Bitcoin's 4-Year Cycle Is Running Ahead of Schedule — Should You Go All In?
A crypto market analysis show hosted by Rob of Digital Asset News, joined by co-host Jerry from Costa Rica, examining Bitcoin's position relative to the four-year cycle and broader macroeconomic conditions.
Summary
Rob and Jerry discuss how Bitcoin is currently running approximately a year ahead of the traditional four-year halving cycle, being only 32% down from its 2025 all-time high compared to the 70% drawdown seen at the equivalent point in the previous cycle. Jerry argues that the four-year cycle framework is becoming less relevant as institutional capital, sovereign wealth funds, and family offices replace retail hobbyists as the dominant demand force. The conversation expands into macroeconomics, covering rising Treasury yields, M2 money supply expansion, inflation, and national debt — with Jerry arguing that traditional definitions of recession no longer apply in the modern monetary environment. Both hosts conclude that while the directional case for Bitcoin and hard assets remains strong, timing the market precisely is impossible, making dollar-cost averaging the preferred strategy over going all in.
The episode also covers a detailed analysis of why certain layer one blockchains succeeded while others stagnated: Jerry argues that DOT, Cardano, and early Avalanche lost ground to Solana, Tron, and Ethereum primarily because the latter group recognised and captured the stablecoin market early. The co-hosts use Polkadot as a cautionary example and note that the core layer one investment thesis — will something built on this chain reach a billion users? — remains valid. Jerry highlights staking and compounding as a distinctive advantage of layer one assets over traditional stocks. The episode briefly addresses Charles Hoskinson's appearance at the UN to discuss a potential energy and blockchain partnership involving Cardano, with Jerry noting that exposure to heads of state could open doors for Cardano and Midnight adoption.
Key Takeaways
FULL TRANSCRIPT
Bitcoin Is Way Ahead of the Four-Year Cycle
Rob: Good Sunday everybody, and we are back again. There is something notable happening — the markets, traditional markets, are a little bit ahead, but our market, the Bitcoin and digital asset space, is way, way, way ahead of schedule as we take a look at the four-year cycle. So the question then is: if we are way ahead of schedule, should we go all in? Or are there some concerns — talks about bubble popping, recessions, debt, wars, and everything else about to crawl up the wall of worry? We'll take a look at that. But first, Jerry from Costa Rica, how you doing buddy?
Jerry: Hey Rob, I'm doing well, and I want to congratulate you on your other channel. It's doing well too. Good job.
Rob: Yeah, that's a thing I didn't really see coming. So we have this second channel where we just talk about AI, but not in the way a lot of these channels do — comparing Claude to OpenAI, comparing this version to that version, which is faster. I don't care about that stuff. All I care about is the things that actually work for my business and make my life easier. We just did a couple of videos recently. One is where I talked about how I went through a tax audit and how Claude pretty much saved my bacon. The second one we just released, which was only 20 hours ago and already has almost 30,000 views, is about how I take all my websites that used to cost me thousands of dollars per year to host — for security and everything else — and how I just let Claude beat GoDaddy and do it for roughly a dollar per month.
Now, there is a link in the description for my website, Dan Teaches Crypto. It's 100% free and it'll always be free. It's nice because it doesn't cost so much. Under the tools section there's the four-year cycle tool where we can compare what's going on today versus what was happening roughly four years ago. It actually only went out to October 4th, 2027, but for today that didn't make a lot of sense. So I told my developer — who is Claude now — "Hey, I need you to extend this out to the next Bitcoin halving, which is going to happen somewhere between April 10th and April 17th, 2028."
The reason I did this is because I want to show you that as of today, if we take a look at the drop from the all-time highs last year, we were at this point 70% down from the all-time high. Remember this time, Jerry — Celsius and Voyager had already collapsed, Three Arrows Capital was on the chopping block, BlockFi was in trouble, Luna had actually collapsed as well, along with Do Kwon and the whole group. And we were getting into rumblings of FTX collapsing. At that point we were down 70% from the 2021 all-time high, and that was on October 4th, 2022.
Fast forward to today — we are only 32% down from the 2025 all-time high. So I think we are way, way, way ahead of schedule. The question then becomes: when did Bitcoin, four years ago, recover all that ground it had lost? And we're only down 32% now. This is why I extended the tool out so it could actually work. Just pay attention to the four years prior. You know how far ahead we are to only be down 32%? Not 2023. Not September 2023. Not October 2023. Not November. We are a full year ahead already — roughly a year and some change ahead of the game to only be 32–33% down. We can project this out, but I don't think it's going to follow the old pattern exactly. I still believe in the four-year cycles and I still think we could have a pretty nasty Q4. I know no one else believes that anymore, but I'm hoping for it because I continue to dollar-cost average every Monday, buying Bitcoin and altcoins on Kraken. But just doing this analysis, we can make a definitive case that we are way ahead of schedule. Jerry, what are your thoughts?
The Four-Year Cycle and Changing Market Structure
Jerry: Well, the traditional Bitcoin four-year cycle was built on the premise of a supply shock. Every time the halving would happen, the new supply of mined Bitcoin would go in half. The whole premise was built on the fact that as more people got into Bitcoin, the demand side increased — more people coming into Bitcoin — and the supply side being reduced every four years. We would see these jumps, these explosions, these accelerations of price appreciation in Bitcoin based off that cycle.
Rob: It is, for sure. And people will always point to the halving coming up, but it doesn't affect things the way it did in the first halving in 2012, 2016, or the second or the third. And also look at the market cap — look at how big Bitcoin is now compared to where you and I got here. I can distinctly remember seeing the entire crypto industry hit 800 billion dollars and going, "Oh my gosh, this is monumental." Because when an asset class or a particular asset reaches an 800 billion market cap, it starts to become too big to fail. There are too many people invested in it for it to go to zero. I remember that very distinctly in 2018. And now look at us — three-plus trillion, on our way to five.
Jerry: Hello. Hello.
Rob: We'll see if it works out. But I will say there is one thing about the halving — there is a narrative attached to it. Some people will say it's not as important as it used to be, but to me it's kind of like — and I know this is a very loose example — you take a look at things that have been around for a long time and they still advertise. Take Coca-Cola. Why does Coca-Cola keep advertising? Everybody knows about Coca-Cola. The reason they do it is because the more times you see it, the more times you actually think about it, and hopefully the more times you'll buy it.
So when the next halving comes up — April 10th to April 17th, 2028 — you're going to hear people talk about it again. People will ask, "What's a halving?" And people who know about supply and demand will say, "Hey, there's half the supply going down. How much is left? We've already mined over 20 million, so we only have less than a million left to go." When they hear those things, I think people's mentality will start to shift — "Oh, there's a finite supply." It'll be a nice reminder and people will go from there. I understand what people say about it not being relevant, but it is relevant to me in my personal opinion when we're talking about scarcity. What is infinite, what is finite? You can compare that to gold — yes, gold is finite, but it's amazing how much we keep finding and mining. And there are those asteroids I keep hearing about. But that's a ramble. Jerry, your thoughts before we move on?
Jerry: Let me respond to that. I'm not at all saying that the halving doesn't have an important role in Bitcoin or Bitcoin's price appreciation, because it does. It's a supply shock element in this industry. What I'm saying is the four-year cycle doesn't mean what it used to mean. Bitcoin isn't reacting in the same way with these new four-year cycles that it did in previous ones. Therefore, it's kind of like that person who changes and evolves. Bitcoin's changing. It's evolving. It isn't what it was. That's not to say elements within it aren't important — the halving is important, it's huge. But it is not going to dictate everything about Bitcoin, especially around price appreciation. The thing that will dictate Bitcoin is the whales manipulating the market.
Treasury Yields, Inflation, and the Macro Picture
Rob: Maybe. We'll see how that works out. Let's jump forward. Now this is the workbench you can use on Into the Cryptoverse. I named this one "America" — just because. What we're taking a look at are the Treasury yields. Right now you can see the Treasury yields — when in doubt, zoom out. Everybody's talking about the Treasury yields on the 10-, 20-, and 30-year, and you can take a look at three months as well. We can see there's been a nice uptick in Treasury yields. We went to the bottom in 2020 — Treasury yields were, Jesus, they weren't even 1%. So of course, when you have something like that and people are going, "Okay, the S&P 500 might give me 7 to 10%, this is giving me 0.5% — where do you think the money is going to go?" It's probably going to go to more risk-on assets because the guarantee is not as good as it used to be.
We are slowly getting up in trajectory. This only goes to September, but we're at around 5.6%. We are back in the same ranges as we were in the 2007–2008 great recession. I'm not saying a recession is happening, but it is interesting. That's the 20-year Treasury yield. The 10-year pretty much matches the same thing. The 30-year pretty much matches the same thing.
Here's where it gets interesting — personal consumption expenditures, which is essentially inflation. Take a look at this divergence. And then you think to yourself, why the hell did it go up so much? Well, it could be because of this — the money supply. Where did we go vertical? We went vertical right around here with this thing called coronavirus. That is where things went, and this is why we have our inflation rate so high moving forward.
Jerry, your thoughts on this and what it means for global macroeconomics — as we see inflation going up, a potential recession being called, and other walls of worry to climb. Is it a big deal?
Jerry: I think it's important to understand that, like what we were talking about with Bitcoin evolving and changing, our economy is also doing the very same thing. If you remember in the early days of my life, the world had a currency tethered to a commodity. Dollars were connected to gold. I can distinctly remember a conversation my mom had with me — I think I was seven or eight — and she was talking about whether to take some money from an inheritance and have fun with it for a couple of years, or buy a house.
When I look back in historical perspective, there were several ways people could equate value and build wealth. Those assets were real estate, stocks, and bonds. It was pretty much limited to those things.
Now what you're seeing is a whole rotation, because that currency — the unit of measure, the dollar — that would acquire those things has completely changed in the way it holds value and how it transmits value. That is all different. When we got off the gold standard and the government basically set the value of the dollar by the amount of debt they issued against it — bonds, the creation of dollars by banks, the creation of loans — it changed and skewed that whole deal, that whole way things get valued. Hence this massive spending you saw, because people are having to spend more to get the same thing.
When I look at your chart and think about putting this into perspective, I'm thinking about what recession even means now. Back in the old days, recession was when GDP stayed stagnant or declined over a certain number of quarters — I think it was two quarters in a row. If growth didn't increase, if it decreased, they could call it a recession.
Well, we're in an economy now where winners and losers are being identified all the time, but the overall economic output is increasing. So how can you have a recession when the overall economy is rising? You can't — by the terms of the words we're using. You can create new words and call it something different. You could come up with a word for when 80% of the population is losing value year over year, getting poorer year over year — which would seem recessionary to them — but not to the 20% that are increasing. In other words, I don't think we'll ever see a recession again in the terms of what the old recession was. Do I think we'll see more and more disparity in the wealth gap? Absolutely. Do I believe that certain companies will excel and appreciate massively while many others die off or become zombie companies? Absolutely. I just think the world is changing, and I don't think some of the terms that were well-defined through the 70s, 80s, and 90s are going to hold true in the 2020s, 2030s, and 2040s. Recession is one of them.
National Debt, Money Printing, and Trump's Statement
Rob: Yeah. And just take a look at this — if we want to compare the past to the current national debt right now in America, we're looking at $40 trillion. To really put that into perspective, when Jerry was talking about back in the good old days, say the 80s or so — the federal debt to GDP in 1980 was 34%. And we can take a look at the time machine. Go back to 1980 — here's your national debt. Not even a trillion. $915 billion. Debt per citizen was $4,000. And right now I think it's over — let me take a look — debt per citizen: $116,000.
Jerry: Can you take that back to 1970?
Rob: I don't think so. The time machine goes 1980, 90, 2000, 2004, and so forth.
Jerry: I'd be curious to know what our national debt was when the US dollar was tethered to gold.
Rob: Well, I think there's a reason why Nixon did that.
Jerry: We know why he did it — two reasons. One, when you take the cap off, the restrictor off your spending, you can spend more with impunity. When you know that you're the creator of all currency — the US dollar anyway — and you take off the restriction of being tethered to a price of gold, you can spend more because you can create more dollars.
And that, I think, would really come into what the current president of the United States just said, which will kind of sum this all up. President Trump says higher US inflation will pay off US debt very rapidly, in response to the total US debt rising above $40 trillion. And Trump states, "You can pay off the debt through other means, but the one thing you can do is pay it off through growth, and we've never had growth like this before." And of course the US Treasury yields are saying, "Okay, that's a lot of growth and we're not going to be a part of this" — and that's why you've got to pay more to invest in US dollars, because they're seeing some hard times ahead.
Every administration since Nixon went off the gold standard — whether Republican or Democrat — has used the ability to create US dollars to pay off debt. Here's the long story super short. Rob and I are two buddies. Rob's going to lend me $100. We set an interest rate — let's say 1%. Make the math easy. Rob gives me $100. I'm going to pay him $1 a year plus the principal balance I owe him. So I pay the interest with a dollar that I created from a printing press in my garage. I give that dollar to Rob. Rob spends it at the gas station. Rob is introducing more money into the money supply, meaning he is now deflating the value of all the other dollars in the economy when he gets my newly printed dollars and puts them into that economy. And if we do that long enough, I am paying off my loan with cheaper and cheaper and cheaper dollars.
That playbook has been the playbook for every presidency, Republican or Democrat, since we went off the gold standard. And when you hear people like Lyn Alden or these other macroeconomists talking about "the train ain't going to stop, you can't stop this train" — they're talking about that mechanism. The mechanism where the US government, the Treasury, and the Federal Reserve in coordination are using cheaper and cheaper dollars to pay off debt. They believe if they do that long enough, they can offset all of these things. That's the thinking. That's the monetary policy that's been at the heart of all of this. And unfortunately, it has one or two endings — a collapse or a jubilee, like a debt forgiveness, like a bankruptcy.
Rob: Let's hope it's a bankruptcy and not a collapse.
Jerry: Not a collapse. One of those two will actually happen.
Rob: I was just pulling this up as you were talking — there was a little piece of information that QE has already begun with our Treasury, with Bessent buying a load of loans and bonds back. So you have this part, and like you talked about, there's a lot of money printing going on. We can see that inflation is going up and the M2 money supply continues to increase. This is the thesis for owning assets — whatever those assets are — and it totally makes sense to me. I just want to see how bad it can get. So assets to me: real estate, precious metals, and of course Bitcoin and some select few altcoins.
Should You Go All In Right Now?
Rob: That'll lead us to our last piece. Jerry, if we know where things are going, is it a good idea to just go all in right now? Everything you've got, throw the kitchen sink at it — because we took a look at the four-year cycle, things are way ahead of schedule, maybe it's only going to keep going up. Will we just go all in, lump sum, that's it?
Jerry: Knowing the direction and being able to predict chronologically what's going to happen are two totally different things. Knowing where this is going and placing a bet based off of circumstance — would I go all in on something today knowing the direction? Well, I knew the direction five years ago. What I didn't know was when it would materialize. I know the direction. I just don't know the other part of that math equation, which is the when. I know the where, I just don't know the when. And that is the question in the set of circumstances we all have to face as investors. So you and I have come up with methods and means in which we can express that knowledge of where without being tied to a when. I'm going to continue to dollar-cost average into the assets that I believe will be here in 30 years, just like you, without needing to know whether it will explode tomorrow or four years from now or five years.
Rob: Yeah. And then the big question is: how much is enough? How much is "I am tapped out, I don't really need anymore"? Because people will say there is no top, there is no enough — I need to own it all. And I think that's where it becomes different for every single person. This is why YouTubers can't give financial advice — first of all they're not financial advisers, second of all most of them give horrible advice anyway, and third, everything's different for everybody. My goals are not your goals.
But I will tell you — like Jerry had a good point — I don't know what's going to happen tomorrow, but the trajectory over three, four, five, seven years remains the same. I don't know how many pumps and how many downfalls there will be, but I think I'm going to be here for the long haul. So I just take a look at it and say I'm going to have the insurance policy.
The insurance is Ben's stuff, Ivan's stuff, and Wes's stuff. Over on Into the Cryptoverse, I use this every single Monday. I take a look at the risk levels for Bitcoin. I'm buying up to the 0.6 level, which right now would be around 110K. I know it seems ridiculous, but I'm sure we'll hit it again. Below that, I do this thing called dynamic DCA — there's a link in the description and I did a whole video on it. As we go below 0.5, I double up what I usually buy. When we go below 0.4, I quadruple up what I usually buy. And the very rare times when we go below 0.3, I 8x what I usually buy. It hurts sometimes — you're like, "Damn, I can't eat anything." No, I'm just kidding, it's not that bad. But it usually pays off in the long run.
Now taking a look at Ivan's and Wes's stuff — the money line and the SMC bot, just for Bitcoin. We can take a look at the money line. Everything turned bullish on the weekly roughly around 75K. Not too bad. It's not about timing the absolute bottom or hitting the absolute top, because that ain't happening. But there are some good levels. Even though this is red, you have to pay attention to Wes's SMC bot for the buy signal. He did a really good job — 63K. And then of course the buy signals here, sell there, buy there. But again, 75K like we just took a look at.
Q&A — Altcoins, Staking, and Market Analysis
Rob: So when I take a look at this, I'm going to do the same thing. The big question though is what are the altcoin winners? I'm going to leave that up to the audience. Let's get into Q&A. You can ask any question to me or Jerry. You can also throw in your altcoins and we can take a look at risk levels or the money line.
One comment here — A1 Rising says, "Paying to not have ads during live streams and the live cutting out 10 to 15 seconds is extortion, plain and simple." Rising, it's not extortion. Me and Jerry get up at the crack of dawn, do massive exercises, get ready for the show. Jerry is taking his precious time. And time is the biggest commodity out there that you can't replace. I don't care what you tell me — you can replace losses, you can replace houses, you can replace precious metals, even if you get hacked. But you can't replace time. Time is money.
Drummer does remind you that you don't have to pay anything — you can just use Brave browser as an ad blocker, no ads on YouTube for free. It is true, but it does take a cut out of any kind of revenue we generate here on YouTube. Most of that goes to the animal shelter. But if you don't want to do that, you can just use an ad blocker.
Someone says they've been watching since about 2017. We'll just say we're both aging gracefully. The white does come in quite quickly. Before you know it, everything hurts. That's why I got that sauna, Jerry.
And this is a good one — "I didn't follow my own analysis from last year, which predicted a bottom price for Bitcoin of 60K in 2026." That's a pretty good call.
Jerry: And you nailed it actually. Good job, with some small tolerance. But I can tell you the same system predicted $200,000 as the bottom for 2028.
Rob: Wouldn't hurt my feelings.
Jerry: Exactly.
Rob: So I will just tell you — whatever plan you guys have now in the bear market, stick to that plan. Usually it works out pretty well, because this is where we're the most competent. We're not overzealous, we don't have that fear and greed index all the way to the greed side, which really affects our decision-making processes. Whatever that plan is, like Jerry's got — do that.
Someone says, "I almost sold all my Solana for Quant last month." Did you see that big move for Quant, Jerry?
Jerry: I did. I own some Quant.
Rob: Well, good for you. I would ask why, though — why would you sell Solana for Quant? And the reason I would ask why is that Solana is already solidified in that fab four of layer ones that the stablecoin market is growing upon. That is going to be a monster market. As tokenization adoption continues to grow and escalate, that stablecoin market is only going to get bigger and bigger. So why would you get rid of one of the fab four in that segment — the fastest growing element of digital assets — for a layer one project that, although promising, has no real-world utility yet?
Let's take a look at Wes's bot for Solana — it's a buy. And Ivan on Tech — they became bearish at around $160, which is a pretty good price. Then it came down and they turned bullish at around $90–$92. So Solana as far as risk levels — a little bit more risky than Bitcoin, but this is a buy. The question is how much you're going to buy — 1x, 2x, 4x, 8x if you're doing dynamic DCA, or one lump sum, or just keep DCAing.
Jerry: Well, the beautiful thing about most of them is you could buy five Solana, five Quant, five whatever, put it in a staking wallet, and allow it to compound over time. One-time investment, and your investment grows every year — at least the volume, the amount of the asset you hold, grows every year, compounding. Name me something in the stock market where you can do that. Very few stocks issue dividends. Very few stocks will allow you to compound the actual quantity of the stock that you own. Almost all layer ones have that attribute to them. And it's one of the things that makes it available to everybody, whether you have $5 or $500,000.
Rob: Yeah, that's the big question. I'd like to have the $500,000. That'd be nice.
Charles Hoskinson at the UN and Cardano's Energy Partnership
Rob: How about this one — thoughts on Charles Hoskinson speaking at the UN on a potential energy partnership with Cardano. I did not hear about this. Do you know anything that's going on?
Jerry: Electricity — the creation of electricity — is one element of the industry of energy. It's important to know how it's generated, how most of the world generates it, and what the world believes it's going to need energy for. Well, electricity is around compute. It's around the expansion of AI. And blockchain being an incredible partner for AI is one of the premises that Charles based his entire talk around. I think the more exposure Cardano gets to industry leaders and heads of state that make decisions on what platforms get used to build things, the better. His exposure to the UN was wonderful in that a lot of heads of state are involved in the UN, and therefore him having a closer relationship and being able to go to a meeting and introduce what Cardano or Midnight can build for this country or that country — it's all really good stuff.
Rob: Interesting. I must have missed that on my radar. This is Charles at the UN talking about energy and how that could be related to ADA.
Jerry: He's a relatively articulate speaker.
Rob: Right. I said humblish and I'm talking about in the way he speaks — he does not necessarily speak as a grandiose knower of all.
Jerry: Ah, that is just for the X posts, which are actually quite entertaining, I must admit.
Rob: Yes. X is for entertainment, that's for sure.
Football, Fantasy, and Altcoin Analogies
Rob: Here's another one for you, Jerry. What's your team? Someone says they've been a Chiefs fan since 2005.
Jerry: I grew up in the Bay Area, and the Raiders and the Niners — Oakland and San Francisco — are kind of those teams that as a child I wanted to wear that uniform and play pro football. Niners and Raiders all the way. But I love all teams now because fantasy football has taken over my whole thing.
Rob: Yeah, exactly. It's the same thing with altcoins — I love them all. The ones that actually have good technology that benefit me.
Jerry: Yeah, I'm in it for the tech, Jerry.
Rob: Number go up technology. Here's a good one. Ron says, "Speaking of alts — I bought a bunch of DOT. Remember Polkadot back in the day?"
Jerry: Of course, I own some.
Rob: It was a great run. This is back when Polkadot was in the top 10. It even staked directly on their network for a long time. Now it's ranked 46. And it's one of those things where — look at Zcash. Zcash didn't do anything for a long time. It was pretty flat. It started out great, went flat for years, and all of a sudden just took off like a light. I don't know if that was because of individuals pumping it, or did the technology change, or was there some kind of huge announcement? I don't remember anything about that. Jerry, what are your thoughts — as a reminder that not all alts are going to make it?
The Layer One Thesis and the Stablecoin Market
Jerry: Ron and I are in the same exact position. I bought a bunch of DOT thinking — with this mentality — that layer ones are going to be the platform, the foundation on which many applications will be built, and the usefulness and adoption of those applications will drive value to that layer one. That was my whole layer one premise. And as a matter of fact, that premise from five or six years ago is still valid today. It's exactly the same premise. Will something be built upon that layer one that gets used by a billion people? And if so, I've got a winner.
Here's where DOT went sideways where Tron, Solana, and Ethereum didn't — they saw the value of the stablecoin market. DOT didn't. Cardano didn't. Had Cardano and DOT and Avalanche — well, Avalanche is in there now — had those layer ones done the same thing back then, we'd have a completely different hierarchy of alts today. And I think that's just the thing. Will something get built on DOT that gets adoption for a billion people? I don't know the answer. That's why I have not sold it yet. A year from now, somebody could build something on it — bada bing, bada boom — and we're back in business, and I've been compounding that yield in my little staking wallet and Jerry comes out a winner.
Rob: Yeah, that's a good point. And you know, it's another reminder — Telegram, which uses TON, now has over a billion monthly users. They're right in line with the social media heavyweights like YouTube and WeChat. So you would think the payments architecture would work out perfectly for that, and it didn't happen the way you'd expect. On top of that, this is a good reminder of what I talked about with Sweatcoin. I loved that project. You download the app — which was already one of the top 10 or top 15 apps globally for movement tracking — and now they're going to use this thing called Sweat, giving you free coins. I thought, "Oh, this will actually work out pretty well because then people can use those coins to buy things."
Here was the problem — when you do things for free, people don't really want to transact with that. And of course when you do something like that, you can dilute the whole process because these coins are coming in and being dispersed to everybody else, and people didn't want to hold on to them. That's where it comes down to tokenomics. That's why tokenomics in 2020–2021 for the big layer ones were such a big deal — because they just came out, you had hundreds of millions available or circulating, and then they were released into the wild over the next two or three years. That's why you didn't see as big an altcoin run. So just take a look at your top alts and check the tokenomics. Solana, Avalanche, Telegram — that's why it was so big back then. We didn't have as much circulating versus total supply. That was a little rant. Sorry.
TONCOIN Analysis and Closing Thoughts
Rob: Most altcoins are junk — that is actually true. Someone says, "Unfortunately, Rob can see the obscenity-laced posts in the chat even after the wrenches happen." First of all, thanks everybody who is an administrator or a wrench — I know you guys have been doing a great job. I do get to see those, and I've got to tell you, it's some of the most entertaining parts of what I get to see. But thank you for deleting those so the normal people don't have to see the nonsense.
Someone mentions Ethereum and liquid staking and how that was going to change everything and bring institutions in — that was one of the big sticking points for the ETFs. It didn't go through that process because they didn't allow a massive amount of staking at first. Now we do, and now here we are.
And this is a good one from our friend who had some pretty good comments before — "I asked five different large language models what altcoin to pick this cycle and they all chose Hyperliquid, TON, and Sui. Interpret that bit of information as you wish."
You know what we should do, Jerry? We should take a look at the money line. This is the last one we're going to do. Out of those three — Hyperliquid, TON, and Sui — Jerry, which one do you want to take a look at for the money line and the SMC bot?
Jerry: TON.
Rob: TON it is. And every right there when Jerry said TON, the entire ecosystem — all the people watching — groaned collectively because we didn't pick Hyperliquid. Sorry. If you want to take a look at that, links are in the description.
So let's look at TON. Okay, so this is the money line. They were bearish up to this point — bearish, bearish, bearish, bearish — but it just seems to flip. Is it $294 for one TON? Is that right?
Jerry: Damn.
Rob: Let's see historically — $300 today. I could be wrong.
Jerry: Well, that's the money line.
Rob: Let's take a look at the SMC bot. Now this one has no data — just a little line here. That's interesting. So if you take a look, the money line looks to be a buy. I'm sure people who have TON are like, "That's right, I knew it the whole time." So we'll see.
That's it for today. We went a little bit long. Jerry's got to go watch some football and keep winning in his fantasy football team. Thanks so much for stopping by.