Hyperliquid’s Fees Buy HYPE—Is the Token Worth It? | Daily Crypto IQ

alltime low $3.81. There you go. So, it is an impressive project or an impressive token when you really look at it on this whole beginning 2024 to where we are now. 17 billion in market cap, max supply 1 billion, circulating supply 222 billion. So, there's actually a lot to come out into circulation over time. And you do have an outstanding supply, which I've explained many times. Hopefully, you know what that is. I'm not going to go into detail to it right now. All right. Listening. All right. Thank you everybody for being here. Welcome to the Underground Crypto Deep Dive Show. This is the token autopsy that we've been doing now for a couple of weeks. I believe it is the biggest value that I can really give you to be honest. Monday gave us an established lending product with

enormous usage. Hopefully you watch yesterday's show. It's a perfect connection between product success and a token and it got a relatively good score. Did you see? Tonight we have almost the opposite problem. Hyperlid has built a genuine business around trading. It processes enormous volume, produces substantial fees, and uses much of that revenue to purchase hype. Hype is also needed for the network security, gas, trading discounts, and certain builder activities. This is not a token desperately searching for a reason to exist or some kind of utility to tag on to its token. It's got it. The difficult question is whether the token has become so valuable that investors are already paying for years of future success. Is it overpriced? Tonight's investigation is therefore not does hype capture value so much. It is the investigation of does hype capture enough value

to justify what the market is already charging for it. So, this is an interesting dynamic that we haven't necessarily had to dig into yet. So, is hype one of crypto's best tokens or is it one of the most expensive expectations? Four things that we really need to be looking at here. And I'm sure some of you probably hold Hype. Anybody holding any Hyperlid? It has done phenomenally well since since you could say 2024, but even still since 2025. Four things we really need to look at here. Hyperlid's usage is real. The activity creates durable revenue like a continuous amount of revenue. That revenue reaches hype in a meaningful way. So revenue in the ecosystem of the project Hyperlid reaches hype the token in a meaningful way. and that the value received is sufficient relative to supply valuation and risk.

A strong product does not automatically create a good token [music] and a strong token mechanism does not always create an attractive valuation. So what is hyperlquid? [snorts] Chris Gos 3 I33 fellow lifer welcome in welcome in givers game. Camstus has got some hype. Nice. Um I don't think I own any hyperlid. feel like it just ran away on me and then it got so expensive so fast I never bought any. [music] I was starting to really consider buying some. We were down at like 51 52 bucks and literally it took off from there I never got chance. There was so many things that I was eyeing. I uh could only deploy capital in so many places. Hyperlid I didn't get to and Canton network I didn't get to. But that's all right. Maybe we'll get a doover. Maybe we'll

get another opportunity as we get a lower bottom for Bitcoin. I'm hoping that we're done with that. But if we do, I'm going to be taking full advantage of it. So, what is Hyperlid, right? And I'm going to know how I feel about Hyperlid so much more after we do this token autopsy. Hyperlid is not merely an application deployed on another blockchain, right? It is purpose-built layer 1 optimized around financial markets. Its architecture divides execution between hyper core and hyper EVM. Hyper Core operates the native order books and Hypereem supports generalpurpose smart contracts. Hyperlid says orders, cancellations, trades, and liquidations are recorded on chain with one block finality. And let's talk about what each one of these different parts of Hyperlid. So, now we're starting to take Hyperlid and we're starting to break it down into its many uh

components, if you will. All right, let's talk about it. Melissa says she doesn't own any. Camsa says, "This is a really interesting deep dive." A deep dive. I'm glad that I hit a token that you're interested in. I'm so into hype. I think it could be the next soul. I mean, they do a good job of generating revenue, right? that I'm already aware of from going to blockworks.com and looking at revenue on a daily basis of all the different blockchains and who's making the most revenue. Hyperlid's usually up there top tier. All right, so we want to break this into different components. First, we have Hyper Core. Then you have Hyper EVM. Those are the two I had just noted. Then you have Hyper the actual token. Then you have this assistance fund, an HLP and backs stop system.

So those are the five things that we're kind of talking about. So hyper core as we said perpetual futures, spot order, books, margins and liquidations. Why it matters? It's the main source of activity in trading. So obviously that is important. Then we have hyper EVM. So, EVM compatible smart contracts and applications definitely have to have smart contract capability and Ethereum virtual machine association inside of any project that's going to be big. And that expands Hyperlid beyond one exchange. Hyper, of course, the token is used for staking, gas, fee discounts, and protocol participation. Connects the token to the network. Here's the ones that you probably are less familiar with. The assistance fund uses eligible protocol revenue to purchase hype aka a buyback. Main token value capture mechanism is this buyback. [music] Now remember there is a big difference between a

buyback and a burn right so let's keep that in mind and the HLP and back stop system market making and liquidity support has provide liquidity helps provide liquidity but creates additional market risk right probably for the people who are providing that liquidity there's some risk involved of course we've seen things go terribly wrong in crypto all too many times. Blues guy in the building, welcome in. Welcome in everybody. Make sure that you've smashed that like button. Sometimes when you go to a stream often, you won't even realize that you didn't hit the like button. And I would really appreciate it if you double check. So, the product versus token tension is kind of the main element of the token autopsy, right? because we're really looking at the product and the token and there's tension there for is it actually

doing any justice to bringing value into the token. So, Hyperlquid the product right is a performance onchain trading venue hype the token is a claim on none of the revenue directly but the asset purchased and removed through the revenue mechanism which is that buyback hype holders do not receive USDC dividends or anything of that right but the benefit includes platform activity creates fees eligible revenue buys hype purchased hyped is removed from normal circulation. So maybe there is a burn. So is there a burn purchase type is removed from normal circulation. So maybe they are burning it. So far in this uh I just see that it says use eligible protocol revenue to purchase hype. It didn't say anything about burning it. And this is always a fun little spot right here. What you may not know, well, Hyperlid currently

advertises more than 300 spot and perpetual markets. So, there's over 300 markets in Hyperlid. Defi Llama, a great place to get data and information, recorded approximately 229 billion in 30-day perpetual volume and approximately 6.9 to 7.2 billion in open interest at the research snap of when I got this information. So, that's a lot of money. 229 billion in 30-day perpetual volume means people are using Hyperlquid. That's a no-brainer. Hyperlid fee mechanism is much stronger than ordinary governance token promises, but hype holders still lack a legal or contractual right to receive the protocol fees. Unlike traditional stons a lot of times have dividends and a right to the actual company, a token is not a stock. So, Hype's original distribution reserved about 31% from the Genesis or for the Genesis distribution and 38 almost 39% for future emissions and community

rewards. One thing I've noticed so far is if you look at the max supply of a billion tokens, only 220 something million are actually out, meaning there are a lot of tokens to come into circulation at some point. Right. Seller where are we? So there was no stated private investor central exchange or market maker allocation. Hype seems a little bit more grassroot. So major data provides provides currently disagrees on hype circulating supply. That difference changes the reported market capitalization by more than $2 billion. and Hyperliquid's delegated proofofstake system currently uses a relative small active validator set. Coin Market Cap reports 24 active validators while Hyperliquid documentation requires more than 2/3 of stake for consensus. So that's very interesting. And one of our favorite things to kick this off is signal verse noise. And signal verse noise. Signal is important.

Noise is obviously unimportant, right? And this is where we do a little bit of of keeping up with the news, right? So, we have the Clarity Act. The Senate vote requires 60 votes and could determine whether US market structure legislation moves forward. Clear jurisdiction could be materially affect could materially affect exchanges, tokens, DeFi interfaces, and derivative markets. basically whatever they decide will affect all the people in the space and that's what is important. Now what is less important or not important is treating every prevote hype or Bitcoin candle as proof that the bill will pass or fail. You know, they love to take something that in the end is going to be relatively important and just make a news cycle and a story and a pump and a dump out of like every single week that somebody talks about

it and then these people don't like it. So now it's not going to happen. But oh wait, they revised it and saved the day and it's back on the table and House passed it, but the Senate hates it and now it's dumping again, you know, and it's just like this whole they make this whole long thing out of the process and make it one big marketing campaign or one big, you know, move the candle or move the price of Bitcoin and it gets old really quick. So, what you want to do if you're feeling the fatigue of a story like that, and there's many of stories like a clarity act or something like that. For the longest time, it was um you know, what is that? Mount Gaus unlocking coins and everybody's going to sell them. You know what

I mean? Um a story like that that hangs around for a long time. And the best thing to do is just be like, okay, when they actually pass something and it's [music] really passed, then I will look at what is in it or I'll watch somebody like me tell you what's in it and then I'll be concerned, right? Then I'll be concerned but with what actually was in it or not in it. Anyways, another story is the Federal Reserve decision is approaching. A September 16th decision comes as inflation and oil prices have increased expectations of a possible rate hike. Not a cut, a hike. You heard me right. Higher rates can reduce demand for leveraged risk. So probably not the best thing for crypto assets for that second. Assuming one rate decision permanently changes Hyperlid's long-term competitive position would

be foolish. Or really all of crypto's long-term position, right? But we are pertaining this back to hype. Hype added to a multi-asset crypto ETF index. So we're getting some exposure here for hype for ETF index. Hashtex added hype to the NCIQ after its inclusion in the NASDAQ CME crypto index expanding regulated exposure to you guessed it hyperlquid. That's what's actually important. But treating index eligibility as proof that a current valuation is inexpensive or undervalued is not necessarily a good idea and not the way to go about it in my opinion. Hypo recently reaches all newtime high. Right? So market demand and liquidity are clearly substantial. But using price appreciation as evidence that the token economics tokconomics no longer need examination is foolish. We do need to know and the number one thing that strikes me here is that there

is a lot of tokens to come into circulation. When are they going to do that? So the regulator vote and Fed decision affects market conditions. Of course they do not answer whether hype is fairly valued though. The token autopsy must still be based on usage, revenue, token mechanics, supply, security, and competition, just like we kind of do for all of them. So, we're going to hit you with a couple of metrics, a couple of figures here, right? So, 30-day perpetual volume, 229 billion. We've already talked about that. It's extremely large trading activity. Nobody could really deny that, right? And 30-day spot volume is about 5 billion. So definitely way more money in perpetual volume than spot volume. But that I would expect that right for spot remaining smaller than pers. I would see that coming. A lot of people

are trying to degenerately like kind of gamble their way into success over on perpetuals. Open interest about 5 billion. Traders are keeping substantial positions open. Total value locked about 6.7 billion. Significant capital is committed to the ecosystem. 30-day fees, 78 million. The platform is monetizing its activity and making dough for the ecosystem. 30-day holder revenue. Well, that's 61.4 billion. A large portion is assigned to token value token holder value capture. So, we like that. A large part of the revenue is coming into the token. So, so far it looks pretty good. So, reported volume in billions, right? Hyperlid. So, this is stacking it up against some of its competitors as you know. You got Hyperliquid, you got Aster, you got Lighter, you got Apex, you have Edge X and other variations. Hyperl's got them beat. We don't have to

go through all of these. I'll look at like the top three. You know, Hyperlid 229 billion, second best 68 billion, third best 52 billion. That's a big jump. So, what you need to know is Hyperlid is on top of all of that. All right, cool. We're caught up on the chat. All right, what job does Hype the token actually perform? Well, we know network staking validators and delegators stake hype to secure HyperBft. The limitation is rewards come from future emissions. So staking also creates more supply. So that's inflationary. Hyper EVM gas applications require hype for network execution. Gas demands remain smaller than trading business though. Trading discounts. Of course, stakers can qualify for lower trading fees. Very common across a lot of different whether it's a centralized or decentralized exchange. If you hold a large amount of the native

token or their token for their centralized or decentralized exchange, you a lot of times get a discount on the daily fees. So, the benefit is strongest for active and high volume traders. Obviously, if you're a high volume trader holding and having those discounts, it's going to be worth a lot more to you. Uh, hip three, deployment. A builder currently needs 500,000 stake hype to deploy a perpetual deck. Whoa, what would that even be? That's a lot of money. Creates concentration because the requirement is extremely expensive. High barrier to entry to deploy a perpetual DEX on Hyperlid governance and validator voting. Stake influences consensus and certain pool decisions. So if you're staking, you can have [music] some influence over the consensus and protocol decisions. Control depends on stake concentration and validator participation. Asset deployment. Hype is involved in native market

deployment and auction activity. And again we are talking about hype the token not the project here. So hype the token is involved in native market deployment and demand can fluctuate with builder interest. Buyback and burn target eligible protocol revenue purchases hype. No direct cash distribution or guaranteed future fee policy, but it does look like they are burning it. When I read this before, it was talking about buyback. You know, that eligible revenue would buy. Um they they never really came and said burn, right? So, Hyperliquid's official staking documentation says validators need 10,000 hype in selfdelegation. Delegators face a 7-day staking to spot Q and staking rewards come from future emission reserves. It also says automatic slashing is not currently implemented for ordinary consensus staking, which is good because slashing can really get you messed up in the game. This

HIPP 3 adds another source of demand. Builders must maintain, not just have, but maintain 500,000 stake hype to deploy a perpetual deck. And that stake can be slashed for certain harmful behavior. So, this is how they're keeping everybody in line. You put 500,000 stake up and then you do something stupid and you get slashed, you better have made a lot of money because they're going to hit you right where it hurts in the pocket. All right, tooken necessity. Hype is not an unnecessary governance token. [music] Without hype, the current system would lose. And again, this is basically saying if you took Hyper token away from the ecosystem tomorrow, how much effect would that have on Hype Hyperlid? Well, it's a staking asset, so it' be a big deal. It's used for security. It's the gas native asset, so that's

a big problem moving things around. Uh, of course, the feed discount system, that would suck for some big players, but you could live without it. The staking and native gas, that's you can't live without that, right? Its builder bond, its deployment economy, and buyback and burn target. So, hype has a very high utility score. I love this follow the money, right? because it always gives us a graph or a little chart, not a graph, but a little chart, right? So, you have trading activity, there's traders, there's fees collected off of those traders. I think this is so far something everybody can understand. Those fees are split into two different places. The HLP and deployers, some of the fees go there, some of the fees go to an assistant fund. That assistant fund is what buys hype and removes or

burns, right? So, as we always talk about a burn, burn is very bullish, but we have to know a mission. We can't get excited about coins being burned until we know how many coins are coming out. One project that we talked about burnt a million coins in the previous year, but they had put out 5.5 million coins in emission, meaning you were about 4.5 million coins short of deflation and you were in in inflation, right? So, keep that in mind. Whenever we talk about burns, you need to be thinking, and I hope you're raising that crypto IQ here. And the first thought that comes in your head when we start talking about buybacks or burns is well how much coins are coming into circulation while this is going on. So DeFi Llama's methodology attributes 99% of eligible core perpetual

fees and 97% of eligible spot fees to the assistant fund. Wow. They went hard on that assistant fund, including builder fees. Across the complete protocol, approximately 61 million of its 78 million in 30-day fees was classified as holder revenue. Wow. So, they were buying back and burning with 61 million. No wonder why Hyperlid has done so well. This is a textbook of what to do to make your coin worth more money. You buy back and you burn supply. You create deflation. Beautiful stuff. But what's going on with those like I don't know 780 something million coins that are still left to come into circulation. And apparently there's some discrepancy over current circulation. So you do have an outstanding supply and I can explain that later if anybody's interested in that. How's everybody doing out there? Let me know that

you are awake. Show me those custom emojis. Consider grabbing a membership. Remember that I got rid of ad revenue for your viewership because everybody was complaining they hated getting hit with ads all the time. So, I would greatly ask you to consider a membership or drop a super chat or something like that. We can easily beat we can easily beat those ad revenues. It wasn't a whole It wasn't a whole lot, but it wasn't nothing either. So, I appreciate your guys' support. All right, let's get past this chart here. What is this chart? 30-day fees compared to the amount of classifi. Okay, sometimes these charts they give us are not the most valuable. Yeah, just saying how many total fees altogether and of course how many actually went to holder revenue and it's a huge portion. I love that.

So, what makes this unusually strong? And it is unusual to see these type of numbers. Hey, there we go. Struggle of heart. Melissa, thanks for showing me those custom emojis. I appreciate you saying, "Hey, I'm here. I'm listening. We're talking about Hyperlid." Hyperlid is a big player in the game. Is Hyperlid a great ecosystem, but is Hyper the token a better token than most because of the value captured in Hyperlid ecosystem? So, Hyperlid is not waiting for some discretionary quarterly governance vote to consider a buyback. They built that in and I love that. The mechanism converts ongoing platform usage into reoccurring hype purchases. This creates measurable relationship. More profitable trading activity can create more hype token demand that is substantially stronger than a token used only for voting. Ono a protocol whose fees go entirely to a company, a

treasury that may or may not approve future purchases, right? and a vague promise that governance could eventually turn on fee switches. So, the fact that they have it built in these buybacks and burns and it's already doing it and it's been doing it is so much stronger than a promise from anywhere else saying, "Hey, we're going to do something to uh give you some value as a token holder eventually." Yeah. Don't, you know, as they say, don't hold your breath for that type of stuff. Remember, this is never financial advice. This is only research, but man, we are hitting some of these nails right on the head here. So, an important distinction to always remember is that a buyback is not the same as a dividend, right? And a dividend sends value directly to the owner. So, dividend sends

value directly to the owner where like a buyback and burn or just a burn, right, is going to help you in an abstract way by reducing supply and increasing value through scarcity. as long as the burn is sufficiently or is more sufficiently more than emissions. Right? So, Hyperlid uses revenue to purchase Hype the token from sellers and remove those tokens from ordinary circulation. Remaining holders benefit through reduced supply and reoccurring market demand, but they do not receive cash directly. So, we're just making a distinction between what is the crypto asset world and the traditional system and making sure that you understand that there is no, you know, dividend or directly shared value with the owner. They're buying the tokens on the open market and burning it, creating scarcity. That's good though. Scarcity is good for the valuation of your

token. So, does the revenue justify the validation? Our fourth question here, right? Well, using the current 30-day holder revenue, 61 million * 12 is about 736.8 million annualized or yearly. This is a run rate calculation, not a forecast. That would be assuming everything stays the same. I would actually bet by the time you get to a year's time, it's going to be considerably more if we see some some more bullish action in the market, right? So, perpetual future activity is cyclical. Revenue can rise during very volatile markets and contract or slow down right during quiet periods. What do we got here? Current valuation range. So, Coin Gecko circulating market cap of 17 billion. Coin market cap circulating market cap is about 19.4 billion. Fully diluted valuation 73 billion or 70 to about 73.5. Right. Let's not get into that.

An annualized 30-day holder revenue run rate. Remember, a run rate is just projecting it out into the future as if it is not going to change, which I think is kind of pointless, but whatever. 736 million. And we're going to skip a lot of those numbers because a lot of those numbers are not going to help you understand what we're trying to get at. So, a central valuation lesson here is that the circulating valuation makes the buyback mechanism look powerful. the dilution makes the same mechanism look less generous. So that's what we should probably be looking at here dilution valuation. All right, so both statements can be true. Hyperlid may have one of the strongest buyback engines and hype the token may already be priced for a numerous future growth. So what are we saying here? We're saying that

people speculating on hype because of what it is and them knowing how it's built, a lot of the growth of hype could already basically be built in. So, a revenue stress test, right? Let's let's talk about some scenarios. Revenue falls 50%. That's our scenario. Monthly holder revenue is only 30.7 million. The annualized run rate projected out from that is only 368 million and your 17.1 billion market cap multiple is 46 where your 73.5 billion fully diluted value multiple is 200. Current run rate is 61.4. So this is what you currently have right 736,23 and 100. So this would make a big big difference. Revenue doubles is an is another uh scenario, right? So let's say it doesn't fall 50% and the revenue doubles. Well, now you have 122 million 30 days, right? Monthly holder revenue and 1.4 billion annual

run rate. That's the projection out using this number 122 million. Now you have a market cap multiple of 12x and of course your fully diluted multiple of 50x. Some people need those numbers. Some people care less about those numbers. I understand that. Um all right, let's get through some of this stuff. All right, investigation five. So then our fifth question here is supply autopsy. Right. So, this is really what I wanted to get into about the emissions cuz emissions are highly important. Hey, look, there's CLLD. What is this? Landa, I've already told you where to find the pre-sale for your CLLD token. You're just you're just not listening. All right, so future emission and community rewards is about 38.8%. But when are those all coming out? I I have no idea. It just says future emissions. So, at what

point in the future? Hopefully, they're not going to dump 38% at one [music] point. That would be catastrophic. So, Genesis distribution was 31%. And current and future core distribution 23.8%. Hyper Foundation budget 6% and is that from Genesis? Yeah, not yearly. 6%. And community grants.3%. This HIPP 2 liquidity is 012%. That's kind of insignificant. So the positive features here are approximately 31% was distributed through the Genesis event. So like on Genesis creation of the token, 31% of it was already distributed. No allocation was announced for private investors. To me, this is so right here some of the strongest case for hype the token. No private investors were announced, right? at least they didn't tell anybody or for centralized exchange or for market makers. So that's a big deal because that can take up a huge chunk of tokens. The

community related category represents most of the original allocation risk that could be hidden here, right? Future emissions and community rewards is an enormous reserve and I don't think we know exactly when they're coming out. Staking rewards are paid from from that reserve, right? So staking rewards are coming out of this future emission and community rewards which I can see as somewhat as a positive because at that point it's kind of trickling out but I'm not sure how fast it's trickling out. So community allocation does not automatically mean that the community has already received those tokens. Foundation controlled or undistributed reserves can still influence future supply. Current circulating supply though, we'll use this nifty chart here is about yeah 26.4 is circulating. I know you were expecting this small little sliver here to be the uncirculating, but this is probably

the most concerning thing. Not even saying that it's a red alarm here, but it's definitely concerning. 26 is out. 73 is not out yet. Now, they could be highly responsible and they could be looking at this as an extremely long-term product that'll be around for 100 years or longer and they might be doing the right thing by leaving themselves a lot of supply. So the likely explanation is that providers classify release claimed contributor foundation and unavailable balances differently. That is an inference, not proof that either provider is intentionally wrong. So you're getting some different numbers in some different places and they're saying the way that they're classifying it is not necessarily the same and that that's why you're getting different numbers. So use a range rather than pretending there is no uncontested number. Do not treat unlocked tokens as

automatically circulating and don't treat circulating as automatically available for sale. Track contributors distribution and exchange deposits separately and use the diluted valuation as the stricter burden test. diluted valuation becoming one of the more important metrics there when we can't really figure out what exactly the circulating supply is. Make sure you smash that like button for me. So the buyback versus the unlock rate to me this is the meat of the matter. So hype was opposing supply forces, right? It has two supply forces that oppose each other and it's in every coin really and that is reduction versus emission or what's being taken out and what's being put in to the circulating supply. So trading revenue purchases hype. We've been over this. Assistant fund holders are treated as removed or burned. So those funds are burned. Hyper EVM fees can

also be burned and hip deployment and slashing can be removed as additional hype. Supply expansion though where we haven't spent near as much time. Core contributor tokens continue vesting or coming out into circulating supply. Staking rewards are paid from the emission reserves. So the emission reserves are trickling out in the form of staking rewards. Future community programs can distribute additional tokens and foundation controlled allocations may enter circulation as well. Higher token prices increase the dollar value for every future unlock. I would like an actual number though, right? [music] How many dollars of hype were actually burned, right? So there you would take the net supply chain equals newly circulating tokens minus permanently removed. A billion-dollar historical burn does not automatically defeat a multi-year schedule supply schedule, right? Just cuz they burn a lot at one time doesn't always mean

that it's going to win out in the long term against what [music] is coming in. The answer always depends on the number of tokens that are actually locked, the number of actual claim tokens, number of deposited on exchanges, hype purchase and burns, staking emissions, and demand from new buyers. Now let's get into their competitors because in this space although Hyperlid has kind of been crowned king they still have competitors right. So liquidity large volume and open interest improve spread execution and liquidation capacity that attracts serious traders which can attract more liquidity. [music] It's kind of a continuous thing and this is what they're doing well. So, they're doing well on liquidity vertical integration. Now, we're going to get into some kind of like, you know, decentralized exchange talk that maybe you understand, maybe you don't, [music] but try to

hang in here with me. Hyperlid controls its purpose-built chain, matching engine, order books, margin system, and bridge relationships, staking layer, and EVM components. So, Hyperlid themselves have been in control of most of what's going on, and they don't have a ton of third-party people involved where things could go terribly wrong or there could be disputes about ownership or money. They pretty much built everything inside of Hyperlid. They have onchain transparency because positions, liquidations, trades, and wallet behavior can be examined publicly rather than hidden inside a centralized exchange. right there. They've got most centralized exchanges beat because you can't see none of that stuff on a centralized exchange. Product speed. Hyper core is optimized specifically for financial execution instead of inheriting the limits of generalpurpose chain. [music] So it is a very customizely built chain hyper core for trading and

it's got [music] the speed builder ecosystem. in this hip 3 lets outside builders deploy perpetual markets while using hyper core trading infrastructure and remember they must maintain 500,000 hype. So that's really good for the token expanding market categories. They've done very well. Hyperlid has expanded beyond crypto into commodities, equities, indices, foreign exchanges and outcome markets. They're much more than a cryptotrading decentralized exchange. They are kind of [music] anything they can get their hands on trading decentralized exchange, which means that they're going to bring in people who maybe are not even interested in crypto. Maybe they're only really here for equities and indices. Flipping the coin, where are they most valuable? Sorry, where are they most vulnerable against their competitors? Well, traders can cap can move capital rapidly when they feel like it. If they find a better opportunity, they

can certainly move very quickly their capital and [music] that can happen almost overnight. Aster, lighter, edgex and other venues continue competing on fees, right? Incentives and privacy and execution. So, if their competitors are able to give a much better deal on fees and things, you will see people move over there. Centralized exchanges retain large distribution networks and easier fiat onboarding. So that's really centralized exchange claim to fame is that they do a better job at onboarding on and off ramping, if you will, fiat dollars into bank accounts and stuff like that. I don't think Hyperlid even has a function for that. Hyperlid's network and flagship exchange share the same operational and reputational risk. HIP 3 activity has been heavily concentrated into one major deployer rather than broadly diversified. Galaxy reported that trade XYZ accounted for more than 90% of

HIP 3 open interest [music] and approximately 98% of builder market volume in a snapshot. That's some concentration even inside decentralization. And if a player buys a big enough piece of the pie and you're kind of right back into centralization, that makes Hip 3 growth real but less diversified than the headlines may suggest. How secure is it? How secure is Hyperlid? If you're using it, how much do you have to worry about their bridge, per se? Anybody tell me the difference between a bridge and an atomic swap? Anybody know the difference between a bridge and an atomic swap? That's a bonus question, right? If you can answer that, uh, I will give you some kind of prize. So, HyperBft requires more than twothirds of staking to reach a consensus. Hype the token staking gives validators and economic interest in network

security because it is proof of stake. Staking is what secures the network. A 7-day withdrawal queue makes rapid stake exit extremely difficult. And Hyperliquid publishes a bug bounty program covering node and API failures. So they are basically paying people to come out there or sit at their computer somewhere and try to find these bugs that could have cost people tons of money, but they're being paid by the good guys, Hyperlquid themselves, to find those problems. So that gives you some hope that due diligence has been done. So the legacy bridge received Zelic audit. So they've been audited by Zelic. So that's interesting. I don't know anything specifically about Zelic. Order execution and liquidation activity are publicly inseparable. Inspectable sorry they are transparent. You can see everything going on between execution and liquidity. But where is the weakness in the

security? Well, approximately only 24 active validator is a very small set of validators compared to older major layer 1 networks. How many validators do you think are going on with Salana? How many how many validators do you think Salana has? Let's check out this chat here. Doesn't the bridge wrap the tokens? Yes. Where an atomic swap is going to move them directly. The difference is a bridge is moving one thing to another thing that do not communicate with each other. They don't have the same code and stuff. Where an atomic swap is moving coins to another layer one or another system, right? Another ecosystem that does share an ability to communicate with each other, right? That's the difference. Bridge is for uh form different blockchain network to another. Yes, that's what a bridge is for. Absolutely. So the weakness

is in security for hyperlquid only 24 active validators that is very small. Consensus influence is stake weighted. So validator count alone does not reveal decentralization. Atomic or sorry I just said atomic way too many times. Automatic slashing is not presently implemented for ordinary consensus staking. So, Hyperlid custom chain and trading engines have a shorter operating history than a mature network. Aka Hyperlid hasn't been around as long as say Salana or Ethereum. Public audit information is limited relative to the amount of capital and leverage the system handles. and validator interventions can protect the protocol while also demonstrating discretionary control. The jelly lesson is this jelly jelly. All right, let's talk about something that happened once upon a time in March 2025. A manipulation of the Jelly token market left HLP with a large distress position. Validators delisted the market and

forcibly settled positions. HLP's unrealized loss reportedly reached approximately 13.5 million before the intervention. The event supports two opposing interpretations, right? Constructive interpretation or positive is that validators acted quickly. They limited systematic damage and protected the broader platform. Critical interpretation or the bearish interpretation is that a small group could coordinate, remove a market and determine settlement during a crisis, meaning there is some control there. Both interpretations belong in the autopsy because both are actually quite factual or have a point to them. So the question is not whether intervention was good or bad in isolation. It is how much discretion should a decentralized exchange validators have when protecting solvency conflicts with predictable market rules. Basically there's kind of two camps here, right? So, if you're somebody who's like, I like feeling safe. Well, then you're like, oh, the validators acted so

quickly and they limited the uh, you know, ability for this to seep into other parts of the market, right? Systematic damage and protected the broader platform. the code is law, Bitcoin maximalist or just like decentralization maximalist is going to say, "Oh, well, how come a small group could just like remove a market and then determine how they're going to settle this crisis?" That's [music] not crypto or something like that. So, who's right? I don't know. I think if I had a bunch of money in it, I'd still be pretty happy that I was protected. I I wouldn't be mad at that. Struggle heart says atomic more direct. Yes, an atomic swap is far more direct because an atomic swap is used when you can communicate where the two where you're where you're moving your coins from to where you're

moving your coins to those two ecosystems are actually able to communicate with some kind of in uh common code, right? Or compatibility. And so they can actually literally move the tokens from one ecosystem to another ecosystem versus a bridge is wrapping and locking tokens and then giving you a representation of those tokens in the new ecosystem, right? And if you were to move them back, they would just lock them on the other side or delete them on the other side and then unlock them on the side that you would originally move from. I hope that makes sense, right? So, users risk. Hyperlid can be non-custodial while still exposing users to substantial risk. So, what we're saying here is non-custodial sounds really, really good, but there is still, of course, some risk when you're anywhere. If you have money anywhere

at any point, there is always going to be some kind of risk. Trading risk, of course. Leverage magnifies losses. Who knows about that leverage magnifying losses? Okay, so there's trader risk, of course, that should be the more obvious risk. Funding payments can make a correct long-term thesis unprofitable. So, you got to pay attention to your funding payments. Liquidation can occur before the market eventually moves in the expectated direction. Meaning, you know, you you make a position and it goes against you and you get liquidated. Thin markets are more vulnerable to manipulation. That's something I think everybody should pretty much know. But how many people even look at how thin or not thin the market is before they get involved in trying to trade perpetuals on some brand new meme coin? Protocol risk is more the risk that I would

have been expecting to look at, right? Consensus failure is possible. Now, in no way am I saying these protocol risks are likely to happen. I'm just saying that the risk is risk, right? consensus failure, bridge failure, oracle failure, liquidation engine failure, validator intervention, and smart contract or EVM application failure. We're just saying these are all the places in crypto that we know sometimes things break. Not saying Hyperlid in any way, shape, or form is going to have these problems. The token risk is separate though from a protocol risk. You have the volatility of the token contributor unlocks staking emissions. emissions is is new coins coming into circulation. High diluted valuation, it's kind of the same thing. Revenue contraction, meaning less money coming in for revenue, contracting getting smaller. Competition reducing actual volume because other people are trading on other

decentralized exchanges. And fee policy changes can overnight change. if they get together and they say, "Hey, that's cool that we've been doing all that buyback and burning, but how about we do this new program um called buyback and put it in our pocket and they change a fee policy and now what you maybe double triple down on the token because had such great fee policy, they changed it." What we're what I'm really trying to say here is understand that no matter how good things look for uh buybacks and burns and all stuff all that is controlled by the governance and the governance can I'm not saying they will but the governance can change that pretty much whenever they take a vote on it if they even need a vote on it that's a totally different thing between just a

governance arm right or an actual decentralized autonomous organization commonly known as a DAO Does it have a DAO where people vote or does it just have a governance round table where people make decisions? Now for Hyperlid specifically, it seems like you do have voting governance rights delegated through staking. So you got to stake in order to get those rights to governance. Regulatory risk of course per uh perpetuals futures remain one of the most sensitive areas of crypto regulation. Why? because they make money and [music] these people want a piece of that money. They're not going to just let you make money. Hyper liquid attempts to restrict certain jurisdiction, but regulatory changes could still affect interface, liquidity providers, builders, users, and institutional access. Now, as we lay out all of that, we have to do our due diligence to turn

around and say this is the strongest. Uh oh, I'm getting ahead of myself. Yeah. No counterargument, right? Strongest bull case. So, we really want to be transparent and lay out all the different things. So, all of what we just laid out here is the strongest bull case for Hyperlid and then of course the hype token. So, Hyperlid has achieved something most crypto networks have not. A product people uh repeatedly use over and over and over and still has demand. Most crypto projects will never have that. Billions of dollars in open interest, hundreds of billions in monthly trading revenue, substantial reoccurring fees, a token required for network security and builder participation, a mechanism that turns activity into continual token purchases, no traditional private investor allocation, not so many insiders, and expanding products through EV uh Hyper EVM, Ethereum virtual machine

hip 3 and outcome markets. HIP 3 is very much about who can build you know markets on hyperlquid. So if onchain markets continue taking activity away from centralized exchanges and hyperlid remains a primary venue today's valuation could represent the early stages of much larger financial network. I personally lean towards that is the case. But shifty shifty, lots of crazy things happen both in the world and in the crypto market. Almost every time you're like, "This is going to happen. I know it's going to happen." It doesn't happen. I'm just saying that's not financial advice. That's just my experience. When you're like, "This coin is the coin. Let me put all my money in it." It goes to zero every single time. So, what am I really trying to say here? Be careful. And you might want to think twice

when you decide that you're going to throw all your money in one place. That that might be a little bit of a red flag like, "Hey, I I'm I'm opening myself up to far too much um risk by doing something like that, right? The strongest bare case hype is being valued like Hyperlid has already won. So, it's overvalued. That's the strongest bare case in a nutshell. Hype the token is overvalued. So the current dilution valuation is above 70 billion. While most of the original supply is not circulating, revenue is heavily tied to leverage trading and market volatility which is volatile and could change at any time. Validator participation remains limited and past intervention demonstrate that the platform is not neutral under every emergency. If trading activity slows, competitors take market share. Regulation limits perpetual products or future supply reaches

the market faster than it is burned or removed. An excellent product can still produce disappointing token returns. So, right now, if we're up on a high and you're buying Hyperlid at what it's priced at right now, there are some some things that can happen, right? Uh we don't we we stay in a bare market much longer than you think. Now, all of this would be completely contentious or matter depending on how long you planned on holding it. If you were buying Hyperlid right now and you were looking at like a 4-year cycle and you were thinking 3 years from now, 2 and 1/2 years from now, I'm going to sell this thing at a much more than it is now, then you're probably, in my opinion, have a good chance of making high return. If you were saying, I'm

going to sell it in 10 years, probably even better. But sometimes if you hold it longterm, what if you know regulators really get in there and they crank down the gears on perpetual products that could hurt you long term, but hopefully you'd be paying enough attention that you could adjust. Anyways, I'm [music] just saying there are many things that could happen even if I believe that Hyperlid is on top and is probably going to stay on top no matter even if a competitor takes a little bit of share away from them. All right, the uncomfortable middle. So a bull case is the strongest at the product level. So the most bullish thing is hyperlquid the product. The bare case is the strongest at the valuation and decentralization levels. Right? Those were the problem. The tension defines the score. So

let's get into the actual score here. Uh let's see. Benjamin uh Moral Hype is Hyper is a scam. All right, Benjamin, I recognize that name, I believe. I hope you smash that like button. I hope you know that this is a very neutral token autopsy where we are deep diving and researching the token and the ecosystem of Hyperlid's ability to capture value for the token, which is the most important [music] thing for anybody who owns Hyperlid token. So, I hope you don't think that this is a we're a bunch of cheerleaders for Hyperlid. All right, that's all I have to say about that, but I do want to reinforce that for anybody just coming in. So, real utility and adoption, it gets a 19 out of 20. Almost a perfect score in that category. Token value capture is an

18 out of 20. And it does have some of the best token value capture I've ever seen with a token. And you want to know what the proof of that is? Look at how it has gone up, right? Look how Hyperlid has gone up over its lifetime, right? I'm going to say that this is largely up and to the right because of that buyback and burn system, right? [music] That's that's my uh thesis here. Benjamin, what's up? I knew I recognized that name. Thank you for being here. And of course, we're going to do many, many, many token autopsies. You don't have to agree with the token. Maybe you learn something, maybe you don't. I would love to hear why you think it's a scam. Certainly, we've laid out a lot of different things here. They they certainly do

make all of their money off of fees and stuff. So, they're charging people money far more than maybe other people. So, let's go through this again. Real utility and adoption. and they got a really good score and token valuation capture which is probably some of the most important stuff here is got a good score now tokconomics and supply there's a lot left wanting not so great in my opinion it could be a lot better I wish I could get some real numbers on a mission [music] and and like not just a bunch of percentages and stuff like give me actual numbers of tokens coming out in its supply but it's so much dependent on staking and staking rewards and stuff. So, it does change quite a bit. Competitive mode right now against their competitors, they're actually doing pretty good.

They get a 14 out of 15. Security and decentralization, it actually only gets a five out of 10 because it's security and decentralization. They did pretty good for security, but they really didn't do so good for decentralization, right? Catalyst and execution actually got a 9 out of 10. So, they have been stacking up some pretty good scores here, but risk an unanswered question is the category where it scored the lowest, a four out of 10, giving it a 77 out of 100. So, and that's just this is just a chart that represents what we just talked about. And then I have explanation for each one of these ready to be posted over on Twitter. So, make sure you follow me over on Twitter where I will be posting uh a detailed understanding [music] of each verdict. Right. So, for

us, the way that this token autopsy report works is that it need a token needs to hit an 80 or above to be like a we want this token. A watch token is kind of like we're just watching it and then of course well 80 and above is what we call pass, but it's kind of like it passes aka it does a good job and we want this token, right? Or I want this token, not you guys. You guys do what you want. So hype is obviously not a useless token and is not merely a governance token. It is disconnected from the product. It's not disconnected from the product. Right. And I feel like I have hit you guys with a ton of information and I could keep going as I have plenty more information to hit you with.

This is what I want. The updated leaderboard. So, so far this week, right? Oh, wait. We have everything here. So, so far we've done seven of these token autopsies. We do three to four usually four a week, right? But I missed one cuz I was doing a interview of somebody who you guys uh should know and that'll be out sooner than later, right? So, Token A has so far got the only pass necessarily. Avalanche gets a conditional pass, which is an an odd ranking here. Most of these are in the watch category and H bar scores in the speculation. So, Hyperliquid is up there. It's coming in at number two so far for what we have actually gone over. We are going to continue to go over lots of tokens and uh evaluate them. So, so far a hyperlid

and avalanche are top three and I will definitely post that in the Discord for everybody. I am working on organizing the discord even more like I've told a lot of people I will have my third child born uh and it's a boy uh sometime in like the next week slashw week and a half you know these things uh they're not given an exact day right so with that being said I've got a lot going on right so have some mercy on me I will have a lot of this information put together and collectively organized inside the discord board for everybody. But I I just posted this at least leaderboard update even though if I don't like the way that it posted. I probably should have did a screenshot. Anyways, things are somewhat kind of pulling back. Let's go take

a look at Le Trading View. I don't know why I got used to saying it like that. Let's take a look at Trading View real quick. All right. So, we were in this range, right? And when we lost this range right here, it really began to dump. Now, 200 day moving averages are s are extremely uh So, 200 day moving averages are extremely valuable. Hyperlid says no, it ain't been. Hey, Blues Guy. Uh maybe just ask him why he thinks it's a scam, right? Anyways, we had this range, right? So, we had this beautiful pump. We had this range we were in. We lost it. Are we seeing like a dolphin dip before we get the pump? It's pretty common, right? So, here here's what I want to say that's kind of obvious in my opinion. Right under here

in this area is where all the liquidity or uh stop losses probably sit for everybody who's going long. So what do what do they do? They dip down. They hit them. Now you have the 200 day moving average that is really holding you up. I mean you've wicked under it but I mean you are really sitting right on it. And that is usually a place of a bounce. Look at look at the momentum of those candle wicks and how they've started to slow down, right? Can kind of look at it like right and it begins to slow down. Doesn't mean that the dump is over. The dump could just be getting started. But it is a moment of pause and see if it holds that 200 day moving average. Of course, the 1 hour is going to be under

its 200, right? Don't exactly see. Uh, yeah, there definitely is a little bit of divergence there on the hour. Interesting. Let's get back to the 4 hour. In this environment right now, when I'm not day trading and I'm just buying spot bags, to me, this is probably a great time to buy a little bit of some stuff that I was hoping to buy. It wouldn't be Hyperlid because Hyperlid was just at like 50 bucks. Was looking at it the other day, right? Yeah. Down here we we got as low as like $52, $51 I think I saw it at. And I was really thinking about copping some and it just took off. And that happens a lot. Of course, if you look at Sorry, I got to remember I did not switch you guys back over our crypto bubbles.

We'll throw these in here. So, our one through 1,000 pretty much all red, right? 100 to 200 is -4.2. What news do we have around news about All right, so we're going to come back to that news about Clarity Act. Let's look at these crypto bubbles. Most of the stuff that's down is, you know, pretty consistent, right? It's like the whole market's down 5 to 10%, right? give or take a little in each direction. Laptops up 25%. What a joke. On a day where everything is dumping, laptop is going to pump. Laptop is is an absolute joke, right? Um Zcat, Anonymous Cat. Okay, so like Ze and we haven't done this in a while. I want to take a look at that fear and greed index. And because we haven't looked at it in a little bit, let's go

actually take a look at the history of it in the last seven days. H let's look at the monthly. It's just easier to look at, right? It's been pretty consistent. September 9th. September 10th, it was at 56. 63 on the 11th, 61, 57, 69, and then pull back to 51. So yesterday, this thing was at 69 and we pull back to 51. I've said many times I I wouldn't mind coming back to this neutral zone and hanging out here. Maybe even a tiny bit of fear as we consolidate. Not because I want to see us slow down and lose steam in this pump, but because what goes straight up comes straight down. We very much want to consolidate at certain levels, build strong support and then manage to pump, not just shoot straight up. Cigar, how you doing? Kumar

his side. Hello, sir cigar. Kumar his side. I don't know what that means, but thank you for being here and I recognize the name. Let's rally back to some news here. All right. So, the verdict is Senate failed to advance the Clarity Act in its first major procedural vote. Again, the first major procedural vote. The bill needs 60. Now, remember, they will vote on these things many, many, many, many times. And almost never do they pass. Almost never do they pass on the first vote. So, there's that. They kind of vote. They see who thinks what. And then they go kind of offer each other things and say, "Hey, man. I'll give you a nice back rub if you'll just vote yes. And by back rub, I mean millions of dollars or something of that nature, or you vote

yes on this and I'll I'll vote yes on something that you want me to vote on, right? They scratch each other's backs and stuff. It's weird. It It's very weird. But anyways, the Clarity Act failed and the market responded to it. It's stupid because it's not like the Clarity Act is done or has been killed, right? So, let's read about it just a little bit. This was not yet a final vote on whether the on whether to make the bill a law. It was just a procedural vote needed to begin moving the legislation through the Senate. Aka, nobody had any idea what any of this how anything works. and they saw it didn't get enough votes and then they all freaked out and sold stuff. That's what I'm saying. Or it's very clear and obvious manipulation. But because the

bill failed to reach the required 60 vote threshold, it cannot continue through the normal floor processes right now. So the clean read here of course is that after more than years of negotiation, Congress still has not assembled a bipartisan coalition needed for comprehensive US crypto market structure legislation. Republicans had already made major lastminute changes as they had revised it just recently. So, the version brought to the Senate incorporated more than 100 change requested during the negotiations, including a revision of, drum roll please, government official crypto conflicts of interest, stable coin rewards, software developers, DeFi, CFTC jurisdiction, the SEC jurisdiction, state consumer protection powers, and anti-money laundering requirements. The final Republican draft also incorporated much of the bipartisan ethics proposal that gave state attorney general some role in enforcing conflict of interest provisions involving public officials. Uh they can just

use other people in their family to do stuff. They don't have to buy it themselves. It's a really a nothing burger. So the clean read is that this did not fail because lawmaker has done nothing. It failed after extensive compromise which shows how difficult the remaining disagreements are or that you know it's all pretty much uh a big game and they ultimately know what they're going to do but they got to make it look good for the camera and also they can use it to twist each other's arms and kind of get what they want, right? Why give up so easily when you could use it as an opportunity to get somebody's uh favor? get a favor from somebody in your pocket. So software developer protection became a major sticking point. So one particularly important issue for blockchain industry

was protection for developers who build software but do not control the user funds. meaning and they had a big something to do with developing but then they kind of handed it over to the people who paid them to develop it and they don't they shouldn't be responsible right for what they decide to do with it. They just built a product. It's like if I build a table or a chair out of wood and then you buy it from me and then you use it to kill your neighbor. Am I somewhat responsible because I built the table because I built the chair? Or are you responsible because you decided to use it in uh an unnecessary way? Yes, please don't forget to hit that like button everybody. So, the latest version narrowed some of those protections. Rep. Tom Emmer and

some crypto industry participants objected to weakening the criminal law Safety Harbor for non-controlling developers. that matter for de that matters for DeFi because the central question is when when does someone who writes or publishes decentralized software become illegally responsible for what other people do with it? Again, if you make something and you somebody buys it from you or somebody pays you to make something for them, why should you be responsible with what they do with that thing? I mean, the most obvious thing would be like a gun. If I'm a gun manufacturer and I make firearms, let's say, theoretically, uh, and I give that firearm to somebody who bought it from me or hired me to make something custom and then they do something crazy. Why would I be responsible for that? All right, enough of that. Stable coin

rewards are still caught in the bank verse crypto fight. Of course, stable coin rewards are probably one of the biggest problem for the bank and the bank has had their money entrenched inside of Congress and Senate and House and everybody in the system uh forever and I don't know it'll ever change. I needed that so bad. All right. So, of course, banks are not happy about the rewards that crypto is giving because remember that your average interest, not talking about a high yield interest, but your average interest from a bank is 01%. And you could get 4% for USDC pretty much any day of the week just on Coinbase, which is relatively a trusted facilitator, right? So, that's a problem for banks because if mainstream really gets to see that, they're not going to want to give people are

not going to want to give banks their money, at least not their savings. They might have a bank account where they pay bills out of, but they're not going to want to keep all of their money in a bank. So, banks have been pushing lawmakers to restrict stable coin rewards because they argue yield bearing stable coins could pull deposits away from traditional banks. See, here's the funny thing that here's the part about this that I find just absolutely laughable. The banks don't even have a good argument as to why they should be allowed to remain relevant. They're just like, "Hey, they're going to take my customers." It's like, yeah, that's called capitalism. It's called free capital. It's called uh the people who innovate and have the best product. The customers get to choose who they want to use. And

if you suck, then they don't use you and that's your problem. Try not sucking banks. Like banks maybe try to not suck and stop stealing all the money that you make off of everybody's money and give people who gave you the money uh some of the cut of that money. It's a no-brainer. But their whole thing is like, hey, they're pulling deposits away from traditional banks. As if like money in traditional banks is our problem. That's their problem. The bank is their business, right? Their charter. That's their business. They're making gobs of money off of that traditional bank. Why do we care if they get to have deposits? It's stupid. [music] And I will I will end my rant there, but it's just like they don't even have a good reason. I just think it's funny how out in

the open the banks are saying all of this and they're not even trying they're not even trying to spin it and act like they have a good reason for why they should be given power protected or allowed to be competitive. It's like then if you want to be competitive, just offer your people in the bank more money as yield as you know depositing or what do you call it? U interest, right? Just offer them more interest and then now you'll be competitive with crypto. But they don't want to do that cuz it's a lot of money. What do you think the difference is between 01 and [music] 1% interest? Now, what do you think the difference is from 01% interest to 4% interest? Some some places are given six right now with Morpho with Morpho on Coinbase, speaking of

a more secure place, right? Not like a 30% APY on some strange DeFi lending platform. But 6 point something% on Coinbase is great. The banks could never touch that. Anyways, crypto companies argue that overrestrictive rules would protect banks from having any competition. Wow, there's a thought and the limit stable coin product development that disagreement remain part of the negotiations going on today. And of course, who do you think senators pockets are being lined by? I mean, I don't know. Crypto's got money. Maybe they need to get in there and throw some money around. Lolo says, "You sound like Satoshi." Right on, man. Hey, I I I feel that. Hey, I just like to go with what is the most obvious common sense? And it's like what what other business gets to like have competitors come into their space and

then go cry to Senate and be like, "Well, we don't want them here because they're giving a better deal to our customers and our customers are going to go over there because they get a better deal." It's like, "Yeah, that's called business, bro. That's called capital. Banks are funny, but banks are so used to getting everything that they want because they're banks. So, this is not a simple Washington versus crypto. Traditional banks and crypto companies are fighting over who gets to control the next generation of dollar accounts and payments. And I'll tell you who it should be, not the traditional banks. So, ethics remained on the other major political obstacle. So, then they argued about ethics. Democratic negotiators remain concerned about rules governing crypto businesses tied to senators and government government officials. Their objections included questions around enforcement and

whether state attorney generals could directly pursue pursue violations involving the president or other federal officials. Huh. I wonder why Democrats would be concerned if they could go after a president for cryptoreated stuff using the state attorney generals. Huh. I wonder why they would want to know that. I wonder why that they I wonder why they would want that to be included cuz they haven't gone after him enough times, right? And failed every single time. And I don't want to come across as a, you know, a maximalist for the president or anything like that because I like to stay more objective. But it's just funny like when we get into these things that the Democrats tend to only really want to talk about the stuff that like somehow favors their ability to carry forward carry forward their agendas that they're

already doing and never like hey pay attention to what we're actually doing and like care about the actual bill and care about what's actually going on and stop just only caring about what benefits you and your political agenda. Not saying that Republicans are all that much better. So, is it dead? No. And not automatically, right? So, Senator Tom Tills made a procedural vote switch that preserves the possibility of bringing the measure back for reconsideration. However, the congressional calendar is increasingly tight ahead of November's midterm elections. Routers reported that the legislation could potentially be reconsidered while some Capitol Hill participants are already questioning whether there is enough time to support left in the Congress. to to get support, right? So, we wouldn't say the Clarity Act is dead. Uh we would say that they're going to take a very very

very very very long time before they come back to it. So, the Clarity Act failed its first major senator floor test today. It can technically come back, but lawmakers still have to solve the bipartisan disagreement that prevented it from reaching 60 votes. All right. And we're not going to go into why it matters and all of that stuff. I think I have given you guys enough of that. Louble Ozo in the house. I love seeing that name in the chat. I love saying that name actually. It just rolls off the tongue. Says, "What's up, Blues Guy?" So, there is another stream happening in about I don't know 12 minutes. And it's a gaming stream and it's called Craft World or something like that. I keep trying to bring you new games, right? New games, new games, new games. So,

a new game is on the horizon and radar. Please come over to the other stream. And that's all I really have to say. I will catch you in about 12 minutes when we do another stream. Are you not entertained? Smash that like button and buy a membership because and I honestly am at the point with saying like, "Buy a membership. Please support it. It's $3. There's higher tiers or you could support more if you have it, but like $3 to support the type of work I do is highly appreciated. And I spend hours and hours and hours. So, I feel like I should be able to confidently say, "Hey, please support me for three bucks, right? Can I can I say that with some confidence?" All right, struggle everybody. Crypto run out. Stay underground. Stay crypto. Think long term.

And I'll catch you in the next video, which is in like 12 minutes. See you then.