my opinion, is to get money in the hands of consumers and let them spend our way out of this where the incremental saved dollar is not worth it.

Anthony Scaramucci (11:57):

Yeah. No, I agree. And so the secondary question of this is, you've got a lot of opinions on artificial intelligence and the ramping of artificial intelligence, which will also lower the cost of goods and services. 3D printing lowers the cost of goods and services. And so at some point, don't you think, and I'll ask it rhetorically, but I'm interested in really to get your reaction the political landscape has to change. Right now we're in a baby boomer political landscape where these guys, as David Rubinstein had said on Monday, they won't leave the stage. You've got 75 plus year old people running for office, and they're killing each other in that sort of self-righteous way. So we're getting left strategies and right strategies opposed to right and wrong strategies. And so how do you intersect that line into the diagram that you and I are discussing? What do you think happens politically?

Chamath Palihapitiya (12:55):

I think politically, this is the last gasp for boomers, and I think that in 2024, you're going to start to see a slate of young emerging alternatives on both sides. And what's interesting is I think at some point between now and 2024, the alt left and the alt right will realize that political ideology is not aligned, but it's a circle and they'll meet somewhere. And then all of a sudden realize, "Oh my gosh, we may be the exact same person." So then everything will reflexively come back to a more neutral kind of positioning.

Chamath Palihapitiya (13:30):

I think the standard bearers of this new movement, the ones on the left are a little bit easier to identify than the ones on the right, but I think that you're going to see a generally progressive shift to the left, and that to be a winning Republican candidate in eight to 10 years will mean you're a Democrat, some version of a Democrat or a free market Democrat. That's I think going to happen for sure. And I think that that force has left the stable. So we just have to buy our time between now and then, and minimize the damage.

Chamath Palihapitiya (14:10):

The one thing that you said, which is true is that we have to keep a pace of all these technologies that are going to be increasingly deflationary by design. One of the things that I think we also have to do is have to have a government regime that's willing to spend money. Now, the good news is both the Democrats and the Republicans have torn this bandaid off of this modern monetary theory approach of like, let's just spend, spend, spend and print print print. And I think that that's reasonable if you direct that capital into really meaningful sinks that slow the deflationary supercycle down.

Chamath Palihapitiya (14:46):

So for example, on the one hand where you're going to see the advent of AI that could theoretically reduce the earnings power of people, on the other side, I think we need to make it a national priority to fly to Mars. Not because we should, but because we could. And you can sink trillions and trillions of dollars of capital there. We may decide that we want hypersonic aircraft, not because we need it, but because we want it and you can sink hundreds of billions of capital into that.

Chamath Palihapitiya (15:18):

And so there needs to be this re-imagining of how the infrastructure of the world should look and should work. And re-imagining ourselves, not just as people that live on the earth, but also in other planets. And while it seems crazy, the reason is because it can consume all of this capital in a way that's productive, in a way that doesn't necessarily just create a downstream asset bubble because that has to deflate and then it will eventually reinflate. And all of that destruction will further segment society in ways that make political disruption more likely. And I think that we don't want that or we shouldn't want that.

Anthony Scaramucci (16:01):

I get it. You don't want a society where people are going to take a Tiki torches and pitchforks and March on the people that are holding the assets. So therefore you've got to flatten it out. You've got to even out the K through 12 education system. And I think you and I are in a general agreement that, I don't want equal outcomes, but I do want people to have a broader likelihood of equal opportunity. Meaning, if you grow up like me or the way you grew up, my grandmother was a maid. She turned beds. My father was a crane operator. And so I got very lucky getting into a good public school, which allowed me to hone my academic skills. I just worry about that generation. Now they have such an uneven educational footprint. You don't know if they can get to the arc of the American dream or [crosstalk 00:16:52].

Chamath Palihapitiya (16:53):

To your point, I completely agree with you. Public education for me was my salvation and an amazing school in Canada that costs $10,000 a year. That was it. And what Canada and the rest of the world have refused to have happen is to allow higher education to become this luxury good that's like an LV bag of sorts where you want to be seen carrying around this $5,000 purse. It's kind of insane. And in that bag, you carry the same garbage that you would carry around in a $10 bag. And so what is the point?

Anthony Scaramucci (17:30):

I get it. I tell people that all the time, you can eat the pizza off of China or you eat it off a plastic plate. We're both eating pizza, but I want to ask you about the consumer orientation to space exploration, which I find absolutely fascinating. And I mentioned this to you. I've built a very nice relationship with Sir Richard Branson. He has been to the SALT Conferences and he like you is a great visionary. And so if you don't mind, could you spend a few minutes for our viewers of what the vision is for Virgin Galactic, where you see it in three or four years. But before you answer that question, I want to know my friend Matt, go to run zero gravity, have you been on the Vomit Comet? Have you ever flown up there and done the zero gravity turns and twists or not yet?

Chamath Palihapitiya (18:21):

I haven't. I haven't done it. But to-

Anthony Scaramucci (18:24):

Well, if you're up for it, I'm going to take you up there as my guest, but tell us where the future is for Virgin Galactic. What do you see?

Chamath Palihapitiya (18:33):

I'll tell you the Virgin story maybe in the context of the Apollo project because I think it's important. When we sent people to the moon in 1969, that became this incredible Thunderclap in the world, and it completely captured people's imagination. From a global hope perspective, it was an incredible validation of human ingenuity and capability. But underneath Anthony, there was something that very practical happened, which was, we invented an unbelievable number of industries. And the reason why space is such a compelling tip of the spear or a canary in a coal mine, whatever phrase you want to use is that it stresses every single law of physics that we know and understand. And that's why space has captured the imagination of so many people.

Chamath Palihapitiya (19:30):

It requires you to think of all of the basic things that we have today in a completely different light. From computers to clocks, to materials, to how you manage heat, all of these things that are understood today have to be completely re-imagined. When you do that, the second and third order markets for these innovations are so vast. So for example, you may care about climate change. Well, in order to really push climate change to the forefront, we are going to have to massively increase our battery density and the efficaciousness of our motors, electric motors. Well, underneath that is massive kinds of material science. Those innovations may never get funded in electrification. They will very likely get funded in space because you have to solve them to achieve these missions, and then it can trickle down to electrification as an example. And so you have to think about space as a way of it being a guinea pig for many of the things that we can use to improve the landscape of the world.

Chamath Palihapitiya (20:37):

So now you think about Virgin, what have they done? Well, what they've done is they've spent the last 15 years building a very safe, repeatable way of sending people into space and back, so into lower earth orbit and back so that they can experience gravity, see the edges of the earth surface, right. Be up there, float around, and then come back down. Now, what are they building in order to do it? They're building all kinds of really interesting materials. They're building a very novel way of managing the stability of a plane because remember at the end of the day, this is not a rocket that goes up and down. This is a plane that takes off and lands. It could literally take off and land from a LaGuardia or JFK. You don't need to go to Cape Canaveral.

Chamath Palihapitiya (21:21):

So how do you design wings that behave in useful ways at 350,000 feet, as well as 50,000 feet? It's building engines that can, with a reasonable carbon footprint, generate enormous amounts of thrust and energy. How do you do that? So they figured all of these things out. So in phase one, 600 odd people have already signed up to fly, hundred million dollars of booked business that we have to deliver. 9,000 people have been waiting in line to give us a deposit. Another 500 or so people I think have given us a small deposit in order to make the bigger deposit. So there's tens of billions of dollars of revenue at very, very high margin, to give people a once in a lifetime experience. But in doing it, our ambition, which we've talked about is taking those technologies and building a plane that can fly hypersonically.

Chamath Palihapitiya (22:22):

So you would go to JFK or LaGuardia, you would get on a plane, it would fly Mach 55. So imagine you need to go to Japan, Tokyo, that would be a sub two hour flight.

Anthony Scaramucci (22:34):

Amazing.

Chamath Palihapitiya (22:34):

You land in Tokyo, you do your meetings, you'd get back on the plane. You'd be back in LaGuardia, JFK at home with your family for dinner, and you would have spent the entire day in Tokyo.

Anthony Scaramucci (22:43):

Well, listen, it's amazing. And just for more context for our viewers, in Douglas Brinkley's book, Moonshot, the Apollo program, $25,000,001,969, which is basically about $400 billion today, and they estimated to your point over a trillion and a half dollars of positive externalities, it wasn't just Tang and posted notes and aluminum foil. It was everything. GPS, all the systems, telecommunication systems, the internet, the entire footprint that grid that information highway, the Apollo program in many ways paved the way for Facebook.

Chamath Palihapitiya (23:25):

You're extremely right.

Anthony Scaramucci (23:27):

It's nice to see that you've tied those two things back together. My colleague, John Dorsey has a question. He's sitting out there with all the dead animals on the wall that he's hiding from everybody at the ranch in Colorado. Go ahead, John.

John Darsie (23:42):

Chamath, you did a fascinating podcast a couple of years ago with Kara Swisher, and you've had a lot of interesting conversations with her. And you talk a lot about Silicon Valley and about how the culture is broken and the system of capital formation is broken. I would love for you to talk a little bit about your explanation of that theory, as well as how you think the pandemic might even exacerbate that the shift that we're seeing out of Silicon Valley or some of the disillusionment that people in the tech industry are seeing with Silicon Valley.

Chamath Palihapitiya (24:11):

I think that there's a dispersion happening and that dispersion is not dissimilar to what's happening in the public markets. If I had to characterize the public market dispersion, it's essentially that we are separating the haves and the have nots. And the haves are companies that traffic in bits. So Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Google above all others, but then underneath them, largely founder led technology businesses, that have the 80 to 90% gross margins, even if they're unprofitable. So those are the haves, they traffic in bits.

Chamath Palihapitiya (24:44):

The have nots or the companies that traffic in atoms. If you're a hotel company, an airline and auto business, those businesses are incredibly impaired and there's been an dispersion in the spread where you could basically essentially, if you bought the weighted S&P Index, which essentially is a way of getting synthetically long, these handful of tech businesses and shorted the unweighted index, which is, basically getting an equal weighting of everything else, you can see this massive dispersion spread by.

Chamath Palihapitiya (25:14):

That's happening in private markets as well. Except what we're looking at are companies that either are benefiting from the pandemic. So tailwinds that are driving positive growth and profitability. So companies like Coinbase, or Instacart, or Palo Alto Networks, which is public or Netskope, which is private, internet security businesses, or Slack which is a collaboration business. So there are these companies, a mixture of private and public, and then businesses that were second and third tier also rants are again, just getting crushed and they're being forced to fire and lay people off.

Chamath Palihapitiya (25:52):

Underneath that dynamic is something that's been broken in the valley for a while, which is that the cycle of building and profiting from companies has taken too long. It used to be the case that we would build a company for four to six years and then take it public. And then the public markets would participate in the last two or three years of evolving the business. Now, what happens is there's so much private money that these companies stagnate in the private markets for eight, nine and 10 years. The problem is that for LPs, it doesn't work because you have these 10 year fund lives. And if you're a growth fund, maybe a seven year fund life with a couple of one year renewals, the timing mismatch now that it's creating is this massive overhang where you have these paper values in IRRs that can't be monetized.

Chamath Palihapitiya (26:40):

And so that's feeding a cycle where even faster than normal, LPs are looking at secondary firms and saying, let me sell some of these things. Let me rebalanced my portfolio, because my publics are getting crushed. If you look at private equity, it's very challenged because they predominantly trafficking atoms. They're buying industrials companies, they're buying things that are real, tangible things that you buy with current free cashflow, that stuff is very trial to challenge. And so as a result, the IRRs that these pension funds and other LPs will see are going to be challenged. They then look at their venture exposure and say, "Wow, I have way too much exposure." And so then they're selling then the venture funds themselves are thinking to themselves, "Wow, I'm having a lot of trouble raising a new fund."

Chamath Palihapitiya (27:24):

So it's a very complicated cycle, John, but that's what we're engaged in right now is this essentially a massive multi-year long portfolio rebalancing. And the publics are leading the way so that dispersion is creating a dislocation. Private equity is the next domino to fall because when they really reset their portfolios and revalue them two, three, four quarters now into the full scale breadth of the consumer demand shock that we're dealing with, and then venture folks will have to take the backseat, but it's going to make valuations very challenging in the public markets. And you're going to be rewarded for having money to put to work.

Anthony Scaramucci (28:10):

Chamath, when you think about the future, it's 15 years from today. We have all of this complexity. What you're basically describing is another big transition. It's a little bit like the industrial revolution back in the 1830s, where all of a sudden people got scared they were losing their jobs and then there was massive productivity uplink, if you will. And so I guess what I'm asking is, you and I know there's going to be an abundance. We know that there's going to be nanotechnology, biotechnology, immunotherapy. There's going to be an abundance. And I know you're worried about this because I listened to your interviews. You're worried that that's going to go to two or 3% of the people, and we're going to live in this ether of plutocrats, where the rest of the society is struggling.

Anthony Scaramucci (28:58):

And so you're a capitalist, obviously I'm a capitalist. And so how do we shatter the totems of political ideology to explain that to people so that they understand that if you give somebody some universal income or some base education, that's actually right in the Western Canon of liberalism. That's the way to allow them to experience their life to their true form, the way you were going to that $10,000 school, or I've been able to. So how do we shatter those totals? How do we get there?

Chamath Palihapitiya (29:31):

I think that the way that I look at it is that right now, we have very uneven starting lines and we can use money and we can use incentives to make sure that as much as possible and as often as possible, we have a very even starting line. And I think universal basic income is a very interesting tool to make sure that the uneven starting lines of today are not meaningfully exacerbated because the reality is looking today, middle of May, 2020, people that are relatively wealthy and had asset exposure, I don't think are very much feeling anything from this pandemic. But people who had normal blue collar jobs, have been affected meaningfully. 30 odd million, we're trending to 30 odd million people, and that's enormous. That's like saying, if you walk outside the United States, every fifth working man or woman that you see doesn't have a job that's in my mind, extremely scary.

Chamath Palihapitiya (30:37):

So the way that you destroy these totems, at least from my perspective is right now, when we're in a crisis, it's the equivalent of being gunned into the ER with a gunshot wound, you have to stop the bleeding. So tourniquet yourself and make sure that we can stabilize the patient. And I think money in the hands of people do that. Then it's about being able to successfully conduct the surgery and remove the gunshot wound. And I think how you do that is to make sure that the companies themselves who are employing you have some reasonably good behaviors coming out of this crisis better than the incentives they had coming into the crisis. And then the way you rehabilitate. So even after the gunshot wound, how do you get back to 90 or a 100% physical capability is that you have to go after some of these huge, big elephants that have been hanging around for a while.

Chamath Palihapitiya (31:35):

Number one at the top, top, top, I think Anthony is education. We have to figure out what to do on the student loan sign side and what to do about the quality of public school education and the compensation we pay teachers. It's kind of a joke. I have four kids, three of them are in school age, and I have to be honest with you, it is impossible for me to do a good job. And I think that those teachers should be paid 10 times more than they are. But then at the same time, I'm a little angry at them because I think between them and the administration, the administrators of our schools, they're so woefully unequipped, and I think this is 2020. And then my school is in the heart of Silicon Valley. How is this possible? So I think that there's a lot of stuff that you can do to make sure that the best teachers are teaching all the kids and that's a technological problem.

Anthony Scaramucci (32:32):

We're going to have Sal Kahanan later on, and that Sal has always preached that to me. It's like, we're trying to make a movie instead of getting George Lucas and Steve Spielberg together to make the movie, we're getting the local drama club to make the movie. And we have to figure out a way to push that expertise down and make it more broad. I know we're running out of time, but I'm very curious about this question and I hope you don't mind me answering it because it's a question about our polarity and politicization. And there was a new Yorker cartoon that I read about two weeks ago and I literally laughed out loud. It was a news anchor and he was sitting at a news desk and he said, "We just heard from our democratic weather person. Now let's get the weather from our Republican weather person." And that the point being that we're so politicized.

Anthony Scaramucci (33:25):

And so do you think Facebook is doing a good job? Do you think we can do a good ... is there a way to dial down some of the misinformation out there and dial up more of the objectivity because I think one of our biggest problems Chamath, is we can't even agree on the facts anymore, depending on where I'm watching or what channel I'm on, I'm getting a different set of facts than the guy next to me. And so we're arguing over the facts now, do you think we could do anything to change that?

Chamath Palihapitiya (34:03):

There's a great philosopher. His name is Rene Girard and he pioneered the school of thought, which essentially says that, people aren't really born with desires. They mimic and model desires from other people. And then they copy and they imitate. And then eventually though they imitate too much and it leads to conflict, and then you have to scapegoat somebody and there needs to be a grand sacrifice before you can reset and everything will be fine again. Right now we're in a cycle where it is very easy to confuse truth and popularity, and so people can do it because it appeases their mind. It makes it easier for them to be part of a tribe and take something as fact versus have to be in the uncomfortable process of re-underwriting, everything they hear.

Chamath Palihapitiya (34:55):

And Facebook in many ways is an impossible situation because they have to do a dance between what is really fact and what is a person's opinion and how do you allow free speech? And so I don't even think it's their problem. I think it's a decision that we, as a society, have chosen to undergo. So I think it will come to a head in the next four or five years. And I think that how it gets resolved, Anthony, like what is the scapegoating that happens? I think that probably there needs to be something like a new deal. and I don't want to say it's the green new deal, but I think it's a re-evaluation and rewrite of the compact we have as US citizens. And I think that that's coming.

Chamath Palihapitiya (35:45):

I don't think that that's necessarily a hundred percent of the rhetoric of Bernie Sanders, but I also think it's not a hundred percent of the rhetoric of Donald Trump. And it's going to be a total rewrite. And this is why I think that the United States in many ways is like a startup that's never failed because we always iterate and we'll recreate ourselves. And so I have a lot of trust and faith that eventually people will emerge on both sides, and they'll just say, "All right, screw the past. I'm tired of our parents bickering. Let's just sit down and shake hands and figure it out."

Anthony Scaramucci (36:21):

Well, listen, but generationally, if you really studied cycles of generations, you're now in the 80th year of the start of World War II. And so when you sit there and look at that, it's a lifetime ago, what starts to happen is another cycle starts. There was a book in 1996 called The Fourth Turning, which was an explanation of these cycles. And so we're there now, and it's going to require really good leadership to set that framing.

Anthony Scaramucci (36:49):

Just one other point on that, I find this fascinating as well, 27 constitutional amendments. The last one was a procedural one in 1993, but the biggest one, the most magnitude in terms of the body politic was the Civil Rights Amendment in '65. So we've really gone ... think about the country. It's 244 years old. We've gone 55 years without a real constitutional amendment to reset things and to re-graph things directionally. So I agree with that. I know we're running out of time, but I'd like you to end on a note if you don't mind, because I think you're an amazing person in terms of being able to see around the corner of where we're heading. It's five to 10 years out, build me the case for America, and where would you like to see America?

Chamath Palihapitiya (37:40):

I think in 10 years from now, I think what will have happen, I'm just going to paint my bright rose colored glasses view. We will have come out of the deflationary cycle. We will have seen some modest, reasonably good inflation, and we will have reinvigorated the US economy. We will have become a standard bearer for basically, Western Europe, South America, and parts of Africa. I think that the two super powers that exist will be us and China. And it will be one where it's mutually assured destruction. And so we choose to cooperate wherever possible and power share. That there will be a lot of high earning jobs because we will nationalize things that should be nationalized for national security purposes. And that we have reinvented education almost back as sort of a very much one to many model to your point that isn't cut across county or state lines anymore, but says, the best teachers teach the entire nation in a completely different way. And we have a body politic that, that is meeting in the middle and is much more like the 1980s Republicans versus Democrats versus the 2020s Republicans and Democrats.

Chamath Palihapitiya (39:04):

So I'm very hopeful. But we are going to go through three or four years of difficult treading to get there. And so we're in the middle of the grind. So this is not where things get easy, but by 2024, things will get much clearer.

Anthony Scaramucci (39:20):

Well, listen, we appreciate your time today. You've been amazing. I'm not a room raider, but I love your room. I love the sunlight coming in. You're doing fantastic. I've got the old fashioned HTTV screen. But I hope you'll take me up on the Vomit Comet. That's what the astronauts used to call that thing. My friend Matt Goad runs zero gravity and would love to go up there with you. I think you'd find it fascinating because you get to a certain level, they move the plane in a certain way. You're up in the air and you can experience some of that space flight that you yourself will look forward to.

Chamath Palihapitiya (39:54):

I would love to. I would love to.

Anthony Scaramucci (39:55):

Well, God bless you. Have a great weekend. Stay safe. That's it for SALT Talks this week. Have a great weekend everybody. And Chamath, I'll be in touch. I really look forward to our next event together.

Chamath Palihapitiya (40:07):

Thanks Anthony. Thanks John. Thanks everybody. Thank you.

Anthony Scaramucci (40:08):

All right, bye.