LIVE JEUDI 9 octobre 2025

So, as usual, those who join the live directly, please, in the chat rooms, confirm that you can hear well, that the sound is OK, and that the image is also OK. If you have a problem with the sound, if you hear me very low, check that the sound on your computer here is at maximum, and also open the settings and check the sound of your browser because it can come from the browser. So, let's pay attention to these two things, and normally, if both are good, you will have everything you need to listen to me properly. So, Thursday's live, we're going to tag everyone, and we'll wait for the regulatory 7 minutes before we can start. So, so, Group 1 is OK, thank you Crypto Keeper, thank you also in Group 2 shit game mes coups perfect, thank you very much, we're just waiting 5 or 6 minutes, and then we can go, so that people can connect for this big live. It's a big live today. Uh, it's going to be a bit, a bit complex too. So, if people don't understand, well, don't hesitate to rewatch the parts that interest you a second time. If, even after watching maybe twice, let's say, three times maximum, you still don't understand, uh, well, say so, say so in the chat, and we'll perhaps do a radio show very soon tomorrow to explain, because these are concepts that will be quite, well, some of them are quite complex. I will do my best to simplify it. So, so, there you go, but it remains complex macro principles to understand because if it were easy, everyone would understand them, and there would be a better market reading than the current one. And even when we understand all of this, well, we can still have problems, or at least, sometimes, areas of turbulence where everything doesn't appear clearly, and we have to do things to review our work, as I would say. This is something I've been doing since this morning. Uh, I've put myself aside a bit because there were things that, for me, contradicted each other too much. Uh, and so I told myself, okay, let's start over, I'm starting over from scratch with everything I think I know and that I recognize as acquired, to date. I'm going to look at what I have in front of me. I'm going to get rid of the patterns that are, let's say, imposed on our psychology, whether we are beginners or not so beginners. Uh, all these market cycle patterns of 4 years, of this, of that, and return to something that will be much more drawn from experience. What happened over time? How did it unfold? What conclusions did it lead to, to get out of pre-established patterns as much as possible, to draw the right conclusions? In any case, what I think is the right conclusion, and that's what I'm going to present to you now. So, my vision has changed a bit compared to, compared to all of this. I am currently questioning my first market reading after having done, well, this work today that I'm going to present to you, well, during this live. Uh, and the result of this questioning is actually even more favorable than scenario number 1. Scenario number 1, where for me, it was the end of this year that we would make a top. Now, for me, sincerely, it's not the end of this year. Where we think we are in the middle of the maximum phase, well, actually, no, we are still, apparently, we are still early. We are still early. We are still a little ahead. It's more likely to play out in 2026. And we'll look at all of this. Just before we start, if I bought a second dog a week ago, so I have two, and they are small. The second is a little baby who is very playful and always bothers the first one to play. So, if it starts to bark all over the place, it's normal because they are always chasing each other, and well, it's exhausting, it's cute, but it's a bit tiring. So, if it barks suddenly, it's normal, it's because they are playing. Right now, they are lying down peacefully. So, so, everything is fine. One more minute, and we're off. So, thank you for telling me in the general discussion groups, Halloween, thank you for the questions. Great work, Halloween, thank you very much, it's cool. It greatly simplifies things, and also gives all members a visual of the questions asked and which we will answer. So, so, it's cool, since it's probably the part that interests people the least, except for those who asked the questions, of course. We'll start quickly with that, so that people who are still connecting in 4 or 5 minutes, well, it's not the best part they'll miss. And we start with Teddy's question. Regarding the cryptos bought before we joined the group, several of us still have them, and you indicated that it was better to wait until the end of phase 2 before selling them. Is that still the case today? Uh, yes, it's still the case. It's still the case. But be careful, there are people who write to me privately to ask for my opinion, and there is a postulate of mine that perhaps some will not share, and that's why I leave it to everyone's freedom. If we talk about the postulate that the cryptocurrencies we are positioned on have better data and therefore will rise faster, taking your loss now to go to a cryptocurrency that will potentially rise much faster. In any case, the probabilities are on the side of these cryptocurrencies. If we take the ones we have, if we take sui, if we take AV, if we take Unii, uh, they have a higher probability of rising higher than the ones you have, let's say, before joining the groups. So, from a purely return perspective, it is indeed a good calculation to say, I take my -20% now, I go to a cryptocurrency that has a better return, because obviously, if AV, for example, gains 40% while your crypto, which you haven't left, only gains 20% in the same time, well, it would have been wiser to take the loss because obviously AV's rise would have compensated for that loss much faster than waiting on the first crypto. So, yes, indeed, for those who want to do it, you can do it. I find it to be a sound reasoning. So, for me, there is no problem. Question number 2, why don't we have Bitcoin in our portfolio? So, this is an important question. Uh, don't you hold any either? More precisely, if liquidity always follows the classic cycle: Bitcoin, large cap, mid cap, small cap, why not allocate a portion of our portfolio to Bitcoin before gradually reallocating to altcoins as the altcoin season approaches? So, there are several things. The first, perhaps the quickest, yes, I hold some because I told you, we had already addressed this question regarding the size of the portfolio, that when a portfolio reaches a certain size, it's appropriate to de-risk these amounts a little by taking a crypto that will yield less in the end but will offer a bit more security, i.e., Bitcoin. Uh, what happens is that, and we had already seen it in a previous live, so I won't redo the exercise here because I haven't prepared the charts, we had already done it. Despite Bitcoin having a very good return since the beginning of its bull run, i.e., January 2000, February 2023, uh, chosen altcoins, good chosen altcoins, which are psychologically more difficult to hold because they perform over a shorter period of time than Bitcoin. And so statistically, we are more often in the red on altcoins than on Bitcoin, but in the end, we have a higher return on altcoins. Uh, and that's why I don't have you invest in Bitcoin. There you go. There are two methods at the moment. There is the first method where you can say, there are trade setups on Bitcoin that don't yield 200% per year, very sincerely, that offer a psychology, in any case, psychologically, something that is much less difficult than what we are experiencing now, i.e., periods in which we are in the green, or even if we are in the red, we are in the red by a few percent and not 10, 20, 30, 40%, and even more if we talk about cryptos like SPK. So, psychologically, it's easier because we are in the green more days of the year. However, 200% per year on a method that I can implement, yes, of course, on Bitcoin, is not possible. So, that's why, to achieve the promise I'm making to you, we have to go for what is more difficult, altcoins, but what is more profitable. Now, this is something I've thought about, and for me, there will be no problem doing it if some people want to. And we can do a little poll in the groups. By the way, if anyone wants to launch the poll now while we're doing the live, that would be great. Uh, a mod, not someone from the, not someone from the groups, because otherwise you'll launch four polls at the same time. Uh, a moderator, Bol Audi Audi, if you can, launch a poll for those who would like to take setups only on Bitcoin. So, we're not talking about swing trading here, we're talking about between day trading and swing trading, because these are positions we take for maybe 2 weeks, 3 weeks maximum, I think. So, it's possible to implement. 200% per year, however, I won't be able to achieve that. But 100% of 100% per year, that's largely achievable. However, 100% is largely achievable. So, there is this first step where there will be less gain, but psychologically it's much easier, let's not lie, because there are more days statistically in the year when we are in the green. A majority of the time in the year we are in the green, whereas a majority of the time on altcoins in step number 2, we are in the red. So, psychologically, it's much harder to hold on. You see this just within the community, you see it's much more difficult. But it's what will give the best results in the end. So, some will say, well, 100% is great, I prefer to be psychologically stable, everything is fine, I'm more comfortable. So, those who want to go for that, I can put these setups in the analysis, the buy-sell analysis rooms. So, those who want to, we launch the poll, and then those who want to, we can do that. So, these are things that will necessarily be a bit different. So, those who want to stick to one model rather than another, don't start looking at what's being done in the other model and cheat on your number 1 choice. Stick to the choice you make. I will be 100% Bitcoin. We'll do mid SW trading as I call it. There you go, we'll aim for 100%, 90%, 110%, whatever. And we'll stick to that. Second step is full altcoin, except when reaching a certain portfolio level where then we have to take some Bitcoin. That's normal. I already explained why. So, so, there you go. Question number 3. When we observe a sharp drop of around -20%, as Ariel explained in a live, should we wait for him to give a call before reloading, or can we directly apply the -20% rule? No, you can apply it directly, no need for a call from me. Sturgeon, question number 4. Uh, over what time horizon, from what analysis level, would the three-phase model be useful in two? Uh, I didn't understand the question. The three-phase model, uh, Ah! Ah, okay. Okay, I understand. Uh, yeah, I understand your question. In fact, in fact, no, it's not that there are necessarily three phases in a bull run, it's not necessarily that there are three. Uh, it's that I've identified three here. There might be four. Two is a bit short, but maybe there can be four. So, it's not something predefined. So, there you go. Surfer, why not reposition on a strong retracement rather than returning directly to ATH? Simply because STRK objectively is a less good cryptocurrency than ATH. Objectively speaking, if we take all the data, it's worse. It's worse, and because it's worse, it's a bit riskier. What was interesting to do regarding the move we made between selling ATH and repositioning, is that we had one that, well, they both have good data, but we had one that had made its pump, was in a distribution phase, which was quite obvious. The first to alert us was Andr, and then indeed, we looked, it was quite obvious that we were in distribution and that we had to get out of there. Exactly in the selling zone, plus, so perfect. And whereas the other one, STRK, was in an accumulation phase and was about to break out of its accumulation. So, there was a small move to be made that was quite interesting. Now, if both have pumped and both have retraced, it's more interesting to go for the better of the two, and the better of the two is ATH. Uh, question from Zorx. Do you think that in case of a systemic crisis comparable to 2008, even the most robust stablecoins could collapse without possibility of rebound? Of course, it's possible. However, there are some that are indeed backed, audited, like USDC, where this is not supposed to happen because they have enough assets to guarantee that the peg will remain 1 for 1 or at least very close to 1 for 1. So, so, there you go, I don't think something like the Terra Luna stablecoin could happen, where there wasn't much behind it, and it became apparent afterwards. That's why USDC is a good stablecoin to stay on in times of crisis if you want to stay in the crypto market and not convert to fiat. Question from Thunderstock. Based on what you've already explained, you're teaching us to use different data and tools for choosing cryptos, as well as technical analysis. Absolutely, but since you have access to certain information that we won't have, will our personal analyses risk being less precise, therefore less profitable, or will the difference be marginal? So, there are two things. There is indeed paid data that I use, of course. I believe that, for example, the CBD is now free, but at the time it was paid. I'm speaking under the control of the members, but I think it has become free, for example. So, that's very, very good data. Uh, for the rest, what is paid and slightly different from free sites, there are liquidations. Uh, after that, I look a lot at the options market, but frankly, that's maybe 25-30% of the work. So, there are indeed those who will take the training, who will learn everything, saying, "Well, I'll fly solo, so to speak, and then, well, you'll see solo." But that means that indeed, you'll have to get a paid tool, but well, it costs 20 bucks, it costs 25 bucks. So, depending on which group you're in, well, let's say not taking the subscription will cover the cost of the other access to information, or you stay in the community, and then you have all the information from all the paid sites that are combined here on Discord. So, there's a choice between the two. Uh, but obviously, paid information can bring a different perspective, of course. Uh, however, I still teach setups that are quite simple to use, others more complex, but which don't use paid data and which work very, very, very well. So, uh, there you go, at everyone's discretion. How long will the training last? Uh, for now, I have 30 hours of training. I'm working on it. Every day, I'm working on sound editing, cutting out the little bits, and it's super tedious. I'm currently working on one that's 1 hour and 37 minutes long. So, for now, I have about 30 hours. Uh, so maybe I'll do a few more videos, but I don't think it will exceed 35 hours. 35 maximum, between 30 and 35. So, it's quite an investment of time for you, and honestly, it won't be super easy. So, good luck. Uh, question from Halloween. I noticed the arrival of a new moderator, Cyriel, a few days ago. Can you introduce her to us and explain? Uh, no, actually, no, she's not a moderator. She works in the digital agency that works with us. Uh, and she's currently doing the final configurations for Discord, and other things for the new site. Uh, because, as you know, currently, well, you used to register on, on Millennium. I used to add you manually to the thing, and now she's making everything automatic. So, those who take, for example, the subscription in group 3, group 4, well, the entire server is private, and they land directly on the server, and the dispatch is done automatically. So, she's the one setting all of this up, but she's not part of the internal team, just in case. There you go, so no need to MP her or send her questions, she won't answer. Uh, tac tac. OK. OK, that's good. Seb, you seem confident about FET, is that still the case? As for me, on this crypto, I'm at -30%. Uh, frankly, let's get rid of it. Frankly, let's get rid of it. Those who still have it, get rid of it. Plus, I just came across the news, what is it? Because I was off today. I came across the news just 25 minutes ago. Uh, well, we have this famous merger of projects that was supposed to give birth to this super AI, which they are now separating. So, frankly, frankly, it smells bad for FET. I can't say, frankly, I can't say if it's still a scam and the thing will pump out of nowhere, but I think with this kind of news, or even the team collapsing, well, it doesn't look good, sincerely. Lalo, swing trading altcoins. No, no, forget it, forget it. No, because, in fact, the annoying thing about altcoins, and you're experiencing it, is that if Bitcoin, in trading, when I say trading, I mean really taking positions for a few days, a couple of weeks, to basically benefit from movements that go from here to more or less here. Then wait, take again when it comes around here, release when it comes around here. Well, we'll multiply trades that are much simpler visually than altcoins. There you go, because Bitcoin depends on fewer things than altcoins. Altcoins, well, we never know when they gain strength against Bitcoin before being in a confirmed altcoin season. So, altcoins are much more irregular. It's also why we don't play all the corrections and all the irregularities because altcoins have a truly random phenomenon compared to Bitcoin. That is to say, Bitcoin in its pattern is quite regular. Trading on Bitcoin is much easier. Uh, the returns are lower. And we come back a bit to what I explained at the very beginning. There are really two profiles that emerge. There's one: I want to make returns, I'm willing to make a bit less. I consider that 80, 90, 100% gain per year is largely sufficient. I prefer to take that role and I'll make less gains. OK. There's the second role, which is altcoins, random phenomenon, let's not lie. Uh, they can pump out of nowhere on their own. Well, we take ATH, ATH, for example, when it gave us its 80%, we know that these are good entries. The thing gives us 80%, and it's the only one to have done 80% in the same period of time. We don't know why it goes first, it has good data, well, it goes first, but at the same time, Luna, followed by, doesn't do much. Ave, well, we know it remains very good, but it doesn't do much either. There you go, same thing. We switch to Starknet. Well, we switch to Starknet. Well, we saw something, we don't know when it will happen. Well, there you go, it can pop out of nowhere. There aren't that many predetermined paths like Bitcoin, which are much easier to see. And that's why we can't play all the corrections, or when we notice, like now, that we're entering a market dynamic favorable to altcoins, even if we experience -5%, -4% over 2 or 3 days. Yeah. Well, we take them, we take them because we know that what's coming next is statistically 6 weeks in the year, 6, maybe 8 weeks maximum in the year during which altcoins perform incredibly well. So, we know that the time window is very short, and we know that when we approach it, it's not the time to give up. It's the time to be on it, to be patient, to accept taking a hit, because as soon as it wakes up, these things where we take a hit, where we have to be patient, etc., etc., are immediately recouped. So, there you go. Now, there are two schools, two types of profiles. Uh, there you go, everyone has their risk profile. I didn't do this for you when you joined the community because I don't have to. Because you need to know one thing, and I'm going to make a quick digression. Uh, I am a certified investment advisor by the AMF, but what I do with you is not considered investment advice in the French sense. Investment advice in the French sense is if I take you individually and I do a risk profile with a complete request of your assets, where they are distributed, your income, etc., etc., where we do all this aspect, a bit like if I were your bank advisor, and where I individually coach you, individually I make you take positions, I tell you buy this, buy that, and I am remunerated for it. That is the job of an investment advisor in the sense of the monetary and financial code. We make decisions, or rather, I make analyses that are collective for a community. There are calls given for a community, calls that I myself take. So, it's a bit like copy trading without being it, because well, there's no copy-paste, but I take the same positions, I give you my positions, in fact. So, it's not considered investment advice, to talk about it. Uh, but I don't know why I'm telling you this. Uh, yeah, I don't know why I'm telling you this. I lost my train of thought, I'm sorry. Yeah, I lost my train of thought. Uh, but, but yeah, I don't know anymore. We were talking about Bitcoin. Ah, I zapped. Uh, anyway, there you go. Well, I don't know why I'm saying this, but there you go. Uh, yeah. OK. Well, next. Uh, I'm just looking quickly. So, yeah, so again, so I, wait, I don't know if someone has launched the Ah, there you go. So, wait, let's see first. I'm voting Yes for Bitcoin. Ah, yeah, 24 against 4 votes. OK. Yeah, we feel that the market is currently hurting quite a few people. Yeah, no, because in itself, in itself, frankly, it's psychologically simpler. I myself wouldn't follow it. But if you want, we'll do both. Those who want to follow, you follow. But however, I insist, if you choose one model over another, you have to stick to it. Unless, of course, we notice that we are really in altcoin season, as we will be soon. And then, well, there you go, you switch, you switch. But you'll have to, well, you'll have to be careful. Gary, from what amount should we integrate Bitcoin PF? Uh, well, that's personal, it's my personal opinion again. Some may disagree with me, some will say, "You need Bitcoin in all PFs." Uh, I would say that you need Bitcoin or PF when you reach a few hundred thousand euros. More or less 300 to 400k, I think. I think, and that's the opinion I share. Why? Because I've been in your shoes, I'm aware that what everyone wants, when you have a small PF, when I call it a small PF, it's a few thousand euros to a few tens of thousands of euros. I consider that a small portfolio. I'm around €50,000, I consider that a small portfolio. Uh, up to that point, you want to multiply your gains. You want to multiply your gains because before that, it hasn't drastically changed your life. What I mean by that is, for example, uh, well, I'm doing it very schematically, but for example, the setup that can be on Bitcoin, most of the time yields between 17% and 25%. And sometimes, when you're lucky, for example, these big rises here, well, you can go higher, up to 50%. Well, when I say small PF, it's that someone who has maybe €2,000, €3,000, €4,000 will want to take the riskier solution to make x3, x4 directly and increase their capital as quickly as possible, to then, with a large capital, move to something more secure. Because if I put myself in the shoes of the average French person, and when I say that, don't take it badly, it's because I'm speaking statistically. The average French person statistically speaking, net, earns, I think, I think it's what, the average net income? Maybe €2,000 and a bit. So, if you have a PF of €50,000, and you work and earn €2,000 and a bit net, well, then in your psychology, you'll say, "Okay, the guy tells me that with Bitcoin, we can make moves of 17-24%, most of the time in the year we are in the green, psychologically, so I'm good, I have no trouble holding my positions, and 20% on €50,000 is still a good €10,000." So, €10,000, that's, yeah, that changes things. That changes things. I can withdraw three, I leave seven, I'm at €57 for the next move. And the next move, where there's 20%, well, it's not €10,000, it's €14,000 that I withdraw. And there you go. And I can withdraw a little, put it back, and so on and so on. So, there you go. OK. Andra €1400 net. OK. Yeah. Ah, France is tough. No, but we'll do everything to change this situation for everyone. But anyway, you understood me. So, answer the poll, it's in crypto analysis. Uh, answer it, and then we'll implement it, and then, so that, I think it will go better for many, for many. And Crypt Keeper says, and those who want to do 50/50, you'll choose, you'll choose in sum, in reality. In reality, we don't care. You'll just have to have honesty regarding the results we get. What I mean by honesty is not saying, "I'll choose Bitcoin all of a sudden when you see altcoins performing a bit better, knowing that you're not on profile number 2," start doing stupid things, that is, switching at the wrong time when no order has been given in that direction. Then, well, getting into bad positions and then complaining. There you go, that's what I call being honest, and there you go, because the problem, and I'm telling you, and we've experienced it with members who have been banned, is that some complain in the server, and then when we talk to them privately, Pretoriens and I, well, we realize that they are the first ones who didn't respect the school, who bought 30% higher for reason X or Y, who didn't sell when they should have because they said, "Come on, I'm going to, I'm going to go to the moon," and then they got crushed. And they weren't necessarily very honest, not everyone, some weren't very honest in the story they told on Discord. Whereas if everyone saw their actions, well, they'd say, "Well, of course, you messed up." So, naturally, there you go. So, be honest, and yes, from the moment you are honest in this, follow, if you choose 50/50, then follow what is said well, and then you'll come out a winner. There you go, I often say it, it's not the race that counts, it's the finish line. So, so, there you go. Uh, OK. Well, fight now in the general chat for the average net salary in France, because there, Andra between €1400 and Romain who says €2007, we're almost double. So, I don't know which source you looked at, but there's a bit of a problem. Well, let's go, the questions are finished. Hello, if you're nice, if there are other questions that arrive, if you can put them back in the chat room, so I'll see them afterwards, because we have to start. So, today's summary, I won't keep you in suspense until the end of the live. My work today was to completely go offline by myself with my computer, without discussing with the Pretoriens, without discussing with anyone. To start from scratch with all the truths we think are acquired at the moment, i.e., the 4-year cycle, it happens like this because it has always worked like this. To start from the principle that we know nothing, that everything is malleable, everything is modifiable, and to look at what we have in front of us to define where we are. And I concluded, and this conclusion was not made only by me, it was also made by the Pretoriens, it was made by a good acquaintance of mine, whom I will tell you about just after, if I don't forget, whom I called early this afternoon to give him my things, my analyses, and so everyone seems to agree with the result. And the result is that we are too early. We are too early at the moment. And where everyone agrees that by the end of this year, we are entering the last year of the 3 years of rise that we are supposed to have before a bear market year, which would close a 4-year cycle, where everyone thinks we are at the end and we are late,

Well, in fact, we are not at the end, we are not late at all, we are early. That's the conclusion. And I'm going to show you everything that leads me to tell you that we are early. And what also pushes us, because the Praetorians all agree with this principle, to say that we are early and not late. So that remains good news if we are early. It remains good news because if we are early, it means that what awaits us is exactly what we expect. There. So, for a little while now, whereas if we were late, well, we could say, "Well, we missed the thing and then everyone goes home and that's it." So in itself, it's good news. Now, what makes me say that, uh, and we'll start with that, is precisely market cycles. So market cycles, you know them, it's not really the chart you usually see, which is the one shown everywhere, the famous Wall Street Shit, I don't know what. Wait, where is it? I'll try to put it up. Uh, hop. So, two little seconds. Uh, YouTube YouTube image. Uh, yeah, [ __ ] but I'll put it up, I don't even have it. Anyway, you know which one it is. It's not really the same thing, in fact. Market cycles, we know the phases. There's a bear market, then we're in a recovery phase, meaning the economy is getting back on its feet. Then we have an expansion phase that begins with hope, with a tiny bit of euphoria, not much. Corrections that come to mess everyone up, and then a euphoria phase. We're off. Let's go! Uh, magnificent parabola, and then we crash. For me, right now, we are here. We are here where we are making upside. We correct several times, notably here, notably here. And what awaits us is what will happen here. Not right away, though. Not right away. Well, not right away. Yes, between November, December, end of this year and Q1 2026, or even Q2 2026. I'll explain why. The question at the origin of everything is how market cycles happen here, and especially in crypto, because what is commonly accepted is that the cycle lasts 4 years with more or less 3 years of rise, one year of fall. This basic principle that is on everyone's lips and in everyone's mind because it's what we've always known since 2013 in crypto, we've already questioned it in some videos, and here is an excerpt from the book that I will also release in a few weeks, which points out that cycles tend to lengthen in crypto, where we've seen from cycle to cycle, well, we gain a range of 3 to 6 months. That's something we've seen, and starting from that principle, without necessarily dwelling on why there's a cycle extension, well, we could start from the principle and the postulate that this cycle would also stretch by 3 to 6 months, and that this stretch of 3 to 6 months would bring the end of the bull run between December 2025, Q1 2026, if we take the biggest, the biggest extension, sorry, of 6 months. What's interesting is when you dig a little and say, "But why is this cycle getting longer?" Why is it getting longer? Because it's something we've known since 2008, since the subprime crisis, and because since 2008, something has happened. Something happens roughly every few decades: the economy changes. The economy changes, the directives, the involvement of central banks, the economic model changes, and it will continue to change in the future. What arises as a question right now is, typically, pardon, and this is a small digression I'm making quickly, and because we're also asking the question with the Praetorians, and we're already working to anticipate as much as possible what will happen, is what data will we no longer be able to take into account in a few years? For example, unemployment, which is data we use to anticipate recessions. Well, we know that with AI, there will be a lot of layoffs, that we will live in an economy that will fundamentally change because of, thanks to, we'll see, AI. And so, there will be an evolution. What we used to take as a marker, for example, of a recession, high unemployment rising by x percent, and so on, well, potentially it won't lead to a recession because it won't be due to an economic slowdown, but simply because there are mass layoffs because humans will be replaced by robots, who, on the other hand, don't sleep, aren't sick, aren't on sick leave, and have a productivity and a work phase that will be significantly higher. And so, we must already anticipate that in the future, we could have bull runs where unemployment will be in total contradiction with other economic indicators, and those who are still stuck in the economy we know now will not see this update coming, saying unemployment is rising. They will pull out unemployment charts with recessions every time there's a spike, and in fact, they won't understand that no, we just have a changing economic model. And the economic model that has changed since 2008 is a major intervention by central banks. We've said this many times, we've seen it, it's not a problem. But what has also changed is the way states, and especially the US, finance debt. And that's something extremely important because it's also what influences the cycle, liquidity. We've talked about that before. The liquidity cycle is one of the famous cycles that intertwines with market cycles, debt cycles, real estate cycles, and so on. And what's quite important when you look at the global economy since 2008 is that the liquidity cycle has changed. And we'll look at an image later that's circulating a lot, which is this one. We'll see it in a few seconds. The liquidity cycle has changed because, precisely, the debt cycle itself, and I'm talking about public debt, has also changed. That is to say, and we'll try to draw the diagram logically, you have an economy, let's take the US economy because it's the one that matters right now, a US economy whose debt relative to its GDP keeps increasing and increasing. There are many more expenses than tax revenue or other. And so, of course, there's a deficit. There's a deficit. There's a debt that is created, issued thanks to, we've seen it, treasury bonds. So bonds, which are short, medium, and long-term obligations. That goes from 1 month to 30 years. And so, of course, once these debts mature, when the maturity is reached, when they have to be repaid, well, we know that too, it's quite commonly accepted and everyone knows it. Well, they borrow, in any case, they find a way to refinance the debt through several mechanisms. Trump can use a mechanism he already used in 2016, and we'll see it just after, which is a copy-paste, what we're doing now, a maximum devaluation of the dollar, and a common strategy of lowering the dollar through lower interest rates, through many other mechanisms. And so, what happens is that we have a liquidity cycle that normally, according to this image, should mature, oops, end of 2025. However, this image was created some time ago, okay? Those little circles going up and down. This image wasn't made 2 weeks ago. It was made years ago, taking into account normal cycles without external intervention that could modify this cycle. And I'll give you a clue. This chart was created before 2020. And what happened in 2020-2021, you know, something that had a huge impact on the markets, the US economy, the global economy, was Covid. Covid arrived, Covid arrived, and it caused a huge amount of debt to be added to the US debt. And this debt was accumulated with bonds with an average maturity of 5.4 years. I think it's written here. Uh, wait. Come on, chart. I don't know if it's this one or not. Hm hm. No, it's not here anymore. It's not here anymore. But in any case, briefly, it's about 5.4 years on bonds that were taken out until 2021, late 2020, 2021. And so, that's why we have a maturity of this debt coming at the end of this year and especially early 2026. You can see, the amounts are quite enormous. And so, in fact, what happens is that if we take into account the impact of Covid, because we experienced Covid thanks to the huge liquidity injection from the Fed, lowering rates to zero, and so on, but what wasn't really anticipated by the market, some anticipated it, like this company called Crossborder Capital, which did this, and also updated other charts that are quite interesting and that we'll see later. Well, what wasn't anticipated but needs to be reviewed is the future impact of Covid in relation to this public debt that was reinforced in 2021 and whose maturity is arriving, well, end of 2025 through Q2 2026, because the liquidity cycle globally depends on that. The state will ensure to create liquidity artificially, naturally, whatever, to be able to roll its debt, refinance itself, postpone the problem for later, and it's precisely afterwards that we will catch an immense, immense bear market. And so, if we start from that principle, it's not crazy to say that this curve should be shifted. The top should be shifted to here. Q1, Q2, maybe even Q3 2026. We'll see that just after. And when we really look at the major indicators of the economy, well, everything points to this market. Everything points to this market, to this configuration, sorry. And we'll see what that is in a few moments. Uh, that's said. Okay. This is the second chart I'm going to show from this famous company Crossborder Capital. The boss is the first one who put in place this chart of liquidity cycles. So he's not just anyone. He's a guy, he's a super, super sharp guy who has what's called a CFA. CFA is the highest degree you can have in economics. Super hard, super hard to pass. But well, that's it. There. And he, with his guys who are infinitely more competent than me, have made a projection of liquidity creation through all possible stimuli by the Fed and the US Treasury. And what's super interesting is that precisely these projections, and we'll see some charts that support this, because you can see that in 2025, we are negative in terms of stimulus, meaning there's a drainage of liquidity. Liquidity is leaving the market. Where we have markets making new highs, in fact, we don't yet have massive liquidity from the US perspective. Well, they project a lengthening of this liquidity cycle into 2026 with various stimuli. For example, treasury bond buybacks, a QE procedure, a hidden QE procedure, meaning buybacks of treasury bonds by the Fed. Yes, it's not direct QE. It's not considered in the Fed's balance sheet as QE, but it's still QE because they are buying assets and treasury bonds. So, that's what's happening. That's what's happening, and we see that from several indicators. First indicator, this is the percentage of banks that are cutting rates. So the percentage of central banks in the world that are lowering rates and will create a very liquid ecosystem where a lot of liquidity is created. So here you have in blue, the blue just here, it's the percentage of banks that are lowering rates, and in red, those that are raising rates. And we can see that those that are lowering rates, it's quite simple, we're at 70%. 70% of central banks in the world, and the biggest central banks in the world are among them, are lowering rates. So we have an environment that is starting to create, to provoke, sorry, economic stimuli in terms of liquidity. And let's recall, liquidity is what drives markets the most. We saw in the last live, there are many things that drive markets. There are of course the news, and we'll see, well, the ESM, that's super important, liquidity, news, interest rates, and so on. But we saw in the last live that liquidity is really the most important macro indicator when we talk about risk markets. And we saw that Bitcoin has been correlated by about 90%. Even if sometimes it's ahead, even if sometimes it's behind, 90% of the time, it follows exactly what liquidity does in a bullish macroeconomic environment. And so, this bullish environment, we are really starting to create it. We can see every time we've had a global rise in rate cuts, in terms of the number of banks cutting rates, we've had a huge injection of liquidity into the markets that followed, not immediately, but later. We can see the crossover here, it was done in 2019. We remember the mega bull run we saw in 2021. Well, it happened 2 years later. So there's still a slight lag, but we are really arriving at this rise. We are not yet at a market peak, and this rise will drive liquidity because what's quite interesting is not so much taking M2. Where is it? It's over there. It's not here anymore. Let's put it here. Hop hop. So where is it? Where are you M2? Here. What's interesting, and here we need to be very cautious, is not to look at M2 and say liquidity keeps going up, it keeps going up, it keeps going up. What's interesting, and what we need to do with all macro data, is to look at year-over-year changes. That's what will tell us if liquidity is entering or leaving the market. And what we've actually seen in the market for a while, and you can see it in the blue histogram here, is that liquidity is being drained from the system. There was the end of the bull, the end of the bear market, sorry, which made us plunge to the bottom. And where we say we have a bull run taking place because Bitcoin is going up and up and up, in reality, we've returned to zero. That is to say, if liquidity, I am the central banks, the merger of all central banks, and I put 1000 into the market, then I take back my 1000 and I also take 1000 from the market, or and so the market is down 1000. In fact, I've just returned what I took. I haven't added anything more to the market compared to the 2017 cycle, the 2021 cycle. And here, we're entering it. We're just starting to enter it. We've just returned to the market the liquidity that was drained from it since the entire bear market. And so, that's where we need to start thinking that what we've experienced so far has been a long phase of liquidity return to the market. That's all. Not monetary creation as we might think with M2, even if M2 is rising. M2 is rising, and that's logical because, again, liquidity is being returned. So, naturally, M2 is growing, whereas before it should have decreased rather than grown, like here. If we had M2 doing year-over-year changes, as we call it, meaning year-over-year changes, we shouldn't have had this spike here. We should have had exactly what we have here, which is a decrease in this liquidity. So we are actually entering it, and it's in line with central bank policies. And so, according to these charts, we are early, we are early, and we are not at all in a phase where we have reached the top of the liquidity cycle, and as we can see, it will start in 2026. So this projection is consistent with the figures that are already here. Even though this projection wasn't made yesterday, it was made weeks and weeks ago. It's consistent with what we're seeing. So that's very important to take into consideration, and that's why we could have what we expect in early 2026, winter 2026, with Bitcoin, which for now would be around here. Okay, so that's the basic principle. Second principle, it's something, an economic data, you know I like a lot and which is very important, and that's the ISM. So, the ISM, let's recall, is an economic indicator that takes many things into account, especially in the sector of companies that produce goods, not services. There's the ISM for companies that produce goods, so everything you buy in stores, and the ISM for service companies. What will interest us is more the goods, because obviously, if we see companies, and we've already done this exercise many times, where we see new orders, raw material purchases, purchases of not necessarily finished products but semi-finished products increasing, it's because these companies are saying, "Very well, we have statistics and we see that more consumers want to buy, so we need to produce more to meet demand." And if these companies produce more, we have an expanding economy. And if we have an expanding economy, we have an ISM, this green curve, rising, rising, rising. And what's quite interesting is to note something again: the ISM does not indicate at all that we are in an upward expansion phase. We are in a recovery, a beginning of recovery compared to a bullish market cycle, let's recall. We are regaining what we lost, we are not gaining anything yet. The balance here is at zero. We are not at plus 1000 in terms of liquidity, we are at zero compared to what was held back. So going from the abyss to zero, naturally, well, the ISM rises. But the ISM is still a little timid. It's a little timid, but it will rise. We've seen the statistics together, we've seen the figures, the ISM will rise, and if it rises, well, what awaits us is what's over there. And if we look at the figures, the ISM, we are not even at figures that indicate significant economic expansion. We've seen this before, it's when we pass 50, we're at 49.1. So, that's really what we need to wait for. Now, it's an ISM that is rising, but we have almost everything indicating it. We have more orders for companies. We continue to see copper rising again, platinum rising, completely exploding, silver rising. Now, gold is something else because it's not really the precious metal that is most used in the goods produced by companies. But we have all these metals rising drastically. What's also interesting is to look at other factors. Where we need to look at other factors is especially concerning banks, hedge funds, the behavior of the Fed, the behavior of the US Treasury, and all of this. And this one, we'll take a step into something that will be even more complicated. We'll go back to the basics and then we'll hop and look at the metrics together. This chart, if you don't remember what it is, well, I'll scold you because we've seen it so often that you should know it by heart. This chart represents precisely, and here you have the number of treasuries sold by the Fed on the temporary market. So what does that mean? It means that here you have a chart showing the number in billions, here of US treasury bonds, US obligations, sold by the Fed to whom? Well, to whoever wants to buy them. Okay? But in billions, when you get to 2100 billion, so 2 trillion dollars, believe me, it's not Mr. and Mrs. Everyone, it's the big banks, the big investment funds that are de-risking. These big investment funds and others are saying, "It stinks, the macro stinks." So, my money, I'm going to put it back into something very safe. I'll remind you why they do it: because when you deposit with the Fed, there are no deposit guarantees, it returns all your money. Whereas in the US, if you put it in an account, well, you are guaranteed up to $250,000. $250,000 is the maximum you get back. Okay? If there's a bank failure, if the bank has no extra funds, well, you have 1 billion, you get $250,000 back, and sorry sir, we don't have more. There, sorry. So for very large portfolios, it's a way to secure. Hop, we put it with the Fed. We take short-term bonds if we don't want to tie ourselves up for too long, and our money is secure. So when it goes up, in short, let's recall, it means that the big players see a zone of turbulence approaching. When it goes down, it means they say, "Okay, the storm has passed, I can expose myself elsewhere, I have no interest in coming here to this market to buy treasury bonds from the Fed." And so, when we see a Fed that can no longer sell bonds, or in any case, a curve that is decreasing, it means that these people will expose themselves elsewhere. And where is elsewhere? In risk markets. And what we observe right now is that we are at, and wait, hop, I didn't even see it. We are at historic lows. There are only 4.6 billion on this. Let's say 5.2 here yesterday, it was sluggish yesterday. 5.2. So, realize one thing: in a context where we are supposed to have a market top in 3 months, and in a context where the last time, that is to say in 2021, they started to de-risk from April, and let's look at the figures here, where was it? 460. Wait, hop. There. But in May, we really exceeded key levels that indicated that the big players saw something coming. But 2021 was where? It was here. We still had, shortly after, almost, in weeks, we had another 26 weeks of rise after this big correction. But the market, remember one thing, they have people, funds, companies, they have infinitely competent people, and they know all of this that I'm explaining perfectly. They expose themselves to billions, they work 20 hours a day. Okay, they know. And so all those who are calling for a top here until November, December, and that's precisely what seemed strange to me, they know. So why do they remain so much in risk assets? Why do they continue to expose themselves even more, even more? We see the data, they are highly exposed, they have never been so much, and so on. Well, it's because they know all of this. They know all of this, and we are too early. We are much too early. We are much too early. And the last time, they did it 6 months before the end. They started to de-risk 6 months before the end of the bull run. In crypto, at least. No, it was also on, no, it was also on NASDAQ and S&P 500. 6 months before, they started to de-risk, and we saw this curve rise dramatically. So that's not something I take into account. But if we say that there are 6 months during which we should see this curve rise beforehand, that explains why Q2 should start in January, and not here in October. So, in any case, we have something at this level. What's also interesting is that I was talking about stimuli earlier. I was talking about stimuli, where was it? Uh, hop, because I've opened a lot. I was talking about stimuli that central banks use to boost the economy, bring liquidity into the market, and so on. We're focusing on the US because it's not just the US, we know that, but the US is behind compared to others. We know that China is already at stratospheric levels of QE, liquidity, and so on. Japan is also starting to be quite active. Europe too, they are ahead, and the US is really lagging behind. And so, in stimuli, there are many things. There are periods of QT, QE, we've seen that. There are periods of rate cuts and hidden QEs, as we call them. So, let's start with the simplest, rate cuts. Rate cuts are here. They are starting to cut rates. Why? Why are they cutting them? That's super important because the economy right now, we look at everything, and apart from private debt which is starting to pick up gently but can remain at quite high levels for a long time, there's not much. When we examine them one by one, apart from unemployment, but we'll see that just after, unemployment, we'll talk about it. Apart from unemployment, everything else indicates that we've just come out of a mini-recession. That's what the indicators tell us. At the very limit, we've just come out of a mini-recession and we're heading for better. That's what they tell us. So why cut rates? And the main reason, but Powell won't say it because, of course, he'll be insulted, the main reason is not to stimulate the economy because does this need to be stimulated? We're not taking altcoins because Powell doesn't give a damn about altcoins, let's be honest. Does this need to be stimulated? I don't think so. Where is it? Where is it? Does this need to be stimulated? No. This no. This no. Not at all. Nothing needs to be stimulated right now. Okay. And we'll see that just after. Even unemployment doesn't need to be stimulated. In any case, a drop in unemployment. They need to cut rates because debt is coming to maturity, and if they don't want to worsen the situation of the US in the coming years, they must refinance this debt at a lower cost. And Powell has to ensure the stability of the dollar. That's always the case. Stability of households through inflation, stability of the currency, and a short-term devaluation of the currency to prevent a huge debt wall from creating even more interest on the debt. That's also his mission. Okay? And so, that's why he's starting to cut rates just as we're entering a period of enormous debt refinancing. Doesn't it seem strange to you that the first rate cut, the first drop, September 2024, okay, short-term bond rates, and we'll see that just after, are not falling enough, and we arrive between 2024 and now at a situation where markets are at their highest, inflation is controlled, or even according to him, there's a slight rebound in inflation, and we need to be a little careful because the core PCE blah blah blah bullshit bullshit because in any expanding economy, inflation follows. So if he wants to eradicate inflation forever, he has to eradicate economic cycles and eradicate expanding economies. That's not possible. And so, that's why when we arrive, as now, in a phase of evolution, economic expansion, rising ISM, and so on, inflation will grow, and he won't be able to do anything about it because it's a natural mechanism. However, where he sees that it hasn't fallen enough is especially concerning this. 2-month, 1-year, 2-year rates, and so on. 10-year, 20-year, 30-year, we can leave them, it's not a problem. It's rather short-term rates that need to fall, because if they remain too high, unfortunately, well, again, we can refinance the debt. But the goal is to be able to refinance it in the best-case scenario. Refinance it thanks to, wait, where is it? Refinance it if you had all of this at, I said something stupid, at 10% every 3 years. If you can refinance with the same amount but not at 10% interest but at 5%, that's good. One way or another, you win. You postpone the mess, but the mess later will be a little smaller than it is now. And so, don't you find it strange that just when there's a huge maturity, by chance, the economy is doing better than a year ago, and we're expecting, what, three rate cuts by the end of the year, we've already had one, so there are two more. It's because rates don't significantly influence 10-year, 20-year, 30-year rates, but they significantly influence 2-month, 1-year, 2-year rates. And 2-year rates are practically a mirror of the ISM, aren't they? Look, it almost seems, frankly, it almost seems like we took a chart and mirrored the two with, anyway, there. So what they want to do is lower rates, refinance debt, short-term rates will fall, more liquidity in the market, and so on, economic expansion that truly begins. And every time we've had these huge rate cuts like here, we've had a spike in the ISM every time. Every time, every time. So rate cuts, that's good. QT, that's where we're going to get to. That's where it's going to get complicated. Until now, it was easy. That's where it's going to get complicated. It's going to be here. So here you have, not the number of bonds sold by the Fed to other third parties in the private or public sector, because other states can also buy into this. Here you have the opposite, the number of US bonds, the famous hidden QE, that are bought by the Fed. And so, they should report this on the balance sheet, but they don't. Of course. We already highlighted that in June 2025, they had discreetly bought 11 billion in securities. 11 billion. There, it went unnoticed, no one talked about it, it's reported nowhere or in documents where you really have to search like crazy to find them and then take the PDF. We also highlighted that they had started again last September. I don't know if you remember, it was a relatively small amount, 1.5 billion, but

There was still something. And there, they started again on September 30th, a week and a half ago, 5 billion. That's a way to inject liquidity into the system extremely quickly if needed. And if needed, it's when banks gently reach levels where liquidity decreases, decreases, decreases, decreases, and precisely the Fed has to do something. And what is that something? It's stimulating the economy by lowering rates. But that's a slow mechanism because first, there's the rate cut. Then there's monetary creation through debt. And by the time everyone creates their money and passes it from one actor to another, there's a slight delay. With this, there's no delay, it's quite immediate, and we see that barely a week and a half ago, well, 5 billion directly. There, they started again with very small amounts here, but 5 billion is not nothing. And that will lead us precisely to hidden QE, which is happening right now. We see it here. And now, we're going to talk about something that isn't hidden, that is in plain sight for everyone, and that is the famous QT, the famous QE as well, what everyone talks about on YouTube and so on and so forth, and raises the question of the third stimulus which happens in two stages. First stage, it's not necessarily QE but at least a reduction. Second stage, to really stimulate the economy enormously, QE. What we want, and what would already be bullish, is for them to stop QT. Stop QT. That at least is better because we know what the Fed buys in priority in stratospheric amounts like here, it's government bonds held by banks, held by hedge funds. So as it buys them in exchange for cash, of course, and not other things, it's Treasury bills, well, they give cash. They have these bonds as assets on their balance sheet, and the banks get cash. Conversely, here when it decreases, it's precisely because, as they have Treasury bills that have maturities, and many even have very short maturities. So bills with, yes, T-bills that are less than a year, 1-year bills, 2-year bills, whatever. Well, when they mature, they simply don't repurchase them. They don't repurchase them, they let them expire. And so, of course, since they let them expire and don't repurchase them, you don't have QE continuing, you have QT where it goes down, it goes down. The assets it has at its disposal, these bills are no longer in its accounting, and since they are no longer in the accounting, well, we have QT that continues, that continues, that continues. Okay? That even decelerates. What will be interesting, and where it will get complicated, is to look at something that is quite, quite, well, for once, I'll say it again, it's a word I use a lot, very interesting, it's this paper in relation to another paper by our dear Audi. Audi, who worked on, so who is a Praetorian for those who don't know yet, who is a Praetorian in the group. In fact, I'm very happy because there are really some good gems. Not in crypto, but in this Praetorian group. Really, I'm very happy. They are all top-notch. And Audi tackled the subject and produced a document that is really nice. Okay. Uh, and I sent him this right after. And we'll start with that first before looking at his document. This, and I'll put it here, this is a press release that was made in July in Dallas by a certain Mr. Christopher G. Waller. So Mr. Waller, who is a governor on the Board of Governors. So they are the ones who make decisions in the FOMC because, as you probably know, it's not just Jerome Powell who votes, he's not alone in saying, well, we're raising rates, we're lowering rates. There's a Board of Governors, in particular, that votes on decisions, and he was there for a conference in Dallas and explained quite a few things that are misunderstood by a majority of people or at least understood in a partial way, and that's precisely the role of the Fed in several respects, and which explains why it does QE or QT. So he explains in his paper, I can put it on the Discord if you want. Uh, he explains a lot of things regarding the balance sheet, yes, that it has grown over time, uh, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. And where it gets interesting is that he starts to say several things, it's precisely the role of the Federal Reserve. Beyond Jerome Powell's nice speeches which are blah blah blah blah blah blah, he clearly explains the roles which are at two levels. First thing, do QE here to support the economy when needed. Like during Covid. Currently, don't expect too much either. Strong QE during an expansionary period like we're experiencing now, yeah, that's unlikely. So that's okay, we know that. Second thing, which is much less known, is precisely to be able to provide liquidity to the banking system by moving reserves, which are short-term reserves, to long-term reserves. And we'll explain what that is in a few seconds. So he specifies that. When liquidity starts to decrease in the banking system, it requires daily interventions from the Fed in the markets. The daily interventions he refers to are coming from time to time when there's a lack of liquidity, stimulating all of this by injecting a lot of money, by buying Treasury bills, securities, as they are called, from these banks. That's the daily intervention to provide liquidity. What's rather interesting isn't so much there, it's what he'll say next. So he recalls a principle that is indeed at the origin of everything, which is that when we talk about the balance of assets versus the Fed, and we'll put it back, this is accounting. So here we only see assets, but in accounting, for those of you who are self-employed, who have businesses, etc., this will resonate with you. There's accounting that says assets imply liabilities. And again, for those who are used to managing this and know it, but for those who don't, it can be a bit complicated and abstract. When you have your accounting, assets must always equal liabilities. So you have your assets, you have liabilities, and the accounting rules are made so that even if you have a lot of cash, etc., and you have a lot of assets, well, on the liabilities side, there are items that balance it out so that in the end, the sum of the ones minus the others equals zero. You have a perfectly balanced sheet. And so he reminds us of this by saying that precisely for all the assets they have purchased, there must be corresponding liabilities. That's the first thing. And these assets and liabilities are strongly influenced by various things. Bank reserves, the TGA, which is the Treasury's bank account. We'll talk about that in a few moments as well. And what he explains, which is quite important, is that precisely beyond these assets and liabilities which must be adjusted, and I'll explain to you in a few moments why that's important, well, he's saying something that is incredibly, incredibly crazy, which is that they have And where is it? Hop hop hop, it's here. Yes, that they have a rule at the Fed, looking at the accounting of bank reserves, they have a calculation they do, a calculation they take into account to decide to stop QT. And this calculation isn't super complex, it's just here, he says it, problems start to emerge when reserves fall below 8% of GDP. So we'll see, don't worry, we'll see all these figures. When bank reserves on the Fed's balance sheet, which are on the Fed's liabilities because it's money it owes, when these reserves fall below 8% or close to 8% of GDP, the Fed knows it's bad and that it needs to stimulate. Remember, around 8%. So it starts to get cautious when it reaches 10%, roughly. That's what it means. We'll go back to Audi's document, which he annexed here, a little thing that I'll take right here, which is precisely a graph called liabilities and capital. So liabilities are precisely the liabilities. And here, you have bank reserves on the Fed's balance sheet. And what's quite interesting is that if before it maintained itself with ups and downs, since last July, it's crashing. We were, you can see, at 3.4 trillion dollars last July. Now we're at less than 3 trillion dollars. We've lost, yeah. About 400, 440 billion in bank liquidity there. Okay. Roughly. So what's happening, as Audi highlighted here, is that bank reserves, when he did the calculation, were still at 3 trillion. So now it's slightly below. So the percentage is dropping. Bank reserves relative to GDP, which is about 30.49 trillion currently, we're at 9.8. It's bad. Excuse my language, because it has to be said, it's bad when you get to 8%. We're at 9.8%. Knowing that there's always a slight lag between when stimulus is injected into the economy and when it's felt in the market. They need to intervene immediately. They need to intervene. And that's why, thanks to the current loss of bank reserves, which will influence the Fed's asset-liability balance, currently, asset-liabilities are largely impacted at the Fed level. And that's why, hop, we'll put it back. Where is it? That's why QT, they can't continue it for much longer. They can't. And we still have a governor on the board, it's not just any YouTuber saying it, it's a governor who's been on the board for a while who explains how it works. QT won't last very long. And if we go back to Audi's magnificent document, which gave us a very nice projection, if we continue to fall like this in terms of bank reserves, of course, that's the variable, if it continues to fall like this, well, the Fed will have no choice but to stop QT by December at the latest. There. So, we saw it, we discussed with Audi for a while. We have the TGA, so the Treasury account, which is also calculated on the Fed's balance sheet, or rather, on the Fed's accounting, which is increasing. So that might postpone it a little, but basically by the end of this year, early next year, the Fed will have no choice, they have to stop QT. And no one is talking about this on social media because these are principles that are just complicated enough that they don't appear on YouTube. But again, I can guarantee you that we are doing this, we are working on it, it's cool, it might seem too crazy, but the very big players have already done this work. They have analysts full-time, about ten of them working just on this. So they know this. Everything I'm telling you, they know, and that explains why they are fully in the market, at risk, and not de-risking yet. So this is what's coming, this is what's on the horizon, as our Quebec colleague would say. This is what's coming. And again, we'll have a third stimulus. End of QT, hidden QE, rate cuts, not just by the Fed, let's remember, by all central banks. We are largely moving out of the passive phase we had just before, and all of this is having a huge impact on the charts, really, really huge. We see it in liquidity as well, year after year, where we are not at all at the highs like in 2021. If we take the global M2, well yes, it's going up, it's going to the moon because, well, it doesn't take into account year-over-year changes. Here, we see that liquidity is returning, it's leaving, it's returning, it's leaving. Now it's gently returning. That's for later. That's for later. That's for later. That's for later. It's for now. There. So all of this leads us to say that precisely, I say us because the Praetorians are not with me, that in fact, we are early. In fact, we are early, and where we say to ourselves, because we have our charts like some, and I can include myself in that, like some Google users, I include myself for that matter. We have charts in linear form like this, and we say to ourselves, well, we observe a rise, we are at all-time highs, so we are in expansion, but in fact, no, not yet. We are not yet in expansion. What we are doing is exactly what we did here in 2015-2016. We are doing exactly the same thing. We are climbing stairs gently at a time when the ISM was also quite timid before it made its bullish breakout, like it will make its bullish breakout, and just before starting the meteoric rise of Bitcoin. There, we are doing the same thing as here, and therefore we are early. That's the main conclusion. So we are early, and all of this is reflected in the charts. Honestly, this is having a huge impact on the charts. And I'm going to show you a few, and you'll tell me what you think. Uh, just a moment, I'll just grab my thing because, tac tac tac. There. So, we'll take our cryptos for fun, and that's precisely where I'll show him this image. We have this image that we often refer to for the path to Altseason, what everyone waits for for 6 years and which never arrives until it arrives for 2 months and everyone misses this season because people gave up before. Bitcoin going alone, Ethereum, Low Cap coins. When I do this analysis that I've just put together, that I've just done in over an hour, and I look at the cryptocurrency charts, for me, the work hasn't started. There's a bullish extension for Bitcoin, certainly, because it's going up, it's the least risky asset in the big drawer of cryptocurrencies. There's immense institutional adoption, so it has no choice but to go up. Let's not lie, it has no choice but to go up. There's such enormous adoption that the old fellow is going up as he should. Frankly, very good, we've seen a rise in ETH. We haven't even made new highs on ETH. We've returned to normal levels. And when I, when I flatten the chart like this and flatten it a bit, what I observe is not an ascent like here with a parabolic phase. What we observe is a big range, in fact. It's a huge range that we haven't broken yet, in which there's strong accumulation. And this, when you look at the majority of cryptos, and we just make an effort to flatten, well, not to flatten to the ground, but if we make an effort to flatten the thing, well, the structures we have are clearly accumulation structures where almost none have broken their upward structure. Let's take Ave, we don't have, we don't have, we don't have a bullish parabolic reaction. We have an accumulation phase here. Breakout, re-accumulation. Very good. CRV, same thing. We are still in an accumulation phase. The CBD demonstrates it, it accumulates, it accumulates, it just accumulates. Uh, well, in fact, we don't talk about it because, well. Uh, ATH too, if we make the effort not to look at its one-minute chart with candles like that and we come to something that is still more adapted to a cycle, we are, we are on a big accumulation range. A big range, we had the bottom, we're almost touching the upper bound. We retrace a bit, we'll see where we go. Let's take the CBD, same thing, it's accumulating everywhere, and let's take all the other cryptos, and it's the same, it's the same. There's no bullish breakout, it's really ranges. Maybe just because, yes, maybe just a little rise and then it consolidates. But it's the same thing. Take Uni, we just make an effort to zoom out a little to realize where we are in the environment. Guys, it's, it's an accumulation range. We are early. That's clearly what's happening, waiting for a bullish breakout. We are sideways, as they say, and we are waiting for it. We are waiting for a breakout like we had here, like we had here, like we had everywhere. And when I look at our altcoins and all the altcoins, except for BNB, which is currently making its bullish resolution, well, for me, all our altcoins are in this. BNB is the first to go, that's normal. We'll see why later. We are clearly in this or in this before that. And it shows when we take all these elements and we make the effort to say, very well, at the macro level, we see that we are early, and from there we go to the charts, and we realize that on the charts, we are really at the levels that, in theory and even in practice, are the best levels to enter, where you just have to not, if we take, let's take Uni, because Uni is an example, we are on charts where you just have to not say, we are in one hour and we look at the chart like this, where we say, no, from a cyclical point of view, of expansion, contraction, accumulation, from a cyclical point of view, we are still in an accumulation phase, like any early phase of a bull run, if we take other charts to confirm it, let's take, hop, it's not that, let's take Total 3, okay, there's a lot of stuff. Brace yourselves. What's quite interesting with Total 3 is that from the moment we had, at the time, in 2021, we had the bullish breakout, we had the previous high which was here in December 2017, we broke it, we passed, we retested, we still stayed around this resistance/support a little bit, and then we took off. From the moment we broke out and took off, there were about 38 weeks before reaching the ATH. Here, we broke out. If we assume that this candle counts and that we won't have a green one closing above, 38 bars, that brings us to next June. This entire extension, extension, retracement, extension, was done over 38 weeks. So there, 38 weeks, that brings us to Q2 2026, precisely within what should be, with the data we have now, the top of this liquidity cycle which is delayed, extended due to all the mechanisms I've explained to you. Okay, that's the first point. When we also look at the ISM, we see clearly how important the ISM is. The ISM develops, great, it goes up. The ISM crashes, it crashes. The ISM stays a bit in range mode, we go up, we make highs, we retrace, we go up, we retrace. What are we doing? We're doing the same thing. I mean, you don't need to have monumental visual acuity to say, "Okay, there." And that's precisely why, even though liquidity was still enormous here at Bitcoin's peak while it had already started its bear market, well, it started a bear market because the ISM is the number 1 macro indicator that everyone looks at to see if we are in economic expansion or contraction. And here we see since May, well okay, we had a huge divergence between the price and the ISM which was already starting to collapse. The big players have access to this chart. They noticed since May, remember, since May, look at the number that was there. They started de-risking in April, it accelerated in May. In May, what did we have? In May, we have the ISM figures, the ISM plunges while everything was supposed to be in expansion, everything was going well. ISM at stratospheric levels of 64 points. We fall. Correction. The market de-risks because it sees that economic expansion is over. We are decelerating before entering a phase of economic contraction. That's how important the ISM is. And Total 3, like Bitcoin, is not the right chart, it follows the ISM considerably. What's also interesting, and we'll come back to it, is BNB. BNB. The question of why BNB is breaking out while the rest is correcting. Very well, we are here. BNB is breaking out. Okay, very good. We know that, no problem. Let's compare what happened between BNB and Total 3 the last time this happened. So, Total 3 list, here it is. Okay, let's zoom in. Hop, hop. There, the last time BNB broke out of its range and made its parabolic phase, the first parabolic phase in any case, at the time when Total 3 was precisely on the week it was tickling its ATH. So BNB goes first. Why? I have absolutely no idea. There's always this famous path. I think it's just Binance. Well, it's Binance that pumps its coin like crazy. They go crazy with their coin, because if you take other large caps, they aren't doing that. So for me, it's Binance that's doing what it needs to do. But what's super interesting is that this first breakout phase we had here, followed by a very short corrective phase. The second push at the same time as the entire altcoin market, which woke up just after BNB. BNB also pushed, but Total 3 pushed like crazy. Really, really crazy. It made its divergence pattern with the ISM, no problem. But this would explain why BNB pumps first. History repeats itself, and for once, BNB depends mainly on Binance. Binance has so much liquidity to make it pump, they do what they want. You can completely remove the reasoning about liquidity going to gold and then and all that. BNB is a separate thing. BNB is a separate thing, but historically we've seen that BNB pumped before the rest. Uh, wait just look at what, here it was already there. Did it do the no, here it pumped at the same time. It's so early at the same time that it's at the same time. So we have the same pattern setting up, really the same. The same everywhere. Interesting to note when we also take, hop, Total 3 and ISM, we've done that, no problem. Remember also one thing because there's a lot to see and that's why it's Wait, hop, what's happening on the chart? Uh, tired poll percentage 9.3. Yes, we avoid it. We remove the Sorry, I'm removing the poll, Romain, because it's Hop there. There. People shouldn't know how much you earn per month. That should remain confidential. We should avoid things. We should avoid things because, uh, we'll talk about it later, but, uh, I told you, we've already had stolen photos from this Discord, and we must keep in mind that someone who is ill-intentioned, or even people who could be ill-intentioned on this Discord server, like on other servers for that matter, we don't have a monopoly on annoying people, that's for sure. Fortunately, for that matter, they can be ill-intentioned towards the person or the staff managing the community, but they can also be ill-intentioned towards the people within it. So be careful. I don't want to be a conspiracy theorist, etc., but people who get kidnapped and have their fingers cut off, it's not just YouTubers. So talk to each other, no problem. Send each other private messages, it's great that there's this understanding between you. But even in private, even if there's a guy you like, never give your wallet. Even if it's like, "Yeah, how much do you have and all that?" Don't give it, don't give it. You don't know who you're dealing with. You don't know. You have a username, you have an image, okay, the rest you don't know. So be careful, be wary of these things. ISM Bonds, we've seen, there's a correlation, an enormous anti-correlation. Okay? Here, everything fell because of Covid. So when there was Covid, everything fell. It's normal that there was a correlation between the two. Uh, here, we see it clearly. We see it clearly, anti-correlation. We know that bonds will continue to fall with the rate cuts. That's something we know. Stimulus, expansion phase, we go up. No need to identify. What's also interesting is to say, the rest, what are all the other elements that lead us to conclude that yes, we are at the beginning of something, and we'll put it back. Precious metals, which are used a lot in manufacturing sectors, platinum, copper, silver, not gold for that matter, silver, gold to talk about it. We also saw, just not to repeat, we saw in gold cycles when it makes its bullish breakout, a bit like BNB, it's a precursor to what's coming. It's a precursor to what's coming. It absorbs liquidity like we had, not here at this peak, a little, a little, how to say, I won't say timid, but yes, no, in fact, yes, a little, but we had the 2020 spike, we had the spike in the 80s. Bitcoin won't be able to be in the 80s, but if we just project Bitcoin, hop, come here, my dear. Uh, hop. So, it was, it was where? There. Bitcoin, which, so to speak, is not doing much here. Gold, which comes first, as soon as gold calms down at its market peak after a few good parabolic weeks, it calms down, Bitcoin takes off immediately. Okay. Here, same thing, gold calms down, doesn't do much, Bitcoin takes off immediately. Oh, there's no Bitcoin, so too bad. But gold is also an indicator that leads us to think that precisely, there it is, it's there. It's clearly there. Where we are waiting for it, just for now, and we were already waiting for it before, well, we are still too early. Oil, what does oil say? We'll see a bit. Oil, which is going down. How many, and I ask you this question, but you know the answer, how many elements present in our economy of processed products, semi-finished products, are made from oil? Enormously, enormously, enormously. For that matter, here, the cost of a raw material is decreasing significantly. So again, companies will be able to take on more things. Yes, it won't last forever. Of course, in an expanding economy, I told you, we'll see inflation rise all the time. All the time, that's normal. We still have something else. Remember something I showed a while ago, it's right here. Where is it? Uh, wait, where are you? Where are you? Where are you? There. Bitcoin dominance compared to copper. Hop, I don't know what you're doing there, but you can leave. Bitcoin dominance compared to copper, where we see that precisely if, well, I'll take another graph just below. If I take Bitcoin dominance, hop there, don't start panicking already seeing this. Uh, tac. So, wait, I'll just reduce. When we break this trendline that serves as support and we start to collapse, it means that precisely the valuation of copper is increasing faster than Bitcoin. Okay? In terms of dominance and market share. And we've observed in recent cycles that when we break this trendline here and we fall, it's a precursor to a drastic drop in Bitcoin's dominance in the weeks and months to come. So we experienced it here with about 17-18 weeks of lag, we first broke, we fell, fell, fell before we really saw Bitcoin here in terms of its own dominance also fall and follow this trendline. Okay, for that matter, they bottomed out at the same time, you see, they are quite, quite similar. Same thing here with a greater delay this time. June, we break, we fall, we fall, we fall, we fall, we fall. However, June, what happened right here? we fell and we had between September, October and December a Bitcoin dominance that rose quite sharply, in fact, to touch previous highs again. If we take this dominance, and you know we like to do this exercise, as a risky asset in its own right, we would have come to do what looks like liquidity hunting, meaning taking these highs here and once we've taken the last one here with the small wick above, we turn around and go scrape in the opposite direction. Here, we had a clear breakout, the trendline, but we had a longer lag. It was longer because we went through a period during which we had this famous rotation of assets again, in which historically Bitcoin takes on more weight. It takes on more weight because it accelerates from that point on. We have the last checkouts of people being fired, people losing money, and you've also seen the figures. We did on the week of the last crash, which wasn't really a huge crash, the biggest losses in 2 years in the crypto market in terms of leverage that was liquidated. So we're doing exactly what's needed before taking off. We liquidate everyone, everyone falls, and as soon as everyone has fallen, it's off. We had this lag, and then, well, it followed. It followed to the moon from January 2021. Now, be careful when I say to the moon from January 2021, it's not enough to do the exercise again. This exercise, you know, we do it together, we take the data and we go deep into the data. We're not going to say because dominance is rising, well, great, it's crap, and bye, see you in January. Not at all. We're going to look at what happened last time. Last time, what happened, we're on ETH below. We don't care about that. It was for a training video. We can remove it. We'll remove it. Hop. Hop! Okay. What happened to ETH the last time dominance like this, in terms of asset rotation, rose on Bitcoin by 57%. So quite interesting too. I hadn't noted that, but then get out. For that matter, I hadn't noted it. I'm discovering it with you. Same place, it bottoms out exactly. at the same level. That's, yes. Well, well, there. Okay, it bottoms out at this level. We have the last little checkout, as it seems to be happening right now. Of course, we're not at the previous highs like here, like we are now at.

ETH, but 2021 and now it's nothing alike. ETFs also play a huge role for ETH, let's not lie. So we are higher because there is more buying pressure. This is also an element I will come back to later. The fact that we have this difference in terms of structures and the money that is brought in, at least for now, for Bitcoin and Ethereum because there are ETFs on them, and that plays a big role. There is enormous adoption by ETFs, by public companies that buy reserves, that make reserves of Bitcoin, of Ethereum, etc. The fact that we are here for these cryptos at the same time as what is happening, what has always happened, and that we are not here is for me a sign that what awaits us is perhaps bigger than what we think, but we will take this small point just after as well. Dominance has risen and you see it, well what did it do? At the same time, it did what? Well, 300% or so. X4 at the time. Yes, you can say "Yes, but it was less capitalized. Yes, okay, it was less capitalized. It takes more money now than back then to achieve such a return. But what I can oppose to this theory is that indeed, less money was needed, but there was also much less money in the crypto market. The crypto market, let's just recall. It rose to how much? Wait, let's just look here. It rose to how much? 2021 total. Hop, it rose. Come on, if we stick to this because we were on this, it rose to 2.5 trillion with a crazy economic expansion. Covid, zero rates guys, massive QE, things like that when we see them again, it won't be the same. We had all the most powerful stimuli of the year. We rose to 2.5 trillion. Why? The why is very simple to explain because in terms of cryptocurrency adoption, we were still too weak. Currently, we have adoption that is accelerating massively. We also saw the metrics, enormous adoption of the cryptocurrency market in general because banks are talking about it, hedge funds are talking about it, BlackRock, etc., etc., everyone is talking about it, and therefore there is much more money ready to be put into the crypto market. Much, much more. So yes, there was this and now we are here, but there were much fewer people in the market. And so honestly, I think it balances out if we take the adoption that was there and the money, let's say, of people ready to invest in this crypto market because there weren't many in 2020, let's not lie, apart from retail everywhere and a few specialized banks and funds. Uh, well, I still remember, I was banned from two banks because I was making transfers to Binance. Crypto was completely blacklisted, and anyone who had it was banned from the bank. We are talking about UBS, UBS, you know UBS, 2020-2021, UBS sent me a letter to tell me you have Bitcoin, we are terminating your account, okay, so we are talking about a no-go zone here in terms of adoption, so yes, zero adoption, and we rise here. Here we are already because there is massive adoption through all these means, ETFs, public companies, etc., etc., and therefore potentially when we really enter the real bull phase, the bullish breakout can be much bigger than what we expect. Where I'm going with this, it wasn't this point, even though it's important, rising dominance doesn't necessarily mean altcoins fall. From the moment we have an acceleration of Bitcoin, I repeat, as long as Bitcoin's acceleration in terms of price is greater than its dominance, it means that Alts will gain ground. They will gain ground, they will rise at the same time as Bitcoin. Okay? If we look at the kind of little dip we made here, well, this little dip we made before Bitcoin took off like a rocket corresponds here to this correction that we might, I say might, be experiencing for the last few weeks. But in any case, we see it, it happened, and as soon as Bitcoin dominance took off, it's because Bitcoin also took off in a very bullish timeframe. From mid-October, November to December, January, February. Q1 is also supposed to be very bullish. So all of this is not unknown. All of this is not unknown. It's history repeating itself in a context where, taking a step back, everything that holds us back from all that I'm telling you is the pre-established belief that a cycle lasts 4 years, 3 years up, 1 year down. When you get out of this pattern, when you recognize that these cycles are influenced, and even more than that, depend on the liquidity cycle, and you know that the liquidity cycle has depended since the post-subprime crisis on debt rollover, and you see this debt maturing until mid-2026, at least for large amounts, well, you know that precisely there is a very high probability that all those who are calling for a top at the end of this year are wrong because there is a lag here. And in any case, that's the conclusion I'm reaching. Uh, what else did I want to say? Yes, interesting, I told you something, it was Bitcoin. Our little Bitcoin, what's interesting when you look at it in log scale, and we'll remove all this. Hop there. What's interesting when you look at it in log scale like this, is that frankly, you have to recognize this rise in a channel as we see it right here, which precedes a parabolic phase. And I'll move it a bit like this. There, it will be better. You have to recognize, being totally objective, that it's the same phase we went through here before breaking out of the channel. Let's make it a bit clearer. Hop. There, it's the same. I'm sorry, it's the same. It's the same. And when we see all the metrics where the ISM was doing the same thing we're doing now. Yes, it's not exactly the same structure, but it's almost the same. It's coming out of a big drop, we go up, we go down, we get stuck here, we do a rollercoaster. We do a range, limited acceleration, acceleration. And that's what we're going to have here. We come out of a parabolic phase, we break the channel, parabolic phase, it lasts what? About 1000%, but it was 1000% at the time, but but well, I'm not saying we'll get 1000%, I don't think so, far from it, obviously, but in terms of expectations for Bitcoin, what you also need to recognize is other things. And hop, uh, where was it? No, not there. It's here. You know this chart? Yes, I'm sorry. H Wind Winur to summarize the live. Yes, true. This chart, the famous rainbow, the famous Bitcoin rainbow chart. What's interesting is to also consider, and we saw this in an image. So, wait, I'll try to find that image again. So, wait, wait. We got it from Bravo Research, whom we like a lot. Thanks Bravos for the images, they are great. Uh, was it this one? Yes, it was this one. We know that Bitcoin is largely undervalued despite the price it already has now. It is undervalued compared to the value it should have. We also know in this logarithmic evolution that Bitcoin is currently still in the green. I don't know if I can zoom. Yes, I can zoom. It is still in the green. Green is still a value of undervaluation according to the rainbow chart. We enter overvalued zones when we reach yellow. Very slight, quite high. And red is, well, it's the top of the market. Get out of there. Basically, that's what it means. Uh, I don't know how to zoom back out. [ __ ] I'm really, I'm really a boomer myself. There. Hop there. Tac. Okay. Come on, even more. There. So we are really, when we look at it like this, when we really step back from what's in front of our eyes, and what's in front of our eyes is a linear chart that looks like this, and we see this. When we switch to log scale, clearly, we see that we haven't started. We see it at the level of this rainbow. We are not even at, wait, maybe yes, no, we are at a high, you see, but we are not in overvalued territory, far from it. And if we arrive at something that might make some people talk, but we don't care because we are here to experiment. Well, when we look at the end of June, and we will finish with this little calculation we already did, when we look at the end of June, let's say even May, because let's assume we're going to repeat what we did last time, it was May, the month of May that crushes us like it should be. But we remain in the green, we should be at $185,000. We are starting to be in overvalued zones, particularly the yellow zone. You will see why the yellow zone is extremely important. Note in your mind $254,000. Why do I call the yellow zone $254,000 as a zone that for me, and I'm the first, even if I see you maybe saying no, that seems impossible because we're taking such a hit, we're so bored, it seems impossible for me. We need to put this question of impossible back into consideration, and I'll tell you why afterwards. It's on the last psychological threshold, the yellow line, when we look at the last times we had the bull run, which is normal, is that we can't always exceed the extension lines. 2017, we are on the red line. 2021, orange line. We go down one line each time, which is normal. We are in a regressive evolution. If we say we stay in the yellow zone this time, so we won't assume we are in the red, we will follow this deceleration, sorry, of the rainbow. We stay in the yellow zone for the end of May, well, for the beginning, sorry. $254,000. Let's take Total 1. Where is Total 1? You are there. ISM, get out. Okay, let's take it like this. Let's clean this up. Let's take Total 1 and put our little No, not put. We put it here, I think. Yes, not even there because we need to put the maximum bottom. Anyway, yes, we don't give a damn about the bottom. That will come later, the top. If we take May approximately, we would be around $14 trillion. I don't know if you remember, we did the calculation, I won't do it now because it would take too long and there are still questions. For those who remember, we calculated that if Bitcoin and the crypto market reach the top here on Total 1, we also reach the top on Total 2 and Total 3. This allowed us to calculate the maximum extension of Bitcoin and Ethereum on this bull cycle. And for Bitcoin, we reached around $2400-$2500 with a really high bullish extension. For Ethereum, I think we reached $15,000. But it's also interesting to note that here we have an evolution that is not at all the same as the rainbow chart because, as you can see on the chart, it's really the peak of the total of this ascending wedge, which is a bearish pattern, by the way. That's why, on the other hand, the theory about the next bear market remains valid, and even more so with such a scenario. Here, we are at the maximum of the maximum of the maximum. And if we take into account the regression in this rainbow, yellow line, we are not at the maximum of the maximum on the red line, we are at the same price target in May between here and here. So it's interesting. It's a point to consider for me. Okay. So all of this might seem a bit complicated. Even the total, we see, look at the relationship between the ISM and the total crypto market, it's the same thing. It follows enormously. We make higher highs, we retrace, we make higher lows, it's the same thing. As soon as we take off at this level, it's let's go. So, this is something to consider. And the last thing I wanted to show was what? It was this, I think. Yes, it was this. This. Wait, which one do I want to move? Okay, cool. I told you what's holding things up right now, the only data that's holding things up and that could be precisely, wait, I'm taking a bunch of stuff. There. The only data that's holding things up right now and that could be a problem, is when we read this at market fear, it's recession. Recession, because we know the recession indicators, GDP indicator, this one has been swept aside purely and simply thanks to the figures, the last figures we had. So that's good. There is also the unemployment rate. The unemployment rate, we know it's rising. It's rising, it's at 4.2% I think. And what's happening, hop, there's even this little chart after. And what's happening is that it's the only data that's a bit annoying. Wait, I'll display it. It's here, it's here. It's here. Why is it telling me it's already there? It's not. Why is it telling me I already have unemployment when I don't? Okay, cool. There it is, unemployment is rising, and well, people are saying "Damn, look at the curve, it's ascending. We're going to rise, we're going to rise, we're going to explode, and every time it explodes, well, what is it? It's recession. Okay, fine, why not? But to that, I have something else to say. Personally, when you dig and look at unemployment data, total unemployment includes unemployment from different sectors. We have education and healthcare here. Uh, we have another one here. Uh, another one. We have many. There. Financial activities, etc., etc. First thing that's quite important and I think worth considering is that we expect a debt crisis. A debt crisis that should cause banks to fail. Uh, financial activities and others, they have never hired so much in banks and companies. So we are not yet at the point of a breakdown. We are really at a big drop. And when you look at all these components of global unemployment, what's quite interesting is to look at which ones are driving it up, because we have 4.2. When we take them, typically we are at 3%, so they are not the ones driving it up. We have a decrease in unemployment in industries that produce goods. It's decreasing, that's good. When we look at all these industries, we are not at 4.2, we are at 3.5. When we take this one, even if it's a spike, we are at 3.3. So it's not really that which is increasing. Here, we are good. Here, here, we are at 55. We are at 55. So this is typically one of the components that is driving unemployment up. What we want is an economic slowdown to say an economic slowdown sucks. And who says economic slowdown? It means we want to see in key sectors, I repeat, key sectors, a slowdown in hiring, personnel, etc., etc. Let's just say that this industry is not a key industry in terms of figures. And I need to find you just, uh, it was here or it was No, it's not here. But I'll come back to that later. Okay. The key sector, and I'll give it to you in, uh, the unemployment calculation, is this one, education and health. Education and health, where there's a spike here around 3.7, 3.8 percent, and I don't have it anymore, it's annoying, I don't have the chart anymore, but I'll get it, I'll get it, I'll put it up. When you look closely at the American economy, there are really sectors that are Ah, that's it, I found it. Magnificent. Ah, I knew I had it. So, wait, the boomer is trying to get the English. There. Okay, it's fine, I don't care. There. Here you have the total number of people employed by sector. So this is 2024 by industry. So here you see that education and health, well, it's a very, very large part of the sample used for unemployment and employment calculations. Professional and business services too, etc., etc. Manufacturing, and you see, that's why I told you that this category at 55 doesn't really count, we are not in a leading category, we are really in a minor category. So that's why for me it's not the most important. The most important one to consider is this one. It's this one. And what's interesting is to ask why it increased like this. And because in education and health sectors, there is a majority of young people. A majority of young people entering the market at key times of the year, and when they enter the market, depending on their numbers, there are not enough job offers. And what we observe, what we observe is that precisely among these young people, who are also often taken on at a very young age, even before 18, you can see it's between 16 and 24 years old, they are a large part in this education and health sector. And what's quite interesting is that precisely for internships and so on in the American curriculum, they get a job because, well, that's where there are holidays, that's where offers are made, where everything starts to slow down a bit, and so it's not entirely, how to say, illogical, abnormal to find unemployment among these young people until this deadline of August, September. We can see that it has always been the case. Well, it has always been the case. Here, I have 2023, 2024, but we see that it is systematically the case at least for the last 2 years. And there is a deceleration from the recovery. Why? Because there is economic expansion. Because these young people who are arriving, it must be said, how many were there? There were, I think, 2 million arriving. Wait, where is it? Uh, there, they say, yes, the rise in this category was not due to a deterioration of the sector itself. It's because too many young people arrived on the market at the same time following, how to say, following the end of their internships, following the end of their diplomas, and between the jobs that are created and the massive number that arrived, which was enormous, well obviously many of them will claim unemployment. There, basically, many of them will claim unemployment. And so what does that do? It increases the statistic. Whereas in itself, it's just young people arriving. It's not people who are already employed who are fired, and these young people, we see it thanks to the statistics, they find a job. They find a job, and their unemployment rate drops drastically, which also contributes to lowering the unemployment rate. So this is a first way to say, "Okay, this fear that is widely relayed because I'm starting, well not widely yet, but I'm starting to have channels saying, 'We are already in recession, it's a mess because we see that here, hop, we're taking an upward direction'." No, no. That's not what the stats say. What the stats say is that it's normal. You have Trump who fired a lot of people since the beginning of the year in the public sector. You have a private sector that sees, as normal, many people arriving and cannot create enough jobs for almost 2 million. I think it was, I'll check the figure, almost 2 million young people arriving in this defined sector. So it's normal to have an increase. And what's also quite interesting, and this is the last data I'm showing you, is that here you have the unemployment rate in orange, you have the ISM in green, and you have in blue something called overtime hours. Okay? In the manufacturing sector. And what's quite interesting, and this is the logic on which I'm basing this, put yourself in the shoes of a company owner, and we'll finish with that. Then we'll look at the questions. Put yourself in the shoes of a company owner. You are the owner of your company. What interest do you have in paying overtime since now, uh, beginning? No, wait, is this weekly? Yes, it's weekly. Tac, tac, tac. Okay, it has increased a lot since Okay, tac. No, since yes, since November. Since December 2023, globally, since December 2023, the number of overtime hours paid by employers to employees has increased. Knowing that I don't know what the system is there in terms of percentages, but I'll take Switzerland as an example to apply because it's almost the same principle everywhere. Overtime hours beyond a certain number must be increased. If you are paid €20 per hour, well, for overtime, at least here in Switzerland, it's increased by 25%. So overtime hours are paid at €25 instead of €20, and on top of that, there are still social contributions and many other things. Why would a company owner sustainably want to pay more? He doesn't want to. What happens conversely is that he doesn't want to offer a contract and have new staff either, as long as he's not sure that demand is there and that opening a position is necessary. And so what's quite interesting is to note that indeed, step 1 before hiring is to see overtime hours growing. So if we remove the green line for just 2 seconds and look a bit at the relationship between unemployment and overtime, what's interesting is that first there is a considerable increase in overtime hours because it's step 1, and the employer says, well, it's been a year, a few months, whatever, I'm paying this, I need someone new, and then there's hiring, and that's why there's a slight lag between the rise here and unemployment falling afterwards, because first there's hiring, and in the stats, hiring means we remove someone from unemployment, and so unemployment falls. And what we have here is that even if there was a decrease in overtime that was also felt in the decrease here of unemployment, well, no, sorry, a decrease here in overtime, a bottom in unemployment, and a rise, we have since here, and there's a time lag again, which is normal, we have the recovery, we clearly have the recovery, and all of this is a virtuous cycle, for once. Because what does overtime mean for a while? It means that there is a need. We know that this need will be compensated by employment, and that precisely this last fear, which is employment, the lack of employment, this fear will be compensated in the coming weeks, in the coming months. We will not have a spike that will rise drastically. It will stay around here, even see a slight decrease. We know that if there is more demand, it's because companies need to operate more because there is more demand in services, in manufacturing, whatever. And so, we have another element that tells us that we have an economy that is starting to truly expand. And when you remove unemployment, we clear it, and we just put the ISM, well, the ISM also follows with a slight lag. This indicator, which is very early, follows it perfectly. Okay. And so what we have here, this little divergence will be filled by the ISM. So that's one more element that we cannot deny. That's a lot. That's a lot. We have to get to this point. That's a lot of elements, an enormous number of elements that all converge towards the same thing. The only detail that doesn't converge on this is a pre-established truth, which is that a cycle in crypto lasts 4 years. And I've been saying this for a while, but this is really the last point before the last questions on Discord. Psychologically, everyone expects a 4-year cycle. Top! End of this year. End of this year, we will anyway have a rise that some will call parabolic, because we will make a new high on ETH, I think. We will start to make new highs on large caps, at least. Okay, it's over, we've had 3 years of rise, etc., a small correction, or even a good correction in December, January, at least that's in my roadmap. People think, beginning of a bear market, etc., they don't understand what's happening. Beginning of January, we might have the end of the correction, we go into winter, they don't understand what's happening. Everyone is calling for a bear market, they don't understand what's happening. It's rising, it's rising, it's rising. There's FOMO, there's retail. We've finished Christmas. We've received year-end bonuses, and it's back to the circus, and no one understands what's happening. Go to the moon, it's great, etc., etc., and we get trapped again like in 2021, like in all cycles. Psychologically, it would be the best thing to bring in retail and trap retail. Once again, it would really be the best thing. And so when we put all this against a cycle, against the only pre-established truth that a cycle lasts 4 years, which is false because we see that it's lengthening, we observe it and we see it, well, I prefer to take this pre-established truth and throw it in the trash because what we have here is totally different. Uh, so, questions, I'll stop here because otherwise I'll repeat myself over and over. So, hop! Halloween! What else did you put? Uh hm hm I don't see any. Did you remove? Ah no, it's fine, I see. So, question from power of fruit. What about the crash predicted for 2026? We see that the defaults on credit default swaps confirm this scenario? So, again, you might not know it, but there's something that's said and that's very true, is that markets can remain irrational for a good while. So you really have to close your eyes and imagine the scene of the banker who has a closet full of shit that's about to overflow, and he's holding the door, holding it like this. He can hold it for a little while longer, especially in a context where liquidity is being created that will fill the holes until the moment when this liquidity cycle ends and the holes are created faster than they are plugged. So that just postpones the deadline. So it might not be Q1, Q2 of 2026, but it will happen just after. Question from Lilian. Could you do a recap call for everyone? Are you sure? About the exit signal on FTT, please, and also specify what's happening with other positions. Uh, if we sell FTT at a loss, do we take cash afterwards? Yes, yes. So you sell FTT now, you don't wait 1000 years. You leave now and you can reallocate to positions, it depends on the cash you have, but you have to respect the allocations in the portfolio. So you look at the allocations, we made the allocations very precisely. You look at them and you can, you can redistribute. Question from Per Rod. I have the impression that BNB functions a bit like an internal stablecoin for Binance since people often transfer their funds there before allocating them to other assets. Is this dynamic what explains why BNB reacts first? Uh no, I don't think so. No, I don't think so because because your funds are not BNB. So what you're saying is what? Is that they take your funds and then they buy BNB? Is that what you're saying? Because if that's what you're saying, uh, I don't think CZ would have, well, it's not CZ anymore, but you understand, I don't think he would risk doing that, honestly. Uh, yes, we will be able to do many more back and forth, and therefore, therefore, therefore, well, we would still be in phase 2, and phase 2 wasn't for this summer, so phase 2 is for now, mid-October, mid-November, expected correction during December, early January, why? Because we are finishing a quarterly PO3, because there is something extremely strong called the fiscal period as well, and there, on the other hand, for the fiscal period, guys, they take gains. They take gains, and even if it lasts three weeks, we'll take them too, this time. And then phase 3, winter 2026, and then everyone goes home. Uh, other question. Okay. No, that's fine. Halloween is very reactive because Halloween, you don't see the questions in group 2, actually. You are in group 1. Do you have access to group 2, can you tell me privately or not? But there isn't any. It's fine. But I just, I just Ah yes, there is one. In that case, how low can dominance go? Uh, ah yes, well, wait. Well yes. I didn't even want to show it. I didn't even want to show it. If we follow, hop there, I did an exercise that was quite interesting, for once. So, it's really drawing, okay. I copied the rise from October to December and the drop from December to May. I copied it here. And, uh, and it's funny to see that precisely, well, it bottoms out in the zone we had identified. Landing zone, it's here. And the same movement makes us land here. There, it's pure drawing. Bar configuration on your Link view. Where do you go? Where is it? Uh, bar configuration, it's here, bar patterns. You copy all of this, you adjust it to the size of the chart here, and then it gives you a rise here and a drop in there. So right in the bottom zone. Coincidence, we'll see. To be seen. Okay. Uh, hm, so, so we'll see the little, the little results of the thing. Ah yes, quite, quite, almost, yes, two-thirds, one-third, not bad, 23%, 1/3 for Bitcoin. Well, we'll implement that. We'll implement that. Uh, but again, you have to, you have to respect the things, okay? The first one, the first one who starts saying something that deviates from the stats we keep, I'll ask for their trading statement. I'll ask for their statement, and we'll publish it on the group. Okay. That way, I think it will avoid the, it will avoid the whiners. The first one who complains, I repeat, the first one who complains and puts in the collective chat, "Yeah, but me, it's highly suspicious that he followed the school," we'll ask for their trading statement, and we'll check that they actually bought at the right price, and that will clear up a lot of things. Uh, no, Tao, no, but Simply, Simply Tao, it's not the same thing. What's happening is that FTT, the team is breaking up. Fundamentals are the basis of any project. If the head is rotten, everything else is rotten. So if the team is rotten and they fight among themselves and half the project leaves when they were supposed to bring all the added value, go ahead, there's a dislocation of the project. So okay, you'll tell me, you'll tell me the merger of the three, three cryptos. There, it was what? It was Ocean, AGIX, and then but AGIX was garbage. It doesn't matter. Ocean, and then and then FTT, globally. The merger was where? It was around here. So yes, when it was just FTT without Ocean, well, it still rose here, the guy. It still rose there. So can FTT survive alone? Yes, it has already done so before. However, what everyone was expecting was really a merger of skills. And from the moment they start fighting, God knows what can happen afterwards. Ocean, which had access to things because a merger was agreed upon, they had access to a lot of things, they separate, they'll screw them over, whatever. Yes, better, better to leave. But you have to leave because if afterwards it's garbage and it falls here when we had the news here. For once, it's not, it's not, it's not fun, because fun, let's recall, is good news, but it's a piece of shit that just scares you. Like war between Iran and Israel, it scares you because you think, oh, war, and then when you look, well no, actually it's war, unfortunately, it's bullish. There. But here, when you look, well no, it's not bullish. So better to leave. So better to leave, really, really. And for Tao, no, Tao has nothing to do with it. Tao has nothing, nothing, nothing to do with it. So no, there's no need to leave Tao. Okay. Well, so, given that we've finished at 8:10 PM, yes, it's been 2 hours. So I hope this live was instructive. If you didn't understand everything, watch it a second time. And if you still don't understand, come and DM us, and we'll do a little radio session very soon. We'll frame a bit what we can do to explain more precisely and didactically one or two elements that you didn't understand. So, have a good evening everyone, kisses everywhere, and take care of yourselves and your loved ones.