How to Fix Crypto Lending | Bill Barhydt, Abra

Transcript

Hey everyone, two quick announcements before we jump in. One, Empire meetup Thursday, May 9th, 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the Blockworks office. Santiago's in town. We're doing a meetup. We got over 100 folks registered already. Empire listeners only. You know the deal. Secret codeword is bald. Somewhere in my uh Twitter feed, if you go to my past tweets, scroll back to maybe Monday or Tuesday, you'll see a link to a Universe page. Register for that. Totally free. 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the Blockworks office. Second thing, Permissionless. Uh if you guys forgot about it, shame on you. It's October 9th through through 11th. Just landed some big new speakers.

We got Balaji, Chris Dixon, Sriram from EigenLayer. We just landed uh Mike Novogratz. We got Nick White from Celestia, Evan, co-founder of uh Sui, Luca from Pudgy Penguins, Kristin Smith Blockchain Association, Leighton from Variant. Vance and Santi are joining. Bryan from LayerZero. Tom Emmer is coming out. Crazy event. Code is Empire 10. Haven't talked to marketing about this recently, but we'll probably jack tickets up soon. Would recommend you get your ticket today. Not tomorrow, today. So, that's Permissionless. Go on our website. You'll find the tickets. Code is Empire 10. Enjoy the episode with Bill Barhydt.

All right, everyone. Welcome back to Empire. We are uh recording this on Zoom, so hopefully the audio is all right for all of you. I think I think it should be, but we have a special episode. Uh we have Bill Barhydt, uh CEO and founder of Abra. So, the backstory of this episode is um Abra announced this launch about 2 weeks ago. I tweeted out. I said, "I don't think everyone appreciates how big of a deal this is." The SEC approved Abra as an RIA that can put their clients' capital into DeFi. They're now the only SEC-approved way to stake, lend, yield farm, etc. in every state. I'd assume they got the approval because of their SMA model, which means assets are never on Abra's balance sheet. Feels like low-key big news. I tweeted that out. Got a bunch of DMs saying, "You got to have Bill on the

podcast and explain this." So, we have Bill. So, Bill, welcome to Empire. Thanks, man. Good to see you. Thanks for having me. Yeah, of course. Of course. So, people don't know Bill, research engineer both at NASA and CIA, VP at Goldman back in the day, ran a P&L at Netscape in the '90s, uh claim to fame gave the first TED Talk on Bitcoin in 2012, launched Abra in 2016, and now it's 2024. So, Bill, I think the best place to start uh is talking about the story of the last 18 months. So, when I think about all the There was a There was a group of companies um lenders and that had both a consumer arm and an an and an institutional arm, BlockFi, Celsius, Genesis, uh the list kind of goes on, and Abra was in that

bucket. They all blew up, and you guys didn't. Tell me the story of what just happened in the last 18 to 24 months. Sure. So, so, so, all of these companies would use the term crypto bank lender in some way, okay? And so, bank implies that you're actually lending money to a bank, and those lent funds become a liability on that entity's balance sheet. When you make a deposit at Wells Fargo, which is a bank if you live in Europe, your deposits become a liability on that bank's balance sheet.

And our space was no different, except these companies were not banks. We were a little different legally in that we actually took deposits through an actual trust bank. Um and and that but that's not the reason why we're still here. The the the the difference ultimately in how these companies operated is is risk management. Now, everyone in the space had losses in 2021. Everyone. No, there's no If you lent and you were in the yield space, you had losses. And we were public about it. We went on Twitter and and we tweeted about exposure to FTX and Genesis and and and ultimately we didn't have what in in risk management what's called the concentration risk that the

other lenders had, meaning BlockFi had all their eggs basically in one big basket, right? I think with Celsius there was probably fraud. Genesis had Well, it was really Gemini who was using Genesis as one borrower, and Gemini had no idea what was happening really with Genesis' books, otherwise they probably wouldn't have done it. And then when Genesis blew up, obviously uh because of their exposure to FTX, 3 Arrows, and others, it created a a mess for all of their clients. So, we were able to restructure and and work through those lending losses, and we've actually completely stopped all activities related to new um you know, under-collateralized

lending. We just don't do that uh at all. We're we're 100% DeFi based uh for our new um our new product, which is infinitely safer, and also doesn't make you a liability on Abra's balance sheet. So, we can get into that, but that's really the big difference is that these lenders, to generate yield, were doing massive loans to individual counterparties. And when you do that, and you have the concentration risk, you have a single point of failure by definition. It's common sense, right? Meaning, if that one lender can't pay you back, you're you're done, right? And and and they were in in in most cases done when the one lender, whether you know, couldn't pay it back.

That's the bottom line. Mhm. What happened behind the scenes um that maybe people aren't as aware of in the last 18 months? Like, I'm sure there were some crazy stories coming out of this. Um and in the trenches, like I don't know how much you can share, but would love to hear some of those stories. Yeah, I mean, someday I'll write a book. I don't know who'll read it. Maybe for my grandkids, I don't know. Like don't This is The book will be called Don't Do This. Um and and the first thing is is I would say Look uh how how would I say this? I think that Look, I'm just going to be frank. I think that I always grew up believing that financial regulators um you know, police who who who whoever was

there in power to protect us was always doing right by us and their primary goal was to protect us and to serve us. Turns out that's not necessarily the case and sometimes these regulators actually have their own agendas. And I'm not pointing fingers at anyone regulators. I meet most of them and I'm like, yeah, these people get it. They're they're honest. They're they may not even agree with the rules that they're implementing but they're there to implement the rules that the legislators set, right? Regulators don't make laws. And and so most of them I meet are honest, hard working, you know, just there to to do their job and then you get a few people who just have an agenda.

Whether that agenda aligns with with me or not or or our space or not is another issue. And so it turns out that there were certain regulators that just don't want the space to exist in my opinion. They don't. And and by the space I mean anything happening in in the crypto world. They just, you know, for whatever reason they don't want us here. And there were certainly regulators that believed that about us and and in Coinbase we we were basically having a uh you know, a brouhaha with several states. Just the same states that basically are are having the same issues with Coinbase. Coinbase chose to fight those states meaning with Coinbase you can't actually stake in like 15 or 20

states. If you log in to Coinbase try to stake your Ethereum and you're in California, you're going to get an error message that says you're not allowed to stake in California. Okay? And then and I don't remember the list of states but it's it's it's an it's not it's not one. It's many. Okay? And we said, okay, we don't have Coinbase's cash hoard to spend 2 years fighting this. And and so we settled that out and we said, all right, well, what's a viable way to do this? And we came up with a viable way which I'm sure we'll get into in a minute. But you know, this cost millions of dollars, 18 months of of heartache, and probably got to a place we could have gotten to in days or weeks versus months and years.

And ultimately it hurt our clients because because many of them, you know, were were just you know, exacerbated. I don't I don't want to basically deal with this crypto was the common refrain from our clients. We trusted Abra for this. Please let me keep using Abra. That was the most common feedback that I was getting from clients over here while I'm having, you know, please die discussions with regulators over here. And and you know, we were still here obviously, so it all worked out, but but it was not fun. Yeah. It was not fun at all, and it didn't help anyone ultimately. Even the regulators because we're still here.

Right? So So the bottom line is is we could have gotten here, I think, in a more productive way. That's not a knock on anyone. It just is, right? It's a lesson for me. I think it's a lesson for the lawyers we work with. I think it's a lesson for the regulators we work with. And and like I said, the vast majority of regulators, even the ones that I've spoken to, they seem like very reasonable people when you talk to them one-on-one. So Mhm. So how were you guys able to get this approval? We had Dave Ripley on the podcast, the CEO of Kraken, and you know, they're they're fighting the SEC, and Coinbase is fighting the SEC, and I heard some rumblings of some other big companies who are about to have to fight the SEC.

And you guys got this approval by the SEC. So how like how how how did that work out? Why did they give you this approval? Sure. There's different buckets of things going on. So let's be clear on on these different buckets, right? So the first is we're not an exchange. So So the SEC's claim that exchanges are operating as illegal broker dealers, I don't agree with that. I I I think they're going to lose on that battle, and I don't even understand Well, I I do understand why they're choosing to fight that battle, but I think it's just basically going to be a game of attrition, and the exchanges will win that particular fight. But But not an exchange, so that doesn't affect us directly.

Mhm. Second battle is around staking. And if you remember there was a settlement with Kraken and the SEC where the SEC said, you know, the way you're doing staking on behalf of your clients, you're doing individual security offerings for each client and more or less is what I think I think the settlement was. And states basically came after Coinbase like I just said for the same issue. And you know, the Kraken settled that issue and Coinbase is fighting the states on that issue. Just while they're fighting the SEC on whether or not they're a broker-dealer for their core exchange business. And Abra settled the issue with staking with the states and and basically went to the SEC and said, we think the right way

to offer staking yield lending to crypto clients are as investments and to do it as a wealth advisor or a registered investment advisor, which is the terminology they would use. And that's what we managed to get done. So that's a very different structure versus the other companies in the space. So a lot of terminology in there. I I don't know if it all makes sense to people, but but there are very important nuances in terms of what we're doing versus what the others in the space are doing and the approach we've taken. Nice. Tell me, let's dig into SMAs. So and the way I understand it is in traditional capital markets SMAs, separately managed accounts, are very common.

Is the way kind of funds are stored often times. And in crypto, uh, the funds have been stored historically in this like pooled funds matter. Um, and until talking to you and a couple of other folks, it seems like pooled one of the things that was at the heart of the problem in the last blowup was these like this pooled funds model, I guess you could call it. First off, is that is that right that like pooled funds was at the heart of the problem? Second, um, why does why are SMAs so important? What's wrong with this like pooled funds model? Sure. Sure. So let's start with the problem and then we'll go to the the solution. So pooled funds are definitely at the heart of the problem that we had the last go around with the yield lending etc. etc.

Um you have duration mismatch, you have concentration risk. Duration mismatch means I have to every If you want your funds back today out of your account, I have to pay you back today, but I may have invested your assets in you know, yield-generating opportunities that I have are locked up for 6 months. So, that means I'm actually using somebody else's money to pay you back. Right? And and banks do that all the time, but they're legally allowed to do that. Right? When you dig in, you're like, why are banks allowed to do this? And and because it's a managed house of cards is why they're allowed to do this. And in 2007, 2008, the house of cards buckled a little bit and and they spent a trillion dollars kind of reinforcing the the foundation. So, so yes, there are significant issues when you become a

liability on someone else's balance sheet, the risk profile of that institution to the counterparty, which is you and I, changes significantly. Okay? Now, on the other hand, let's say you have a bunch of cash. When you walk into the bank, there's actually two things historically you can do with that cash. You can lend it to the bank either as a savings account in a savings account, checking account, CD, but effectively you're a liability to the bank. Or you can walk in the other line and say, I want to open a safety deposit box and I want to stick my cash in there. Now, when you do that, you're not getting any yields, it's just sitting there, might collect some dust, but you're not a liability on the bank's balance sheet.

Meaning, regardless of what happens to the bank, if you walk into that bank and say, I need access to the safety deposit box, whatever's in there is yours. So, that's that's the difference between the the safety deposit box and and the deposit model. Think of a separately managed account as closer in structure to the safety deposit box, with with one exception, which we'll come back to. The most important aspect here is that with the separately managed account, it's like a vault where you retain title. That's the legal phrase. You retain title to those assets that you put in the vault. Your Bitcoin, your Ethereum, your stable coins, your Solana, whatever it is. Okay?

The difference is now from that vault or separately managed account, you can actually deploy the crypto into investments. And we can direct those deployments for you right? Uh but you're retaining title to the asset. So, if you say I want to earn yield, I want to stake my Solana, I want to stake my Ethereum, I want to earn yield on my Bitcoin, I want to borrow cash against my my Bitcoin holdings. All of that can be done for you from your individual vault. But when you make a withdrawal, remember what I said what happens in the bank model. You're actually getting somebody else's cash back cuz it's always a duration mismatch in bank deposits.

Right? Not only that, they've lent out your deposits multiple times in a bank. That's why banks, you know, operate outside of traditional laws cuz they're allowed to lever themselves where you and I are not allowed to lever ourselves with other people's money. With with a bank with with Abra with the SMA model, when you do a withdrawal, it's always your assets you're getting back cuz there's no pooling of funds. You see the difference? So, so with a bank, you don't know whose assets you're getting back and you don't care as long as you get them back until there's a run on the bank. Right? And that's what happened last last March when Silicon Valley Bank failed because people were withdrawing, there was a duration mismatch because they had all these long duration bonds that were being, you know, marked to maturity on their balance sheet using,

you know, interest rates going out forever, but they were actually worthless or worth significantly less uh because interest rates were going up. And so all of a sudden when they had to sell these bonds, didn't work. So, so my point is is that, you know, the SMA model is infinitely safer because you retain title. When you do a withdrawal, you're only withdrawing your own assets. You're not in a pooled model, and you're deploying the assets directly to earn yield, to borrow, etc., etc. And and um you have an advisor as a fiduciary in Abra that is responsible for the maintaining the integrity of that SMA accounts on your behalf and making, you

know, investments on your behalf per your wishes and and risk tolerance and profile. If SMAs are such a better model, why doesn't everyone do them? Well, in the crypto world, it's hard because you're not pooling funds, and you have one vault per client. And if you're deploying into DeFi, it's infinitely easier to pull everybody's funds into one big pot and sign one smart contract than it is to sign a million smart contracts for a million clients. That's just why no one else has done it.

Um in the equities world, it's extremely common. Right? It's it it trillions of dollars are managed via separately managed accounts, mostly for higher net worth um in investors. But I think that this is going to become the standard for crypto for two reasons. One, it's closer to using crypto the way it was meant to be used. It's your vault. So it's it's it's as close as you can get to not your keys, not your coins, and still be able to earn yield, stake, uh access lending, etc., etc. because if Abra goes away, you still have your stuff. You still have your crypto, all right? And two, you can earn yield, you can borrow, and you can do all the

things that you want to do without having to go full-on DJen and understand MetaMask and smart contracts and all the this the stuff. You can understand that. There's risk disclosures, we explain how it works. All those things are there, but you don't have to go as deep as somebody who, you know, would have to go if they were managing all their assets directly in MetaMask, for example. Hm. So, So, how do you actually do this? I'm I'm trying to picture if this I mean, if this works and people use Abra, I mean, I know you already have a lot of customers, but let's say you have 100,000 customers, like it's not feasible to sign 100,000 individual transactions to deposit into Lido.

It is feasible. Okay. All right, tell me tell me more. So, it's it's just a lot of work. So, so so we've built a platform, an SMA platform, on top of our custody partners that meets the the qualified custodian rules of the SEC. Those rules are pending, by the way, they're not official rules yet, but I believe that's my understanding, I'm not a lawyer, that we would meet the the spirit of those rules today. So, we kind of took it upon ourselves to do that. And each client gets their own individual SMA, and their individual account is deployed. And it And we've built the solution, and it's it's an automated model, so when you come in, your the creation of your vault is automated, the custody of your Bitcoin, your your Ethereum, or your stable coins, your USDC or Tether, it's

all automated. Hm. And you can either deploy yourself, or tell us what to do, and and we'll push a button and and deploy for you. Uh but effectively, you know, it works across 100,000 clients the same way it should work across across 10 clients. Hm. Could you tell me more about the DeFi activations? Like, where are you putting Like, are you using I don't know how do you how do you determine that there's like no smart contract risk? Cuz it's just the kind of what I'd call the tier ones on Ethereum, like Aave and Compound and Lido, like Yeah. Yeah, I think that is the single most important question as it relates to how we operate, because everything we're doing now, whether it's yield or staking or lending, it's all based around DeFi

and smart contracts now. I actually think this is a breakthrough. Let Let me give you a story first, right? Go back to Remember the Celsius bankruptcy? When people at the very beginning, right, everybody was clamoring around, "Oh, you know, who are the counterparties? We have to go after them. They didn't pay back the loans." And then Celsius actually made a payment into a DeFi loan that they had. And the as I recall, the judge was a little upset. And they had to explain to the judge that, "Hey, we have no choice. If we didn't pay back this loan, we were going to get liquidated."

Right? And the bankruptcy court knew exactly what they had to do, and they paid back the loan. Whereas everybody else had to wait. And so the point is is that DeFi is a better approach because it doesn't care about your bankruptcy proceedings. It doesn't care about a lawyer's opinion. It's just code, and it works. Mhm. And and so what we've done is we've built a team that analyzes all the DeFi protocols out there. Uh we deploy our own assets. Uh we test for weeks at a time. We're generally only using larger uh tried and true large TVL, total value locked, protocols uh that we believe um have proven themselves to be safe over

time. But there are risks, you know, there's always smart contract risk, and we disclose all of that. But relative to everything else that transpired, we think and we believe that the risks here are are minimal. And that's why we only We're not using the newest uh with any large amounts of of client assets. And we'll test for weeks. Sometimes we'll miss opportunities. Uh but that's okay. Our clients would rather have us be prudent. Um you're already taking principal risk if you're holding Ethereum and Solana and Bitcoin, right? And and so yeah, staking makes sense. A lot of our clients stake Solana using Abra or Ethereum using Abra. That's fine.

Uh but they don't want to take crazy incremental risk versus the principal risk they've already taken. Doesn't make sense. Right. That's what our team does is we analyze those smart contracts in order to make smart recommendations to our clients. Uh what protocols do you guys use? Like if I looked on the Abra platform, like what are the top five D5 places where you've put capital? Yeah, so we stake using the standard places like a marinade for for for um for Solana, Lido for Lido, I don't know how you say it, for for Ethereum. Um and there are other couple of other staking protocols uh places we use, services we use.

Um we use Ave for lending and and yield compound as well. Uh um we've used GMX um on the trading side when the yields there were good, almost like a carry trade model. So so there are different places where we either earned yield or even when you're borrowing to be clear, right? This is really cool. So traditionally in the last go around, if you were borrowing from BlockFi, right? BlockFi was the counterparty to the loan. If you're borrowing against your Bitcoin, right? As Abra Capital Management client, you are you are not borrowing from Abra.

You are borrowing directly from the D5 protocol. And what we're doing is we are putting signing the contracts, whether it's Ave, Compound, or another another protocol, that puts your Bitcoin on that contract and pulls out the requisite amount of stablecoins per your instructions. Hm. And and so your counterparty even there is the D5 protocol. How do you think about the evolution of Abra's business as Like when I hear So okay, so that's really really cool, but the maybe downside is that like you're kind of operating as a um like an access point to protocols, and maybe that's a short-term thing where like maybe in 5 to 10 years the risk of

using Ave and like in the mind of an institution goes away and they just go straight to to Ave. How do you like think about that dynamic? Yeah, I I I like it you know if you look at it that way, Netflix is an access point for HTTP and RTP streaming protocols, right? And and value add is is they're using the internet the way it was intended to be used. even know what those protocols are, honestly. Oh, it doesn't matter. It's just they're they're standards, right? So I think that says it all, yeah. Yes, exactly. Thank you. That's exactly my point. Everyone is going to every bank in the world is going to be using these protocols and the consumers are not going to know it. Now, we're doing it as a wealth advisor today cuz the banking system

hasn't caught up to this yet. And we're we're very early. I mean, I was with a a group of RIA CEOs yesterday. They probably manage a half a trillion across the the 15 of them and you know, they were learning about this for the first time. Right? And and we're out there doing it for their clients. Right? Because they don't offer crypto to their clients. And so we're educating them on how to do that, you know, through us. But but the most importantly to your point they don't understand how this works, but they're hearing rumblings that their clients want it. Mhm. I don't want to be holding my Bitcoin on Coinbase. I don't want to be holding my my Ethereum on Coinbase. I can't stake it. I can't borrow against my my $5 million worth of Bitcoin. How can I do that? And and so no one at scale as an

end user is going to understand the complexities of any of these protocols. Just like the average money market user doesn't know what a reverse repo is. And and they probably don't feel that they should have to. I would claim it probably helps a little bit to understand the basics of the banking system, although most people don't. And it probably will help at scale to understand a little bit of the basics of this, but you don't have to go full on Degen to understand how to take advantage of this. You have a the right advisor who's acting as a fiduciary. And that's what we've chosen to do.

Yeah. Yeah, you don't need to you're locking in a 5% interest rate on your mortgage. You don't need to know how the interest rate swaps market works right? It would it would be useful in some cases but You don't have to. That's exactly right. Um What do you think is the future of um of lending in crypto markets? So, okay, context for that question is the last market I would categorize as like a very much a lending-fueled um or like a leverage-fueled uh uh bull market, especially maybe not in 2020, but at the latter half of 2021.

Um Right now, it feels like the there's demand in the market for leverage and like lend and borrow, but the supply has not entered the market as much. What do you What are your thoughts on like what the future of that will look like this cycle? I did I did It's a great question. So, so we're we're approaching this from an investing perspective today, meaning we're a registered investment advisor and and and and and hence a fiduciary to our clients, but I actually believe that the the RA model that we're pursuing with these separately managed accounts merges back into traditional banking and becomes the banking model. And I think there are three aspects to the future of banking that crypto kind of takes over. The first is what this this, you know,

buzzword of real-world assets that everyone's talking about. And this gets to the heart of your question because I believe that when once you basically tokenize real-world assets, you basically have an infinite amount of pristine collateral. And I would actually bucket Bitcoin in the real-world asset category now. It's a trillion-dollar asset. Right? So, Bitcoin, real estate, equities, tokenized treasuries, treasuries, all tokenized, all available to part two, which is DeFi, as smart contracts to enable lending. So, to your point, we're going to have an infinite amount of collateral, Bitcoin being the best collateral we've ever had cuz it trades 24/7, it's instantly liquid, it's in- infinitely easier to transport than

any other collateral in the world, even paper bonds, and it's available to everyone. And in places where there are no credit scores, holding that type of collateral is brilliant because anyone can borrow against even $50 of Bitcoin. You just take it out of $20 loan at the point of sale and at the end of the month you pay back like a credit card. And you keep using your Bitcoin over and over to effectively borrow against at the point of sale. So I think that real world asset model, right, enables an infinite supply over time of collateral which leads to the application of DeFi global scale.

And that's the future of banking. We're doing it now as a wealth advisor because that's the best legal way to do it for our clients to enable investing, lending, yield, borrowing without ever being the counterparty, which is brilliant in my opinion. And and so that's part two, which is access to DeFi via wealth advisors, banks, whoever, right? And then the third is how do I do this and avoid the pitfalls of traditional banking. And and and which is being a liability on the balance sheet. And that's this Valut SMA model. And in investing, because of the way it works, it's not really as automated, it really is set up for the wealthy. With crypto, I think we can make it accessible to everyone as the default.

And if you know, my friend Caitlin Long talks about this all the time, this mismatch in the way crypto works versus the way banking works, it's a huge risk for the system to take a 40 Val asset that trades 24/7 and and use it for leverage within a banking system that's closed 100 hours a week, it doesn't make sense. But the DeFi model doesn't allow for that. Meaning you can't the the it's a marketplace where the where the the both sides, the borrowers and the lenders are matched and are over collateralized in the system. So you don't have this excessive leverage in the system. And so when you combine that with this vault where you're not a liability on the balance sheet, you now have a formula, real world asset tokenization, DeFi, you

know, vaults where you become your own bank in this SME model, that's the future of banking. Long long answer to your question, but when you bring all of that together, I I I I've never seen a bank that operates with less risk than the model I just described, never. Mhm. Would you say that the wealth becoming a crypto wealth manager is a backdoor Trojan horse into becoming a large into into competing on the with with the banks in 5 to 10 years? I mean, we're sitting here talking about it so. Yeah. How much of the world Look, I mean, most people have never heard of Abra.

Yeah yeah. I I That's That's my biggest challenge today. Um I don't think about it as a Trojan horse to the banks. I'm very overt about what I'm doing. I want to help people Yeah. um get exposure to crypto, hold Bitcoin, um eventually be able to borrow against the Bitcoin, which I think is our biggest long-term business. Our biggest long-term business is probably enabling people to borrow against Bitcoin and use it as the ultimate form of collateral. Mhm. And we're simply doing that using an SEC-registered investment advisor model, which is the path of least resistance today. Yeah. Yeah.

And that may change to your to your question now, that may change in the future, I've no idea. But But that's also a very US-centric answer that I gave you. We operate all over the world, and so you'll see Abra now, you know, putting different licensing models in diff in in place in different countries. Some may look more like a bank model, some may look more like the RA model RIA model. It just depends upon the country and and the nuances of their laws versus ours here in the US. Yeah. Maybe getting away from Abra for a second, like zooming zooming back out, um would love to talk almost like macro banking system, the election coming up, uh the stuff that we tend to nerd out on when we're just talking and not not you know, not on a recording. Um what are your thoughts on like how a lot

of the next like 12 to 18 months plays out? I think that the the pendulum has has swung in in the political discourse towards losing the plot to put a fine point on it especially as it relates to regulation not just in in in crypto but in a bunch of industries. I mean I have I'm here in Silicon Valley and every tech discussion you have has a strong regulatory component to it. When I was here at Netscape in the 90s that didn't happen with the exception of exporting SSL you know HTTPS where we had different versions of the browser there was no discussion on regulation except with that one it

was a big exception but but still now everything in every industry seems to center around regulation and you know whether it's TikTok and social media and crypto and AI and robotics and you know well what does the government say? You know and we never cared before what the government would say. We were just ethical responsible people doing ethical responsible things and and and basically exploring all aspects of of capitalism which is what makes the world go round. And that's how I think it should be and and that's why I think the 90s was probably the kind of zenith of of of American power and you know it's it's eroding now because of of

this kind of deep regulatory state and the pendulum has swung all the way over here and I do think it's going to swing back. I think the kind of Euro socialist agenda is failing and I think Americans are fed up with it. Um and we'll see. I I I do think that there's going to be a regime change in the US and we'll see the pendulum swing back over the next few years and and I also think that the the pressures of competing on the global stage against the likes of of Dubai and Singapore and and and you know even Bahrain where I've I've seen a bunch of interesting um you know, developments

the last few months are all going to put pressure on the US to do a better job of competing on the global stage, not just in the crypto sphere, but now in AI and robotics and life sciences and people want certain types of procedures because they're sick or have cancer or whatever. In many cases, they're going outside the US to get these procedures done, which you know, that never happened before. You know, we've had discussions offline about some of the the volunteer work I've done in the psychedelic space where I raise money and a lot of those procedures which are saving lives with near 100% efficacy aren't done in the US cuz they're illegal, which is crazy. We're talking about veterans, right? They're getting the procedures. So So, anyway, I I I'm hopeful

that, you know, the pen- a pendulum can only swing so far before it has to come back and I think we've reached that apex where it has to has to come back now. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it's really interesting. I don't know. I'm I'm I grew up a liberal from Marin. Um you know, and I'm watching all of this stuff play out with the universities and um like it feels like a lot of the like woke cancel culture stuff kind of pushed a lot of people on the left a little more towards the center. Um it's just very interesting seeing how this plays out. doesn't need to be that, right? I mean, I I I'm I'm in the Bay Area, too, and and you go in San Francisco and and a lot of the ultra-liberal friends I have of like are fed up.

I 100%. Yeah. And so, you know, sometimes it's just I can't walk down the street or I can't I can't go into CVS to buy my toothpaste. Well, CVS doesn't exist anymore because they had to leave the city because of the Yeah. Yeah. I can't walk in there cuz they closed them all because they were basically walking in with shopping bags and walking out with no recourse. Full with a you know, shopping bags full of crap. So, everyone has a breaking point. Everyone. I don't care if it's Mother Teresa or Donald Trump. Uh everyone. And I think San Franciscans as a case in point have mostly reached that breaking point.

Not mostly, they have. And and you're seeing now in in in the election discussions and in the type of candidates we're getting where it was like okay everybody I don't know which is left and right on the camera, but but if I'm on the left, all the candidates were over here. It's just a spectrum over here. Well, now the spectrum has widened. Because people say, okay, if we keep doing the same thing, we should expect the same outcome. So, maybe we need a spectrum of candidates to have the right discussion. And that is now entering the San Franciscan discourse discourse for the first time in in 15 20 years that I can tell.

Yeah. How will uh You know, I I follow like Selkis's tweets about the about the election and then the impact that the election will have on crypto. Like, what are the two scenarios as you see it? Like, a Biden election versus a Trump election. Like, how much of an impact does that actually make on crypto? I think it's huge. Um I wish we had two different candidates. We don't. I I will certainly be voting Trump. Um and I've made no He's not my favorite person, but, you know, the bottom line is is that we cannot afford in our industry, in our financial system, in our regulatory capture model, um you know, four more years of of of, you know, regression as as a society. And I

think that's what's happening. Not only that, we're we're just printing money at an insane rate. Now, I'm hoping that Trump will do better at this, but he kind of lost the plot himself during COVID. And I hope that there's a little bit more responsibility, um but this is a major issue that I have with both candidates is the money printing. We can't afford to spend $70 billion in Ukraine and and to be financing genocide in in Gaza. And and so, these things are untenable. And so, we have to stop. And and so, I don't know if if if a Trump administration would stop this, but it certainly as it relates to our space, Ryan is 100% right.

Right? The attacks will not stop until there's regime change, cuz they want us dead. I mean, it's like, you know, the current kind of Warren-led fight against crypto is very clear. They don't want our space to exist, and they will do whatever they can to affect that to happen. Mhm. As someone who has spent a lot of time deeply ingrained with a lot of the states and the federal government trying to get approvals for Abra, what is your best reason for What is your best answer to this question of like, why do they hate crypto so much? I think that there's a faction within the Democratic Party that believes that the banking system needs to be socialized to the benefit of certain people.

Can't be the people, because not everyone would benefit from that. And most people ultimately wouldn't, whether they understand that or not. And socializing the banks is It's kind of a predictable outcome of a late-stage empire. You read Dalio's books or the Fourth Turning or, you know, there's a bunch of well-written books that talk about this stuff now. And obviously the crypto space is is represents the opposite, which is decentralization, ultimate freedom. Right? The ability to be your own bank. Well, the ability to be your own bank is exactly the opposite of the idea of socializing the banks, which is something that, you know, Elizabeth Warren has written about when she was, I guess, a professor or something. So, I don't know. Um this is the end game. It's not going to happen in our lifetimes, for sure.

Um and like I said, as long as we represent a direct threat to that idea, uh there's always going to be this fight. And the only way for us to win the fight, in so far that we want to enable people to have this choice to operate as their own bank, is to have regime change in the United States, so so this power base of theirs is eroded significantly. Mhm. Phil, I think that's a good place to end. I appreciate you coming on, man. My pleasure. Always good to see you.