WARNING! One Headline Sends BTC Vertical | Joe Consorti

I think we probably conservatively, and my channel was attacking me for this because it's too conservative, but a quarter million dollars at the very least, um, if not 350 to 400. Calls for the bottom are getting louder, and Joe Consorti says the real move hasn't happened yet. And he brought the whole map, including where he thinks Bitcoin bottoms first.

Chances are we bottom around that cluster of levels in the range. I believe it would take a lot of selling pressure and a huge exogenous shock, in my opinion, to get any lower than that.

Joe stares at these charts for a living, and in this one, his exact bottom and the month it prints. The IPO, he says, is draining Bitcoin's capital, and when it flips, and why he's still buying right now.

Buy now because you can never time the market, and I would rather buy at a 50% discount instead of trying to time the low and then never seeing these prices. A mapped bottom, a dated breakout, a $450,000 bull case. Joe's got this entire thing mapped out. And again, remember, nothing in this video is financial advice. It's for educational purposes only. Without further ado, guys, let's bring Joe to the stage. Joe, welcome. It's great to have you here. Uh, you are one of the only bulls still remaining in this kind of, uh, you know, inevitable bear market. I mean, just like the overly optimistic bull. I mean, I'm, I'm alongside there with you. But what keeps you so bullish even in a market like right now?

For sure. I mean, I would call myself bearish, uh, to to be well. Kyle, thanks so much for having me on, first and foremost. I would call myself near-term bearish, long-term bullish, right? Like, I like being realistic about where I think the price is headed. Um, anyone who's seen my show, and if you haven't seen my show, I'm Joe. Good to meet you. Um, over the last couple of weeks and months, I sort of laid out the, uh, the stairs, uh, with which I think Bitcoin is sort of going to, uh, walk down, if you will, over the next couple of months. Um, uh, a little bit earlier on this year, I was of the opinion that the four-year cycle was broken, and we can get into that and why I think it it will inevitably break, but it's not broken this time around. Um, I was swiftly proven wrong when we, uh, have have just decidedly made new lows, basically every single, every other week, uh, over the entire summer. And so, sort of, you know, looking ahead, uh, we can kind of estimate the downside targets, um, both from a price perspective and from a time perspective. So, from a time perspective, the four-year cycle being followed puts us at about October of this year to find a low. Now, I'm not strictly operating off of the four-year cycle to try to find where Bitcoin is going to make its low. Um, I'm also looking at the macro backdrop. And right now, uh, Kevin Worsh is slated to cut interest rates. So, I've been saying Worsh is probably going to cut interest rates for several months. Everyone was calling me a back when, uh, he came and did his first press conference and he acted hawkish, and I told people he was faking it. And guess what? Today he comes out and says, basically, in, in no uncertain terms, like the economy cannot withstand a rate hike, and we got bad jobs data among other things today, uh, and rate, rate cut odds are through the roof. So chances are rates are going to be on hold this year. If not, we're going to see a rate cut, and that'll, uh, come into effect, uh, uh, closer to Q4. The other major component, um, sort of coming to a head in Q4 will be price inflation fully decelerating following the oil shock. So obviously, this trade for moves closed on February 28th. It just recently opened, and the impact of that has yet to be fully felt and realized across markets. So, price inflation hit 4.3% in June. It's probably going to hit 4.9 or 5.2 or something like that. I'd be willing to bet money on it. I'm not a betting man. Um, because sort of what happens when you have this push inflation, this supply-driven inflation, is you start to see lagged price impacts. So, we started to see the first hint of it in last month's inflation report. We're going to see more of it throughout the summer, but around Q4, the same time that the Bitcoin four-year cycle says that Bitcoin will bottom, in my opinion, will be the time that inflation actually rolls over. And so, those will be three major macro headwinds all lining up for Bitcoin at the exact same time. That's why I think we'll probably chop around, if not take one more leg lower into the 50s, uh, firmly into the 50s. We're seeing a bit of a relief rally here. That's to be expected. I think through July, maybe in the next week, you're going to see maybe as high as close to the 70s. We're going to come back down. I think we probably bottom as low as like 51 or 52,000. Uh, and then that's that, and then we form a base and we move higher from there. So that's sort of my thinking for now. Uh, the, because I've talked about when I think Bitcoin is going to bottom and where I think it's going to bottom. A lot of people call me a bull. I am a near-term bear, to be frank. I don't think what we're experiencing right now is the start of the next bull. Um, but that's sort of just the TLDDR on my, uh, base case for Bitcoin as of right now.

And just give us a little bit more context around Worsh's statements and what he said.

Yeah, absolutely. So, basically, again, he decided to say that he's not going to comment on the, uh, Fed decision that is going to be coming up, um, uh, very, very soon here. Obviously, this is just an extension of what he said three or four weeks ago, where he said he wasn't going to give any forward guidance. He wants to move away from being a Federal Reserve chair and a Fed at large that's reliant on giving forward guidance in order to hint at what's coming next. Um, but effectively, I don't have the quote in front of me. Effectively, he said, "At this point in time, the market can't really withstand a rate hike." Um, and the other Fed members have been a little bit more vocal about that. We're going to hear more of that in the coming days because forward guidance still is a thing. You still have press appearances for the other Fed members in the lead-up to the next FOMC. Um, so chances are you're going to see more of that. You're still going to see forward guidance as it gets phased out, just not a lot of it from Kevin Worsh. And so, it was very telling that he was willing to say something like that on a day like today, right? Um, basically, everybody had been saying that the economy was was, uh, rip-roaring hot, price inflation was soaring, and that would warrant a rate hike. Um, but I was kind of telling everybody, and there were a couple of other people who are doing the same thing, that the type of inflation we experience is not a type of inflation that can be fixed with a rate, rate cut. What do I mean by that? Well, there are two different types of inflation, right? You have push inflation, which is driven by costs rising, and you have, uh, pull inflation, which is driven by a red-hot consumer. They borrow too much money. Too much money gets printed into existence. The price goes up as a result of that. Uh, what we're experiencing right now is push inflation. The Strait of Hormuz, responsible for 20% of the world's oil supply, was shut for like three months, four months, almost four months. Um, and so, as a result of that, you started to see massive impacts on crude oil prices, right? It doubled. The price of WTI almost doubled and stayed there for a while. Now WTI is back down to its pre-war levels. Okay, fantastic. However, that's going to create a ripple effect. The three months where oil was elevated is going to create a ripple effect throughout the economy, drive price inflation up. And so, all of the people who were pricing in a rate cut, I've, I'd been saying, and a lot of other people were too, that the, a rate hike, um, were saying that a rate hike was completely mispriced, that hiking rates, the only thing it's going to do is weigh even more on the consumer. It's not going to help them at all. And lo and behold, Kevin Worsh comes out and sort of alludes to that. So that's what I would expect. I think the path of least resistance for the Fed is to not do anything and just sit and wait, sit on their hands. Um, and then, of course, they will be at the ready in the event that anything terrible happens and we do get some kind of inflation or a recession. Then the money printer may go off, and, uh, we may, we may see a Bitcoin bull market sooner than later. We'll see.

Yeah, well said. I want to get your take. Uh, everyone has their own opinion on, uh, on Kevin Worsh's new kind of the divisions that they created, you know, to kind of reassess the way that they measure inflation. Uh, do you think that, um, it does sound like this, but like I, like to hear your details on it. Uh, his, how do you think that they're going to recalculate inflation? Uh, do you think that now combined with the, the new weakened jobs, kind of we know that Trump appointed him, we know that Trump wanted lower rates, uh, and then he created this task force to re, to, to reassess the data. Uh, what are your thoughts on that? And, um, do you think that he's going to kind of magically come out and say, "Oh, look, actually the inflation's like at 1.8% like true inflation says, maybe, or, uh, something like that."

So, it certainly seems that way, right? Unfortunately, uh, when, when he came out, he basically said that our measures of inflation are inaccurate. Now, I think many Bitcoiners, every Bitcoiner, and every hard money enthusiast will agree that yes, our inflation measures are inaccurate because they're much higher than is actually being priced, right? Monetary debasement just hit its, uh, its highest fastest pace on record since 2020. So, more money is being printed now globally, not here in the US necessarily, but globally since 2020. Um, yet we're told price inflation is only 4.2%. So, yeah, you can use true inflation. You could look at the things that it measures and talk about from a basket of goods perspective, but I'm more concerned, uh, what the actual monetary inflation is, right? Because that is ultimately the upstream cause of price inflation. So, true inflation is a great measure, but I look at M2, right? Because think about it this way. It's like, I don't want the airbag to deploy after my car has been crashed for 10 minutes, right? I want the airbag to deploy before my car crashes. In that same vein, I want to be looking at M2, global money supply, and other measures of money printing so that I know what inflation is going to be. So that said, um, like they're printing so much money globally, and that obviously impacts goods here in the US. So, like the notion that the Fed could even control, uh, the rate at which the price of goods and services goes up is laughable. Um, but it doesn't prevent them from trying. And so, with this latest, uh, change or proposed change, Kevin Worsh basically wants to take our current measure of CPI inflation, and the Fed doesn't even use that. They use core PCE, which is even more trimmed down, um, and replace it completely with what's called trimmed mean PCE. Um, so PCE, um, personal consumption expenditures, is already a trimmed-down version of CPI. Trimmed mean PCE basically takes every single tail, uh, tail thing, right, edge case, so the things that actually massively go up in value and actually cause people's lives to get much worse, and remove them entirely. So, basically, remove all of the outliers and just take the mean, right? Um, now, that obviously doesn't accurately reflect the level at which price, the price of goods and services increases, uh, but the reason Kevin Worsh wants to do it is because of exactly what you said, Kyle, right? The 4D chess being played here. You got to think about the reason Trump wanted there in the first place. Whoever he was going to nominate was going to be someone who would do his bidding and cut interest rates regardless of whether or not the economy was running hot or running cold. The economy obviously is in a spot right now where price inflation is elevated. But Kevin, and so there's really no reason to cut rates, but there's really no reason to to raise them either. Um, and so Kevin Worsh decides, you know what, we're going to take a measure of inflation that's actually much lower than what inflation is right now to give ourselves the leeway and the, uh, uh, the rationalization, if you will, to cut rates to, to lay the groundwork for this. So that's basically the 4D chess at work here. Kevin Worsh was always somebody who was going to do Trump's bidding, was going to do the Treasury's bidding, more importantly, because it doesn't matter who's in office. It's just the mathematical reality. We have to cut interest rates. Um, and so that's what Worsh alluded to today. It's all coming to a head.

Do you think that's going to happen this year?

Yeah, you know, I, I would have to say so. Um, I think that again, the path of least resistance for me, the way that I see it, is, uh, nothing happens. I don't think anything happens until the fall. Then, once the fall rolls around, once you see price inflation go back down toward that 2 and a half% level, um, the Republicans are going to try to pull out every stop they possibly can in order to win the midterms. Now, ultimately, like when it comes to politics in the United States, at the very least, there's one side that hates you, and there's one side that hates you a little bit less. Depending on who you are, it's different for everyone, but both sides do not work for you. It's just the reality of the situation. I'm not saying that from, like, a libertarian perspective. I am not a libertarian. Um, I think you should be voting, you should participate, and you should vote for one of the two winning sides. I have my opinions, but the reality is, um, politics shouldn't factor into markets, and it shouldn't factor into what the Fed's going to do, and it shouldn't factor into what we think Bitcoin's going to do as a result of those Fed decisions. But ultimately, it does, right? Everything is about money. That's what it all boils down to. That's why the Federal Reserve exists. And so, the reason I bring up the Republicans and the midterms is they are on track to lose badly. If you look at Cali, look at Poly Market, they're on track to lose literally the House, the Senate, it's going to be terrible, right, for the Republicans. What are the stops that they have left to pull in order to potentially maintain their seats? Well, uh, they could cut interest rates and make sure that markets continue to rip into midterms. It's basically the only lever they have left. They have making sure inflation goes down, which is why they opened the Strait of Hormuz, but didn't end the war, strangely enough. That's because they want price inflation down. And the other thing they're going to try to do desperately is allow markets to rip into midterms. And so, whatever they have to do, they're going to do. And so, if markets begin selling off massively over the summer, or if price inflation continues being elevated, I think they're just going to say, "Screw it," pardon my language, and cut rates into the end of the year. Right? So that's what I would be on the lookout for. I think there's probably a 30, 40% chance they do that, um, if price inflation is, uh, uh, uh, coming back down to target. I think there's a much lower percent chance they do that if price inflation isn't coming back down to target. So, this is the order of operations here. Open up the Strait of Hormuz to make it so that, make sure that price inflation is coming down into Q4, and then ideally sooner than later, inflation comes down just enough so that way you can justify rate cuts. Pair that with using trimmed mean PCE instead, all of a sudden you've laid the groundwork to justify rate cuts and make sure the market keeps rallying into the end of the year. So, all that is to say, I think there's probably a 30, 40% chance we get a rate cut this year, and probably a 60, 70% chance that nothing happens.

All right guys, just some quick housekeeping. I hope that you're enjoying this video so far. Some exciting news coming out of what we've been building. So, first of all, we've got my website, kyleshassay.com, and we'll leave a link for all the stuff down in the description below. But there you can go find, uh, everything there, my portfolio, what I've been doing, who I am if you're not familiar. But most importantly for you guys, there's the deals page where all the affiliate links are there, and every single one of them has some sort of bonus. So, if you're thinking about using a new exchange or getting yourself a crypto debit card, like a cash card, or VPN, whatever, it's all over there. You're going to get deals and discounts on everything. Second, we have a new channel that launched, the Shass Report. Again, I will leave a tile card at the end of this video. For example, if you're curious about how big SpaceX can get by the year 2035, well, we cover that in depth in a really fun and entertaining way. The new channel is all about finance on a broader level. We cover AI, macro, global finance. It's really fun. It's, it's not necessarily crypto, although there might be some crypto in there, but it's really, uh, just a broader channel where I talk about the things I'm really interested in. And lastly, guys, the data room. If you haven't seen the video on that that I made recently, I will leave an end screen at the end of this video as well for that and put the link in the description below. But the data room is where I put all of my institutional-grade research. Now, I must make a disclaimer. Past performance does not guarantee future performance. And again, the data room has three tiers in there, and that's where I go to put institutional-grade research. More information at wop.com/thedataroom and the link in the description below. All right, guys, back to the video. Let's go.

Earlier, you said that you believe that the four-year cycle was dead. It, you were proven wrong this time. Um, what was driving the thesis behind that before? And, uh, because I was in the same camp that you were, and mine was kind of looking at liquidity usually, and liquidity cycles, uh, and historically when we've seen global liquidity or US liquidity like M2, you know, skyrocketing, you've seen, we've seen crypto or Bitcoin correlated. We haven't really seen that right now. So, yeah, so let's hear a little bit more about your thesis of what's going to drive the Bitcoin, you know, rally, and, uh, what, what gauges are you looking at?

For sure. Yeah, so it's a really good question. Um, I'll take them sort of one by one. The four-year cycle, I thought it was going to end purely because if you think about it this way, 1 million Bitcoin are left to be mined over the next 114 years. We officially hit 20 million BTC about, uh, three months ago in April, early April. Um, and, uh, the next about 99, because actually, the, the block limit, or the, the Bitcoin limit isn't 21 million. It's, uh, 20,999,999.99, whatever. Um, anyway, technicality. Um, less than 1 million Bitcoin left to be mined over the next 114 years. We have less than halfway to go until the next halving. Um, and currently, the block reward is 3.125 BTC. Okay. So, going from 6.25 BTC, which was the last block reward, to where we are now, 3.125 BTC, I thought that that was marginal enough that it really wouldn't cause the sort of supply shock dynamic that you see with an 18-month lag during the typical Bitcoin four-year cycle. So, for those who might not be aware, and I highly doubt anybody watching a Bitcoin channel is unaware, the four-year cycle is effectively what happens when Bitcoin's supply schedule gets cut in half. This happens on a cadence roughly every two, every 210,000 blocks, which is about every four years. So, when this occurs, this has occurred four times in Bitcoin's history, from 50 to 25 to 12 and a half to 6.25, or actually five, all the way down to 3.125 where we are today. Um, so, basically, when this has happened all throughout history, Bitcoin's tops can be timed at about 18 months following the prior halving. Uh, so we saw it most recently with, uh, Bitcoin topping 18 months literally to the day, almost, after the fifth halving in April of 2024, all the way to October of 2025. That's what happened. Um, now, typically, the bear markets that follow that top in this four-year cycle dynamic, um, last for about a year to 18 months, and they bottom right around a year prior to the next halving, or not a year prior. Um, anyway, they're about a year, uh, to 18 months after the top. Right? So, what I thought was, because the issuance being cut in half is so marginal at this point, that it wouldn't really have that material of an impact on Bitcoin's price. I was wrong. Now, why do I think I was wrong? Uh, we could make guesses all day long, but the reality is the market has chosen. The four-year cycle is very much not dead. The reason I think it is still very much alive and well, and it dictates Bitcoin's price, and why that's actually a pretty good thing, um, is because investor psychology plays a huge role in all of this. Think about it this way. Um, Bitcoin, despite being extremely volatile, counterintuitively, is a very predictable asset. What do I mean by that? Well, you can basically say with near certainty every four years, you're going to get a new all-time high. And then roughly a year after that, you're going to get a cycle low. And then three and a half years later, you're going to get an all-time high. And then you're going to get a cycle low. Rinse and repeat. And so, all of the new market participants, but also all the Bitcoin OGs, right? But also, you got to think about all the new market participants coming in. Since ETFs were launched in January 2024, this will be their first cycle. If you know that Bitcoin is as predictable as it is, what are you going to try to time your trades around? That predictable cycle, right? You would be a fool to not do that. And so, as a result of that, I simply think it's purely an investor psychology thing. And it has very little, if anything, to do with the actual halving event of Bitcoin itself. And so, that's why I think that it could continue for a few more halvings going forward. But over time, it'll just matter less and less because you have to consider once we get to sub one Bitcoin, we're cutting, you know, uh, from half a Bitcoin to 0.25 Bitcoin, 0.25 to 0.125. At that point, we're splitting hairs. And even though Bitcoin will be a, um, in my mind, a centa-trillion-dollar asset at that point, so hundred trillion dollars plus, granted, there will probably be like 10 quadrillion worth of global assets at that point, but, but regardless, um, even though it'll be such a large asset, I still think that the, uh, the halving won't have much of an impact, say, three or four halvings from now. But that's why I think it worked out this time, and it ultimately works out in people's favor because now we can time the bottom of the cycle with much more ease.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Let's talk about, uh, maybe issues surrounding Bitcoin moving forward. Um, you talked about quantum computers and potentially kind of the exposed coins or Satoshi's coins or the old wallets. Uh, so what is quantum computing, something that we need to be worried about with Bitcoin? And, um, how's that going to play out?

Yeah, so with quantum computing, I, I just made a video today, um, and I don't know when this video is going live, whether it's next week, but, um, the video that I posted July 2nd, whenever anyone's watching this, go give that one a watch after this show, but go give that one a watch. You can click my profile right down there. And I talked about how I think quantum is still the number one threat to Bitcoin. A lot of people are talking about BIP 110. Um, but I, I believe that it's quantum computing, right? BIP 110 is sort of infighting in the Bitcoin community. It's not as important as the block size wars. It's basically a temporary one-year filtering mechanism, a proposed temporary change to the Bitcoin protocol to make it so that spam gets filtered out, and we can come up with a more permanent solution for making sure Bitcoin stays as money. Um, it's not something that if it happens or doesn't happen is going to kill the asset. There is one thing that could kill the asset though, at least in the near term, and that's quantum computing, right? Um, effectively, what's happening right now is the speed at which quantum computing's, uh, quantum computers are becoming cryptographically relevant, meaning they could break SHA-256, elliptic curve cryptography, the cryptography that secures Bitcoin, is accelerating rapidly. Google has published a paper at, sort of, uh, and they published this in April, so a while ago, three months ago, that outlines the rate at which these computers are developing and the rough timeline at which a cryptographically relevant quantum computer could crack SHA-256 and break into Bitcoin. Now, what are the actual risks here? Um, well, they're saying as soon as 2028 or 2029. So, very, very soon. Uh, and they're saying that basically, what's, what a quantum computer can do is the cool thing about Bitcoin is it runs on public key, private key cryptography, which means that you can have a private key that proves your ownership of Bitcoin. So, you can move it, uh, as long as you could sign for it on the blockchain. Um, but with one private key, you could derive theoretically a near-infinite number of public keys. So, anybody can send you Bitcoin, but nobody can take Bitcoin back out, right, without proving ownership of the private key. What quantum computing can do, what breaking SHA-256 can do, what these quantum computers are trying to do is derive a public key or a private key from a public key. Which means that any Bitcoin address, you would be able to look at how much Bitcoin is in there, throw it into your quantum computer, find the private key, take the Bitcoin. Uh, that's pretty bad. That sounds bad on the surface. That said, not all of Bitcoin, not all of the available Bitcoin float today is actually vulnerable to this attack. Any Bitcoin wallet that has already upgraded to pay-to-public-key-hash (P2PKH), which is the newest wallet type on Bitcoin, is fine. You're fine, at least in this iteration of quantum computing and what they're working to do with breaking ECC. Um, that said, there are still a few million coins, if I'm not mistaken, that are on what are called quantum-vulnerable addresses. So, Bitcoin wallets that have not been upgraded to pay-to-public-key-hash. Um, and so a couple of different things are being proposed in order to deal with that. Number one, freeze those wallets. Make it so that Bitcoin cannot be taken from those wallets should they get broken by ECC. Uh, I don't think we should do this. Number two, option number two, and this is the option that I lean toward, is, uh, allow that Bitcoin to be taken, right? Allow the people to migrate their funds away or allow the Bitcoin to be taken. Why do I say that? Well, the first one, right, you'd be able to protect the Bitcoin from being seized, stolen by a quantum computer, right? But it would be much worse for Bitcoin reputationally over time. If people know that their Bitcoin can be frozen, right, at will, then apart from verifiable scarcity, you don't have provable ownership anymore. One of the big value propositions of Bitcoin dies the day that they decide to freeze, uh, quantum-vulnerable Bitcoin. Option number two, it sucks in the near term. Quantum computers could steal several million Bitcoin and then dump them directly onto the open market. That would really suck. That said,

It would suck from a price perspective, probably a lot, right? However, in the long term, it would be much better for Bitcoin, right? Because all of a sudden, that value prop of provable, verifiable ownership remains intact. And once you move past the difficult price perspective, the massive drawdown, massive crash, probably multi-year bear market, first of its kind that you have for Bitcoin as a result, Bitcoin is still alive on the other side, and it still stands to recover and be the best performing macro asset once again. So that's sort of how I see it because if you think about it, once a quantum computer steals Bitcoin, what are they going to do? They're going to move it to a quantum-resistant wallet, right? So, in scenario number two, you get the price pain, but you ultimately protect that Bitcoin in the long run, which is better for the network in my opinion. So that's where I stand in it currently. We'll see how situations or how solutions unfold over time, but that's my current two cents.

What about scenario number three, where, uh, America builds a quantum computer, America, uh, steals Satoshi's Bitcoin, and then adds it to a strategic Bitcoin reserve?

That's a really cool, you know, it's a theory. It's a theory that I think is, uh, super interesting. Look, um, a lot of people have talked about strategies, Bitcoin being seized, um, you know, the quantum computers being nationalized, uh, that that Google develops, and them being nationalized by the US government, and then stealing Satoshi's Bitcoin at the Bitcoin reserve. Um, look, I think that it, it has the same price perspective over time. I think the one that they definitely will not do is, um, uh, stealing strategies, Bitcoin, right? Because that would be terrible for all, like, if you think about it this way, one of the major strengths of America, like, it's not our military. You can say that all day long. It's not our military. It's our constitution, number one. The strength and prominence of the US dollar globally, number two. And our free and open capital markets, number three. The moment you steal strategies, Bitcoin to establish a Bitcoin reserve, uh-oh, your free and open capital markets, it's no longer an investable reason to invest in the United States. All of a sudden, one of those three pillars goes away, right? And we're already in an era of relatively waning dollar dominance. The dollar is still king. It will remain king for decades, but relatively waning dollar dominance. And so, like, all of a sudden, you're kneecapping yourself for no reason. So, I don't think that's going to happen. But I do think you bring up a good point, right? Like, in the event that Satoshi's Bitcoin gets stolen, do you want to know what the strategic Bitcoin reserve right now is built off of? Stolen Bitcoin. Literally entirely. We haven't bought a single coin. So, it stands to reason that if Satoshi's Bitcoin gets stolen, then all of a sudden you could nationalize whoever, whatever actor stole that, and then add it to the reserve. Um, so that's actually a pretty good idea. And then all of a sudden, America would be the leader in, uh, in Bitcoin. That'd be pretty sweet.

Yeah. Yeah. I just came up with that.

Yeah.

Uh, on that note, though, um, what are your thoughts on the strategic Bitcoin reserve? I know that, uh, you know, it was a big deal to get those 51 million wallet holders or whatever Americans for the election last time. Midterms are coming up. We haven't heard much from it. We haven't seen much from it. We haven't seen one Bitcoin acquisition since the executive order. There's a bill floating around. I don't know if it's doing anything. You know, Clarity Act seems to be kind of fading away. Um, I think the only glimmer, glimmer of hope that I've seen recently was I think Scott Bentense mentioned it, uh, maybe a week or two ago. He did bring it back up in passing that they were working on it still. Uh, I, I feel like that would be extremely bullish, right? If, if, uh, if that actually happened, something happened around America accumulating or actually taking initiative there. What are your thoughts?

Yeah. Uh, I think it would be bullish, and ultimately them being so desperate for voters is a good thing because they're willing to tap into whatever pools they can think of. Like, basically, think about this because that's what it is. Think about this as effectively like a second election cycle. Um, what you're going to be seeing is politicians pulling out literally all of the stops in order to try to make it so that constituents of all stripes will come out, uh, in droves and vote for them. And so, one of the simplest ways to do that is to just tap into the existing voter bases you already pandered to and repromise them what you already promised them. So, like, you, you don't necessarily have to do it. You can just repromise it. So, like, for the strategic Bitcoin reserve, for example, you may see a lot more media hits over the next couple of months of, uh, Trump, Scapasent, etc., talking about this, um, talking about the Bitcoin reserve. Um, I wouldn't count on it happening, though. I think that the American Reserve Modernization Act, the, the version two, if you will, of the Bitcoin Act, uh, that you brought up there momentarily, um, has a decent likelihood of getting, uh, through, but, not this year, not this Congress. And unfortunately, if the Republicans don't keep the House and the Senate, probably not ever, unfortunately, right? U, because as I mentioned, like, both parties really hate the American citizens, but the, uh, Republicans hate them a little bit less, right? The Democrats are just like, avowedly hate most of America. Um, and so, like, why on earth would the Elizabeth Warrens of the world want to buy Bitcoin? Like, they're so outspoken against it. So, if it doesn't get through in this Congress, I don't think it's ever going to get through until the Republicans get power again. Um, so, yeah, I mean, hopefully, hopefully it happens. I mean, honest to goodness, one of the massive tail, uh, risks, and I hope I don't not tail risks, but, um, tail scenarios, and I hope I don't lose my credibility in saying this, just having fun, is if the Republicans are on track to lose so badly in the midterms that they just decide via executive order, you know what, we're going to revalue the gold. We're going to sell part of it, or we're going to borrow against it, and we're going to buy the, you know, several hundred thousand Bitcoin per year that we said we were. Um, everybody in Congress gets mad, but it ignites the Bitcoiners and gets them happy enough. It gets the sound money guys fired up enough. It gets the gold guys fired up enough to show up for the Republicans and vote for them. Who knows? Could be. That's an interesting tail, uh, tail scenario. I don't think anybody has considered, probably because it's ridiculous, but it would be cool to see.

It would be cool to see. Uh, I'm curious to get your take, uh, you personally, on the whole kind of Bitcoin versus gold perspective. You know, we've seen central banks accumulating gold like crazy. Uh, there's a lot of, in the gold bug realm, there's a lot of, uh, theories about them repricing gold, uh, a lot higher. You just talked about that as well, as well yourself. We had Clive Thompson on last week. He, I don't know where he came up with this number or how he would even justify it, but he, he thought maybe they would reprice it to $15,000. Whatever. I, I am curious though, like, on from you, from an investment perspective, your personal holdings, uh, future outlook on gold versus Bitcoin.

Yeah. So, I think that, uh, I think Bitcoin continues outperforming gold. But I do think, speaking of gold revaluation, and it's purely because gold is a 20-some odd trillion asset, $25 trillion asset. Bitcoin is a $1.1 trillion asset. So, just the law of large numbers, it's much easier to move Bitcoin with a, with the same amount of capital by a larger percentage than it is for gold. That said, like, gold is still the most valuable, the single largest, uh, uh, monetary asset in the world, if we're just talking about one specific asset, not an asset market. Um, and so I think that, you know, gold will still do extremely well, right? It's, it's not necessarily, and this is, this is something that I think the, the Bitcoiners agree on largely, is that, excuse me, gold isn't going away, right? A lot of the gold bugs think that Bitcoiners are morons, and Bitcoiners hate gold. Like, it's, it's actually flipped. For the most part, Bitcoiners actually are in agreement that gold is extremely valuable because we see the same thing the gold bugs do, right? We can recognize the fact that the, the, um, fiscal, um, tomfoolery, that's just a word that I, I could think of there. Um, the, the, uh, the just the largest of government and the Federal Reserve, um, are making it such that there's so much money printed out of thin air all the time that, uh, it only makes sense to own hard assets because the only way out of this is printing more money, right? You take a look at the interest expenditure on our national debt, uh, it's going to be over $2 trillion dollars, um, by this time next year if rates stay where they are, which is why they're going to cut rates regardless of how the economy is doing. And so, like, in that environment where inflation is elevated, but you're cutting interest rates, and then on top of that, right, because the reason rates are so high now is because investors are demanding a higher risk premium for owning US debt. And so, all of a sudden, when you cut interest rates and be even more fiscally irresponsible, think the Treasury market probably fights you a little bit on that. Rates go even higher. And then at that point, um, who is there to buy your debt? There's an increasingly fewer number of buyers for US Treasury debt over time. So the Fed becomes a marginal buyer. They print money out of thin air. They buy our own debt. We're an Ouroboros, like a snake eating its own tail, right? That's not sustainable whatsoever. And so, ultimately, this is the value proposition of, and this, this is something that accelerates over time. Uh, unless the government becomes austere, we plunge into a multi-decade recession, and the large S gets wiped out. That's never going to happen. So, uh, that's the value prop of gold. It's been the value prop of gold since 1971. We departed the gold standard. It's been the value prop of gold since 1913, since we established the Federal Reserve and made it so that you could print money out of thin air. Um, but it's also the value prop of Bitcoin. And Bitcoin actually does that function better than gold, right? Why do I say that? Well, gold has been the best performer over the last 18 months. Sure. But if you look at both moni, both, both monetary properties of both assets and their performance over the last decade plus, um, Bitcoin has been the asset that has outperformed, and it also is the only absolutely scarce asset relative to gold. What do I mean by that? Well, gold is only relatively scarce, right? Meaning whenever the price goes up, there is a supply response. More miners can come online, new equipment can be dredged, new locations can be scattered and found, uh, and they're mining gold from asteroids now. Like, they're literally sending test missions to go mine gold from asteroids. So, there will always be more gold.

With Bitcoin, there will only be 21 million, right? Or just under 21 million, as I mentioned earlier. Um, but the more nodes in the network, the more hash power behind the network, the more solidified in place that rule becomes, right? A lot of people, uh, as far as quantum computing is concerned, have the misconception, and the gold bugs do too, the Peter Shiffs of the world, that quantum computing is somehow going to break Bitcoin's monetary properties. No, no, no, no, no. You cannot break Bitcoin's monetary properties, right? As long as it has that energy behind it and its network effects and people continue using it and nodes keep running and miners keep hashing, you're never going to change any of Bitcoin's rules, right? Through force, through brute force, like quantum computing. Um, but what you can do is, uh, cause the price impacts that I mentioned earlier. And so, nothing, literally nothing, barring the end of the world, you know, and the return of Jesus Christ and the end of this world as we know it, um, you can't kill Bitcoin, right? But you can make it so that gold supply is so overinflated that it, it, it doesn't, uh, uh, hold a candle to Bitcoin. So, that said, gold is still going to remain valuable forever. Bitcoin is just going to be more valuable, and it's going to grow at a faster pace.

Okay.

Curious to get your thoughts on, uh, I think earlier you said that you think that Bitcoin bottoms out in the low, I don't know if you said that, low 50s, uh, and maybe you said around October, potentially, but also October would be the time, uh, where the midterms are. So that's a little bit counterintuitive, uh, if you know, if you're really, really trying to win the midterms. But I guess next question is, where do you think that we bottom at, what price? And then also, how high do you think that we get next cycle for Bitcoin?

For sure. Yeah, I think, um, you know, chances are we bottom around that cluster of levels in the $49,000 to like $53,000 range. I believe it would take a lot of selling pressure and a huge exogenous shock, in my opinion, to get any lower than that. Um, and then I think that, uh, as far as like when that occurs and when we begin moving higher, I think those are two separate questions, you know, that that I'll sort of answer in kind. I think number one, after the midterms, I think that's when we bottom. Um, purely because like, and this also lines up with the AI trade that I didn't really discuss. The Anthropic IPO is still slated to occur in Q4 of this year. OpenAI did delay themselves to Q1 of next year, but the Anthropic IPO is the last major AI IPO this year that's drawing a lot of risk capital away from non-AI related assets, uh, and into AI-related assets, namely Bitcoin, right? Obviously, I think Bitcoin is accurately pricing in the geopolitical and macro realities, and that's why it's, you know, the way that it is right now. That's why it's underperformed so much. But I also think that there's been a crowding-out effect, if you will, of the AI trade, um, uh, taking some of that risk capital that would otherwise be devoted to Bitcoin and drawing it into itself. So, I think for that reason, once the OpenAI, or once the Anthropic IPO is behind us, Bitcoin is going to look increasingly attractive. You pair that with a four-year cycle, 50% discount, like, come on, you know? Uh, and so I think at that point, talking about, you know, lining up with all the other macro factors as well, uh, with the timing of rate cuts potentially, um, I believe that, uh, all signs are pointing to October, November. And then as far as like when we move higher, you look at the last couple of bear markets and, uh, how long we have ranged around at the low, and I would say like January, February timeframe for clearly and decisively moving higher, probably March, mid-March, late March timeframe for breaking back above, uh, the, uh, the 200-week moving average, and then probably April or May breaking above the 200-day moving average, and then at that point, you're firmly in a bull market once more. Um,

Yeah.

So, yeah, that's sort of the way that I'm, I'm timing things out right now.

And then the other question was, how high do you think that we go, uh, next, next?

So that's the question. Um, I think we probably conservatively, and my channel was attacking me for this because it's too conservative, but a quarter million dollars at the very least, um, if not 350 to 400. Um, I, I just believe that that is extremely reasonable for Bitcoin. It's also smaller on

a percentage basis by a very large margin relative to what we did this cycle where we went from 16K to 126K. We bought him out at 495 thou or $49,000. It's late over here where I am. $49,000. Um, and we uh go all the way up to 350 to 400K. That is much less from a percentage perspective than what we did this cycle. So, I think that's sort of my conservative case. Um, and then my bull case would be, you know, a little bit higher than 400, like 450. Um, yeah, that's sort of how I uh how I see and the way to time that is 18 months after the next having. So that cycle that all-time high would probably uh that cycle high rather would in all likelihood be reached if the four-year cycle remains intact around um uh October of 2029, which I know you know it's really long ways or not October rather, uh late September, mid-September 2029. It's a ways out. I know it sucks to hear, but also like the good news is it gives you more time to stack.

So >> Yeah, makes sense. Uh no, I like those numbers. It sounds sounds good. Um, also Joe, uh, okay, two, two, uh, two more things I want to talk about. One is, uh, real quick, going back to the quantum computer thing for anyone watching this, uh, who might have had, um, Bitcoin stored on their hardware wallet, their Ledger, Trezor for maybe, let's say, let's say, five or 10 years ago, it's just been sitting there ever since, you know, they bought it. Um, what what should they do to make sure that their Bitcoin is in the kind of quantum resistant address? Um, yeah, like Yeah.

>> Yeah. So, I know a lot of the um the new Trezor model specifically um is quantum resistance built-in. So, like the you can only generate quantum resistant wallets with that one. Um, so, I would go ahead and and snag one of those, one of the Bitcoin-only additions preferably. Um, and then as far as like just having any other hardware device, uh, just make sure that the address you've generated is paid to public key hash. If you're on a Sparrow wallet, you're in a multi-sig quorum, just make sure that it's paid to public key hash. And if you are, you're good, right? And chances are also between now and then. Uh, we will have even more quantum resistance measures that are introduced for Bitcoin. So, like I wouldn't worry about it too much. Obviously, it is quite a bit to be afraid of, but if it were a really imminent threat, Bitcoin would have drawn down by much more than 50%. Uh, you probably be at like 20,000 Bitcoin by now, $20,000 Bitcoin by now. So, don't worry too much about it. Preparation is important. So, that's those are the measures that I would take from a hygiene and security perspective.

>> Cool. All right. And then for anyone watching this who might be looking to acquire some more Bitcoin and maybe has own owns a home or something like that, I know that you you run a business uh that can help folks like that. Maybe you can uh tell us a little bit more about that.

>> I do. Yeah. So, I run a company called Horizon. Uh we help homeowners convert their home's equity into Bitcoin without taking on debt, interest, or monthly payments. Uh the way that we do that is quite unique. Um, so effectively what we've constructed is a special financing agreement where you sell us a portion of your home's current value in exchange for uh, Bitcoin. You keep the Bitcoin fully self-custodied and then whenever you decide to sell your home, uh, an appraiser comes by obviously when you're selling your home, and then we take that chunk back, uh, you take that chunk back rather. So you buy it back from us. That's how we make our money and then over that time, the idea is that Bitcoin has appreciated faster than your home. So, if you're interested in that and you're looking to acquire more Bitcoin in a way that doesn't involve new debt or new mortgage or margin call risk or liquidation risk or risk of your losing your home or anything like that, uh you can check that out at joinhorizon.com.

>> That's awesome. That's really really cool. Okay, cool. And uh Joe, for this last part of the show, we just have some rapid fire questions real quick. Oneliners, uh does Bitcoin hit the 49 to 53,000 zone before Labor Day? Yes or no?

>> No. And does Bitcoin for sure bottom this year or could it skip to 2027?

>> Bitcoin bottoms this year.

>> Does Bitcoin fall into the 40,000s this cycle?

>> Yes.

>> Okay. Uh does the government's Bitcoin bill become law before the midterms?

>> No.

>> If you had $10,000 to invest today, would you buy now or wait for the October dip?

>> Buy now because you can never time the market and I would rather buy at a 50% discount instead of trying to time the low and then never seeing these prices again.

>> Perfect. I totally agree with you. I I bring that up all the time. It's like even though we think that you and I and a lot of people in agreeance that probably we're going to go lower, but if one of these events happen that we've we've talked about, uh an announcement of a strategic Bitcoin reserve or uh anything that could be a potential catalyst, we could see what happened when they announced the ETFs and you can just get the sudden huge repricing and then you miss out on that and you're not in the market and you know, boom, you get you miss that opportunity. So, could it go lower? Yes. But, uh, could an event happen that shoots much higher? Also, yes. And, uh, I wouldn't want to be out of the market if that happens.

>> Exactly. Right. Yeah. I know. I say it on my show all the time and I'm happy we're in agreeance. It's like ultimately the best way to invest, not financial advice, and Kyle's not giving it either. Um, you know, is DCA, right? Like DCA, you know, and then also having a fat stack of cash to to smash buy on the dips, but largely dollar cost averaging. Like even me who, you know, and your job and my job are largely the same. We stare at the charts for most of the day and then create content based on what the asset is doing. Even we can't time the bottoms perfectly, right? So like the the notion that anybody else could, not to be prideful, is extremely low. So like just set up a DCA, have some cash on the side if you can in order to stack dips really heavily. Uh and ultimately you'll have a lower cost basis and more Bitcoin over time. It's just the best way to do it. And and like once you know you are near a bottom or probabilistically can surmise that you're approaching a bottom, then like that's the time to increase the DCA or start the DCA. So, it's just the best and only way to do it.

>> Agreed. Uh Joe, we're going to put your links for your for your socials in the description below, but just so folks uh watching can find you, how do they find you?

>> Absolutely. So, if you're interested in looking at more of my work, and Kyle, again, appreciate you for having me on. Uh if this is a collaboration, you can just click right there, click subscribe to Joe Consorti. Uh or you can find me in the description uh at one of those links down there or up there. Just search Joe Consorti and then you'll find me and uh hit subscribe, check out more of the content.

>> Awesome, Joe. Thanks so much for coming on. Appreciate it.

>> Thanks, Kyle.