Summary

Avi Felman sees the move into the $90K-$93.5K area as a year-end liquidity washout, not a broken Bitcoin cycle. He argues that Michael Saylor drove a substantial part of the move above $100K with an average purchase price of $106K; Avi first said BTC traded above that level for “like, 30 seconds,” then revised it to “I think it was 24 hours.” Once Saylor’s bid disappeared into a blackout period, traders protecting annual P&L sold into almost no liquidity.
The higher-conviction trade is an altcoin-led Q1 rebound, potentially hedged with a Bitcoin short if outright market direction feels uncertain. Jonah noted that BTC fell about 3% on a day when some alts fell 15%-20%; Avi sees that selling as having washed out many year-end sellers. He expects buyers to return around January 1, favors assets that retained their trends, and targets ETH/BTC above 0.04 within weeks.
Both hosts view the Fed’s hawkish turn as a reduction in easing—not the regime change that ended the prior cycle. Jonah contrasts it with 2022’s departure from zero-rate policy and later compares it with November 2021, when the Fed abandoned “transitory” inflation and rethought its strategy. Growth, wages, profits, and an anticipated business-friendly Trump administration remain intact; the Fed changed only how much “gas” it would pour on the fire.
Strategic-Bitcoin-reserve optionality can buoy BTC even before any reserve is formally created. Avi says the game theory starts with Trump not selling Bitcoin accumulated by the U.S. government, while Jonah argues that the government could begin by moving the Silk Road Bitcoin held by the U.S. Marshals onto the Treasury’s balance sheet. Jonah’s “threat is more powerful than the action” argument suggests sovereigns could front-run the United States and receive one-fifteenth as much BTC per fiat unit if they wait. Avi’s rough valuation map is $100K-$140K as a new range, with euphoric upside to $200K-$250K before a retracement.
Their execution rule is to buy strong alts on predefined weakness but wait for confirmation before buying Bitcoin. Avi uses a 180-period exponential Hull moving average, plus the 20- and 50-day averages, and generally tolerates noise unless an asset records two daily closes below trend. His Virtuals bid around $2.24-$2.33, placed while it traded near $3, exemplifies the approach: do not chase highly volatile alts; leave bids where volatility can fill them.
Decentralized exchanges are investable partly because current onchain execution still encourages retail traders to buy highs and puke lows. Avi expects DEXs to take centralized-exchange share over the next two years as regulation and usability improve; Jonah agrees on AMMs but says the CLOB case remains unsettled, particularly as platforms such as Hyperliquid eventually confront KYC requirements. Both concede they missed how no KYC, fee-funded HYPE buybacks, and unusually user-friendly tokenomics made Hyperliquid different.
AI agents could shift artificial intelligence from a passive answer engine into a continuously working analyst, but they may transact in USDC or Bitcoin rather than bespoke “AI currencies.” Avi imagines agents independently scanning markets, generating trades, and lowering company costs over two years; Jonah sees the possibility of distributing “Soros-level market intellect” to people without institutional mentors. Jonah favors USDC or whatever base rail works, while Avi says a value-maximizing agent might hold Bitcoin for its Sharpe ratio. Their emerging business thesis is that agent creation could become “Mad Men 2.0,” with platforms such as Virtuals supplying the rails.

Deep dive

1. Saylor’s vanished bid exposed a thin year-end market

Avi traced a substantial part of Bitcoin’s move above $100K to Michael Saylor “just jamming it in.” Saylor’s average purchase price was $106K. Avi first said BTC traded above that level for “like, 30 seconds,” then revised that to “I think it was 24 hours.” Once Saylor’s bid disappeared, market structure deteriorated toward Avi’s $90K-$93.5K range floor.
Jonah had been buying into the highs and admitted the selloff “was not in my bingo card,” but a 10%-15% pullback in majors did not look historically extreme. December is illiquid: institutions close their books, traders protect annual P&L, and systematic players such as CTAs can amplify momentum while discretionary capital stays sidelined.
The hosts noted the relative performance shift. After some alts had fallen 15%-20% on a day when BTC lost roughly 3%, selected names began outperforming; ETH/BTC rebounded almost 4% from its low. Jonah attributed the earlier collapse to profitable traders liquidating alt books simultaneously while “zero liquidity” existed to absorb them.
That creates Avi’s Q1 setup: buy strong alts before year-end, or hedge the exposure by shorting some BTC. With Saylor potentially absent for at least a month, capital crowded into Bitcoin can rotate elsewhere; Avi expects ETH/BTC above 0.04 within weeks and says categorically, “the cycle is not over.”

2. The Fed repriced the slope, not the bull-market regime

Jonah’s reading of the Fed was less dramatic than the market’s. Officials were signaling that they would not cut “with reckless abandon” while inflation remained uncomfortable—not launching a fresh hiking cycle toward 8.5%. Selling a long-term crypto thesis because somebody heard “hawkish” on X, Avi argued, surrendered an important opportunity.
Jonah’s contrast was 2022, when zero-interest-rate policy ended and the 35-year bond bull market appeared over. That was a seismic change with an uncertain destination; this announcement merely changed the Fed’s approach. “It didn’t seem like a massive paradigm shift.”
Jonah later located the comparable break in November 2021, when inflation ceased being “transitory” and the Fed had to rethink its strategy. The current move lacks that quality: the economy is still doing well, wages and corporate profits are rising, and the incoming Trump regime is expected to be more business-friendly.
The hosts therefore viewed the Fed as changing only “how much gas” it would pour on the fire. Avi described the equity decline—about 5% in the Nasdaq, perhaps nearly 10% high to low—as a reset to a lower base, not evidence of a new downward trend. He also expected January 20 deregulation to help markets resume their prior direction.

3. A reserve can support Bitcoin before it exists

Bitcoin has an additional variable beyond the Fed, Jonah said: Saylor’s temporarily absent demand and the Trump-era strategic-reserve narrative. Traders planning to sell into the January 20 inauguration may already have exited during the weakness; only a renewed run toward $110K into inauguration would make that sell-the-news trade attractive again.
Avi respected Nic Carter’s view that a reserve was unlikely because governments typically buy their own instruments and the political hurdle for purchasing Bitcoin is high. Avi nevertheless said his own game-theory case starts with Trump not selling Bitcoin accumulated by the U.S. government; the hope remains unless Trump or another official explicitly rejects the idea during the administration’s first 90 days.
Jonah’s pushback was that governments already hold non-government-issued currencies and commodities, including gold, euros, and oil. A reserve might simply transfer the Silk Road Bitcoin held by the U.S. Marshals onto the Treasury’s balance sheet, rather than begin with a theatrical announcement and hundreds of thousands of open-market purchases.
Their chess analogy carried the trade: “The threat is more powerful than the action.” Other sovereigns may accumulate first rather than receive one-fifteenth as much BTC after the United States acts; even the unsubstantiated UAE-buying stories illustrate that reserves need not be transparent. That threat alone could put a floor under crypto in 2025.

4. Avi’s valuation map leaves room for $200K euphoria

Avi argued that $90K cannot represent equilibrium if Bitcoin reached $75K in 2021 without a pro-crypto president, regulatory support, reserve discussion, or possible sovereign accumulation. In the six months before Trump’s election, he placed adverse-world fair value around $50K-$70K; the improved environment should command substantially more.
His rough new range is $100K-$140K. If that becomes the post-election base, euphoria could carry BTC to $200K-$250K before it settles materially above the prior summer’s range. Avi would “probably sell everything” at $200K without an actual strategic reserve, but rejects a durable return to $70K unless his framework is fundamentally wrong.
Jonah called that reasoning rational rather than delusional. Had the same Saylor pause and Fed surprise occurred in a liquid month such as February or March, he thinks BTC might have fallen from $108K to $103K-$104K—not $93K-$94K. The extra drawdown was the price of holiday illiquidity.
Their shared conclusion was unusually direct: the move looked like the textbook bull-market washout, with euphoria interrupted by one negative catalyst and unrealized winners rushing to preserve 2024. Jonah called the dip a “holiday gift”; Avi called it “a no-brainer point to get into the market and just ride it up.”

5. Strong alts deserve bids, while Bitcoin deserves confirmation

Avi’s trend screen centers on the 180-period exponential Hull moving average, supplemented by the 20-day average for short trades and the 50-day average. He wants assets still above those baselines, buying as they revisit support and accepting roughly 5% noise unless two daily closes break below it.
His preferred basket combines ETH with stronger ETH-linked names—Aave, Morpho, and Chainlink—plus leading AI coins and resilient “dinosaur coins.” Ondo and LTC were cited as remaining in trend, with a potential Litecoin ETF adding a catalyst. He was still below full allocation, preserving capital for another holiday-liquidity break.
Virtuals supplied the concrete playbook. Avi left bids around $2.24-$2.33 while it traded near $3; it fell as low as about $2, below his entry area, then recovered toward $2.78. For a young asset without useful moving-average history, he used horizontal support and asked where he would own it “with my eyes closed.”
Jonah separates BTC from 300%-annualized-volatility alts: he waits for Bitcoin to bottom and begin recovering, because a “screaming dip” argument can sound equally convincing at $100K and $93K. Avi countered that alt recoveries may fully price within days; if FOMOing, buy perhaps 20% and place deeper bids rather than chasing a 20% day.

6. Onchain market structure rewards patient execution

Jonah explained why alt rallies overshoot: when a centralized exchange lacks the desired token, users swap through Jupiter, Aerodrome, Phantom, MetaMask, or Rabby. Limit orders remain unintuitive on many venues, making the trader’s brain “the order book”; retail market-buys highs and market-sells lows, leaving an opening for patient execution.
Avi expects DEXs to take centralized-exchange share over the next two years as regulatory clarity and usability improve. Onchain capital is “more free and more composable”: a profitable Hyperliquid position could eventually become collateral elsewhere, allowing its owner to borrow against unrealized P&L in ways that a siloed Binance account cannot easily support.
Jonah’s caveat was structural. He agrees AMMs can price new or illiquid assets better, but thinks the jury remains out on decentralized central-limit-order books. Hyperliquid may owe billions of value to what it omits—KYC—rather than something centralized exchanges cannot technically provide, and platforms may eventually have to identify users.

7. Hyperliquid made user alignment more valuable than novelty

Jonah’s mea culpa: after studying Hyperliquid six or seven months earlier, he saw a slick interface but too few validators to call it decentralized and no need for the market’s “101st” CLOB. He missed that no KYC was itself enormously valuable and that trading-fee-funded HYPE buybacks passed revenue to users without violating securities laws.
Avi had also seen predecessors such as GMX and Serum come and go, so neither host profited meaningfully despite discussing Hyperliquid eight months earlier. What distinguished this team was timing and an unusual willingness to “serve their users,” build what they requested, and give away substantial project wealth to them.
The airdrop functioned like giving casino regulars more casino chips: Jonah said that if someone had traded $1 million of notional on Hyperliquid before the airdrop, their allocation was worth more than $1 million at HYPE’s highs, and many likely recycled that wealth into trading on Hyperliquid. Aerodrome’s gains against Uniswap offered a parallel—“extracting less and sharing more with the community” can itself capture market share.
Jonah’s revised framework puts tokenomics beside product and timing: projects that accrue value to users can survive, while projects that are more accretive than their competitors may capture market share. He remains unsure whether it is too late to buy HYPE, but his alternative—placing bids 30%-50% lower—shows how far his view moved from dismissing the product entirely.

8. Active agents could become analysts, customers, and counterparties

Avi’s agent thesis begins with a distinction: today’s AI is largely passive, requiring users to supply the question, subject, and framework. An active agent could continuously examine markets and present ideas without prompting—effectively an always-on analyst capable of helping run a hedge fund—and drive substantial corporate cost reduction over the next two years.
Their own 1000x agent illustrates both promise and immaturity. With help from the Virtuals team, they revised its behavior, examples, and JSON instructions weekly; Jonah joked that it was “dumb last week” and now merely “dumb,” but less so. The ambition is to turn it into “the best damn analyst in the world.”
Jonah imagined embedding that agent beside a customer’s live crypto activity, where it could ingest prices and news, understand what the customer was doing, and proactively suggest ideas. After a 20-year trading career spent learning from analysts, portfolio managers, and senior traders, he sees agents potentially placing “Soros-level market intellect” in everyone’s hands.
On money, Jonah expects agents to transact in USDC or whatever base rail works, rather than in a bespoke machine currency; he drew on his 2017 IOTA thesis as an example of the mistake of assuming machines need their own currency. Avi instead said that a value-maximizing agent might hold and transact in Bitcoin because it offers the best Sharpe ratio. Both see value accruing to creation rails such as Virtuals, and their sharper business idea was “Mad Men 2.0,” an agency building branded agents, followed by a promise to field a virtual 1000x co-host within six months.

John Palazza - Vice President of Global Sales @ CentML ( sponsored)Jake Saper, GP @ Emergence Capital: "We Sold Salesforce Early and Lost Out on Billions"