WBD272 Audio Transcription
The Case for $500K Bitcoin with Cameron & Tyler Winklevoss
Interview date: Friday 23rd October
Note: the following is a transcription of my interview with Cameron & Tyler Winklevoss. I have reviewed the transcription but if you find any mistakes, please feel free to email me. You can listen to the original recording here.
We discuss their paper, why Bitcoin is the best hedge against inflation, the debt reckoning and Wall Street investing in Bitcoin.
“The question in our mind is not so much does it get to $500K, but how quickly.”
— Cameron Winklevoss
Interview Transcription
Peter McCormack: Cameron, Tyler, good to see you both again. How are you?
Cameron Winklevoss: We're good, thanks, great to see you.
Tyler Winklevoss: Hey, Peter, we're good, thanks for having us.
Peter McCormack: Good to have you both back on, even though it's only recently I had you on. But, I read your article recently. Obviously, when you start talking about a $500k Bitcoin, it's quite exciting. But, there was some good rationale in there and I have forwarded it on to a few of my friends who don't believe me. I thought it would be good to get you on, talk about it; also, it's a good time to talk about it, because there's so much weird stuff going on in the world, especially your side of the pond, which I can't visit at the moment, because they won't let anybody in, but there's so much stuff happening right now, I just think it's a really good time to get into it, talk about your thesis.
So, good starting point, we'll start with you, Cameron. What was the background to writing this article; what was the inspiration to you both.
Cameron Winklevoss: So, I think we actually started writing this, I think, in January, pre-pandemic, because we started to think about what the government's been doing with the US dollar for the past decade or so, and traditional stores of value and hedges. Then the pandemic hit around March in New York and we sort of stopped writing and put it on pause to see what was going to happen, and then restarted writing it sometime this summer, once the dust had settled and we had a sense of what the government had done in response.
So, interestingly enough, it wasn't actually a pandemic-related piece; it was really a piece on the debt-reckoning that we think is coming over the next five or ten years, and then why we thought Bitcoin made a lot of sense for people who want to hedge against inflation. So, really the story got way more interesting because of the pandemic. We thought it was still compelling what the US government has been doing to the dollar pre-pandemic, but even more so now. So, the stage is really set for what we think is likely, you know, inflation; and, Bitcoin's really the best way to combat that.
Peter McCormack: And, there have been a couple of other things. Sorry, you go on, Tyler.
Tyler Winklevoss: No, I was just going to say that when people first hear about Bitcoin, it's like, "What is this crazy internet money thing?" So, what helped us early on was to think about, okay, sort of analogise a little bit; and, we came up with the gold framework, which is a pretty classic way to understand Bitcoin at this point. So, that helped us early on understand why this was interesting in what way; it's not just internet money, but it's gold 2.0. Then, just as a thought exercise for ourselves, but also it's great to share that with other people, it's like, what is Bitcoin and why is it important or relevant to me? And that was really the impetus.
We bought some of our earliest Bitcoin in 2012; how had things changed or not changed since then? Is gold itself still an interesting asset class or investment for people, and that was further impetus just to look back at just the last ten years since the beginning of Bitcoin, which was born in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, and the pseudonymous creator, Satoshi, talked about the problems with the existing system, how much trust is required to place into bankers, government officials, central bankers and just governments in general, and how that had led us astray, let us down so many times.
So, we want to sort of look back at the decade since Bitcoin had happened, kind of reassess our own investment pieces, like are things more relevant or not, and then of course, they had not only become more relevant, but the pandemic and the ensuing central banking tools to get us through it have only catalysed, or rather set the stage for Bitcoin even more. So, we actually tabled the blog. It was almost done when the pandemic and the lockdowns and the economies, the economic shock, happened and we were like, okay, this is going to change a bit.
So, we sort of waited that out for a couple of months, waited to see the government responses, like the CARES Act in the US, a lot of the stimulus. And then we just realised, wait, this piece is even more relevant, the outlook's gotten even more scary for fiat regimes, oh my gosh, Bitcoin's your only saving grace. So, we put those thoughts together and then finally published it.
Peter McCormack: So, what you're really saying is the pandemic has accelerated what was happening, and kind of accelerated your own thesis?
Tyler Winklevoss: Yeah, pretty much. You're sort of seeing -- the pandemic, in some ways, has pushed us into the future and in some ways, pushed us behind. We've sort of seen the decline of bricks-and-mortar retail has been accelerated by this; the onslaught of ecommerce and Big Tech has already been accelerated as well. So, it was very much a tale of two cities, or two countries, or two worlds before the pandemic hit; it only really pushed us and accelerated us through to that more. It's been record quarters on Wall Street for much of Big Tech, yet the rest of the economy and Main Street is really suffering.
And then, why you see it's also pushed us in a time machine in the past a little bit is because, at least in America you see the second coming of drive-in movie theatres which is really a relic of the boomer generation, my parents, and something I'd never seen, you know, a part of America that I thought I'd never see. It's like the good old days, I guess, of America, and now we have drive-in theatres with social distancing, drive-in concerts.
So, in one way, we've taken a step back but very much have accelerated some of the economic trends and frankly, inequality that has been growing and growing in America, and it is definitely concerning.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, well we'll get onto the inequality bit, because I think we've got a kind of political section to cover anyway with regard to this.
Another thing that stood out within the article is that you're still doing an educational piece in there, beyond just talking about the stores of value and problems with oil, the USD and gold; but, you're actually still doing an educational job on Bitcoin. How much do you still have to do that, because you obviously mix in Wall Street circles, you mix with finance people? Whilst we've seen an adoption, an institutional adoption of Bitcoin, Grayscale Trust is growing, we've seen MicroStrategy, we've seen Square start investing, are you still having to do a big educational job; and, is that job getting easier?
Cameron Winklevoss: So I think, since we've been in Bitcoin, education has been a really big part of our journey and trying to educate others about what this technology is and what it's not. And I think when we got involved, when we first started buying Bitcoin in the summer/fall of 2012, the narrative back then was Silk Road, that this is only used by drug dealers and illicit activity. So, we actually didn't go public with our investment for about six months, because we were worried that people were just going to interpret it the wrong way.
As we know, the Silk Road narrative really wasn't the true narrative. The vast majority of Bitcoin transactions weren't being used for that kind of activity, so we spent a lot of time trying to educate people about the gold thesis for Bitcoin and why it really wasn't the case. In fact, Bitcoin's really not even anonymous, and that was a pretty common misconception back in the day.
I think there's always going to be an element of education, because it's a new technology and I think a lot of people still don't understand how straightforward it is to buy Bitcoin these days, and how you can literally go to an exchange start-up, there are custodians; Gemini's a good example, or a New York trust company, who are regulated like a bank, and the experience is very much like going to a brokerage and signing up for a brokerage account.
So, I think that's always going to be there, at least until Bitcoin gets sort of so mainstream. It's probably like the early days of the internet where people were like, "What is this thing called, 'The Internet'?" If you look at -- Tyler, you recently tweeted about Jeff Bazos's first 15 meetings to raise $1 million for Amazon and the biggest question he got was, "What is the internet?", so there's definitely going to be some of that.
Peter McCormack: So, are you still dealing with those questions yourselves then?
Cameron Winklevoss: Not as much, but a lot. Sometimes, and I think it depends who's asking it, you know, "Can you touch Bitcoin? Where does it exist?", things like that. You talk to a Gen Zer and you're having a much different conversation. They don't want physical hardware like gold; they want software. They're streaming, they live online, their entire lives are online. Explaining why digital money and crypto makes sense and why you want that, it's not necessary.
I think money, at the end of the day, is really in the eye of the beholder and it's this big experiment that's been going on for thousands and thousands of years and the gold meme is super strong; we all grew up with it. You see it in movies; it's shiny; it's in jewellery; it has this familiarity. So, a lot of that has just been burned in our inner minds that, hey, this is a store of value and it's built up trust over multiple millennia. And, that's one of the biggest challenges Bitcoin faces, is it's only about a decade old.
With that being said, the adoption cycle of technology today is growing at a rapid pace, and so what Bitcoin has managed to do in a decade, go literally from whitepaper to $200 billion of market cap, is pretty phenomenal that it's covered that much ground. So, I think that over the next decade, we could very well see an exponential growth, and that's sort of how we came into the Bitcoin $500k Coin thesis.
We looked at the market cap of gold and then we looked at some other elements like, what if a central bank were to diversify some of its holdings? A lot of central banks, they hold fiat foreign reserve currency and they hold gold and different assets. So, what if they took some portion of that and put it into gold? And then, you look at a $10-11 trillion market cap for Bitcoin potential, but arguably even greater, because Bitcoin has attributes that far surpass gold, in terms of its portability and the ability to programme Bitcoin and move it easily. So, you're sort of back into $500,000 a coin and it's pretty straightforward; it's not a complicated assumption at all. That's really where we are at.
The question in our mind is not so much, does it get to $500,000, but how quickly; and I think that's unclear. And, part of what will drive it there, there's always these catalysts, some that you can predict and some you can't, but one of the catalysts is potentially hyperinflation due to all of the debt around the world. And, as Tyler has mentioned, the pandemic has sort of accelerated us a couple of years forward, if you look around what's happening with Big Tech and retail.
I think it's also pushed us closer to that debt reckoning, that point where people start to look at the US deficit and say, "This is incredible". It no longer passes a reasonable test of whether or not the US can pay it. At that point, the US debt bagholders are going to stop lending, and that's when it's going to get really ugly.
Peter McCormack: Yeah. So, it was really interesting reading through the article because, whilst it was oil, gold and the US dollar, the majority of the article focussed on the US dollar. And, a lot of it resonated with me because, do you know Lyn Alden? I did an interview with her recently and she's a macroeconomist. In the interview, she was talking about 51 of the last 52 countries who have reached 130% GDP to debt ratio have ended up going through a currency devaluation; and, I think the US, I'm trying to go my memory, but I think it might have hit 135% at some point, so some kind of devaluation's likely.
Cameron Winklevoss: Right. We entered the pandemic, I think, around just above 100% and I think we're going to hit 135% in the next year or two, so it's accelerated substantially. And then, there are other countries entering where their ratios pre-pandemic were significantly higher. I think China was around 300% and it's probably now closer to 320%.
Peter McCormack: Yeah. I think Japan was the only one that hasn't -- that was the one Lyn was talking about; she was explaining a weird scenario. Now, another thing that you just made me think of also, with this kind of potential acceleration into Bitcoin, I'm not sure if you're aware of Parker Lewis? He wrote a series called, Gradually, Then Suddenly, talking about the kind of movement into Bitcoin.
I think something like Square and MicroStrategy are the first signals into the market. I think, if you add in too a potential bull run of Bitcoin, hitting all-time new highs, and starting to get some positive media coverage, I think the movement then upwards could be very, very quick; I think that's potentially what you're talking about? I'm assuming that's what you've been looking at as well, Tyler, right?
Tyler Winklevoss: Yeah. I mean, I would sort of contend that £500,000 Bitcoin is actually pretty conservative and the game hasn't even really started. You're seeing hints of it, right, with MicroStrategy putting treasuries, with Square, but what if every Fortune 100 or 500 company does that; what if central banks start doing that? I mean, it hasn't even started. And, to use a US baseball term, bottom of the first inning, maybe.
And we see this; we're on the frontline with Gemini because we see the institutional customers versus the retail. So, institutional customers like market-makers, high-frequency traders, some alternative aggressive hedge funds, a lot of family offices. But, Wall Street's not here yet. Institutions aren't in Bitcoin right now. It's been a retail phenomenon for the last decade. So, Wall Street talks about it, they're aware of Bitcoin, but they're not really in it, from our perspective.
But, it's starting to happen and one thing that did happen a lot with the pandemic, the lockdown, a lot of people came back to us and said, "We believe in the Bitcoin gold thesis", and these are dyed-in-the-wool Wall Streeters, the biggest sceptics in the room. They're boomers, they're not really technology people. They'd be the first to be slagging on Bitcoin for the last ten years. But then they saw what was happening with the Fed, with the money printing. They saw the deficit we've been running for the last ten years.
The US has run surplus only 4 years in the last 50 years. In 1992, Ross Perot made headlines because he banged the table about running a budget surplus. He was like, "We have an issue, we have a deficit spending issue, we have a debt issue"; that was in 1992, 30 years ago. That was before the tech bubble, that was before the credit crisis that spawned Bitcoin in 2008, that was before the lockdown. This has been an issue for 30 years and it's only gotten dramatically much worse.
So, anybody who's paying attention to what's happening in fiat regimes, and unfortunately that's not that many people, are completely spooked and scared, and they recognise the Paul Tudor Jones's of the world, back in the 1970s, when we have stagflation, that gold was the trade. It would have been Bitcoin if Bitcoin was invented, but this is pre-internet, this is pre-Bitcoin. Today, hands down, that trade to stave off the scourge of inflation is without a doubt Bitcoin, because it is the only known asset in the world that has a fixed supply.
Gold is scarce, but its supply increases. In fact, the supply above ground has increased two-thirds since 1950, so it does grow for many reasons we can get into, but the idea is that Bitcoin, no matter how much demand there is, that supply is fixed. Wall Streeters get that and we saw a lot of them come running to Gemini immediately in the beginning of the lockdown, the pandemic, precisely because of that reasoning.
Cameron Winklevoss: And, I think oil provides a really interesting spoil, because in the early 2000s, peak oil theory was pretty popular; this idea that the US's oil production had peaked. The US was an oil importer and now, the US is a net exporter, oil net exporter. And fracking, a new technology, has been able to drill and access oil in the earth that was previously not thought possible.
So, when you look at mining techniques, if the price of gold increases and/or energy costs come down, or some combination thereof, we will find and produce more gold. The supply of gold increases with demand and the same is true of oil. The same is not true for Bitcoin. It's really the first commodity of its kind where demand simply does not impact supply.
Peter McCormack: Well, look, I hope you're right. And quite interestingly if you are, I've run the numbers; I think that makes you guys trillionaires. You could actually end up becoming the richest guys on the planet and I don't know about you, but when I thought about that, I just thought, "That's a fuck you Zuckerberg moment"; can we say that?!
Tyler Winklevoss: You can!
Peter McCormack: I can! I'll do that for you. But seriously --
Tyler Winklevoss: He'll probably get some Bitcoin, because he's smart.
Peter McCormack: I don't know, man.
Tyler Winklevoss: Can you imagine if Facebook put some treasury into Bitcoin? Wow.
Cameron Winklevoss: And speaking of corporate treasury, right now, MicroStrategy obviously was the pioneer in that strategy, for lack of a better word, and Square is sort of the second to follow suit. I think most corporate boardrooms would say, "Oh, that's a risky strategy for your treasury", but there will be a time not too soon where it would be irresponsible not to put some amount of your US dollars and other fiat into something like Bitcoin; likely Bitcoin.
I think that that's the future that we see. It's hard to see perhaps right now. When we got into Bitcoin, there was this crazy Wild West scary sort of thing.
Tyler Winklevoss: But, Cameron, to interject, it's hard to see how that doesn't happen. We've been down this path for decades and it doesn't matter who's in office in the US; democrat, republican, the money printer still goes on and the ability to actually raise taxes and lower spending, we've been unable to do that as a country.
There no longer is a political party that is the hard money, tight fiscal party; it doesn't matter. It's sort of like the Fed wags the dog. Whoever wins in November, the money printing will continue and it seems to span no matter who gets elected, no matter which party. Now maybe Brock Pierce, if he gets elected, he has different ideas, the Libertarian party; I don't know, I haven't seen his platform. But as it stands, this has been something adopted across the aisle and I don't know how it stops. I don't know how you turn off the printer once you're addicted and hooked the way we are, the way Wall Street is; I don't see how that stops.
If it keeps going as it has been going, the math simply won't work out. The ability for the US economy to grow fast enough to service its debt will no longer be mathematically credible on any level. And, I don't know who said this, whether it's Einstein or Buffett, that, "Compound interest is the eighth wonder of the world". You want that working in your favour in terms of growing your wealth; you don't want that working against you in terms of your debt obligations compounding against you.
Right now, compound interest, the eighth wonder of the world, is working against the US dollar and all fiat regimes; they're headed down this path. And, I just don't see how we get off of it.
Cameron Winklevoss: Another thing on that is that, if you measure success by stock market gains, then it's very hard to wean yourself off of the money printer. The stock market has gone up incredible amounts over the past decade, and you keep printing all of this money, it's just going to go right into the market and increase values and basically destroy signal. I think you see a lot of active managers; they can't actually beat the market anymore.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, but that's the big lie, right, because whilst the stock market's going up in dollar terms, I think it was Pomp who was showing me the chart. You look at the stock market in gold terms, it's actually dropped, I can't remember the time period, but that's kind of the big lie and I think that's what a lot of people are missing.
I also just think the problem is, there's no incentive for any political party to stop the money printer, because it's not going to be a popular solution because ultimately, it's going to lead to hardship. I can't remember who said to me, "It's like an opioid addiction; at some point you've just got to come off it and you're going to go through some really hard times", but is Donald Trump going to want to do that in this election; would he want to do it in the next election cycle and be seen as a failed president? There's no incentive for any political party to do it.
Cameron Winklevoss: Yeah. The only person who could do it would be a second-term president who no longer is going for re-election and sort of says, "Hey, this is just going to end really poorly. I don't want to continue to engage in this generational plunder. I want to hand the country down to the next generation in reasonable shape". But, if you're up for re-election; no way; there's no chance.
But also, who wants that legacy, "Oh, my second term was the greatest depression since the Great Depression; it was greater than the Great Depression"; who wants that legacy? And at the end of the day, Wall Street, the bankers, there's so much influence there, there just really is. I mean, if you just look at even how the families of these parties, either side, they make money in financial services. They're all basically Wall Streeters at the end of the day. That's who their friends are; that's who they play golf with; that's who they lunch with.
That's what's so brilliant about crypto and Bitcoin, is that there isn't, what is it, 12 people behind a curtain making decisions for the entire currency of the US dollar in the economy. If you ever invented money from scratch today, let's say, or you did it again, no one would say it's a great idea to put all this power in the hands of 12 people who make decisions behind closed doors so we can't see; you'd never set it up that way. You'd set it up like Bitcoin or Ethereum or some other crypto decentralised protocol.
Or DeFi with a governance token, right? That's what I find really fascinating about these governance tokens, is people can literally dictate the strategy. If you look at YFI, yearn, you choose the vaults and the strategies and it's built on voting?
Peter McCormack: Well, I've got your chart in your article where you compare Bitcoin with gold and I think if you add Ethereum or DeFi into that chart, Bitcoin still wins, right? So, I think luckily, we're fortunate we have that. I will add one thing in. I was trying to find the article then when you talked about it. Jerome Powell is definitely concerned about the growing debt, and he's also alluded to the future generations are going to have to pay for the mistakes of the current generations. And, I'm not a huge fan of Jerome Powell, but as least he recognised it; he talked about it.
Tyler Winklevoss: Yeah, and we actually link in our article to the fact that they're already basically telegraphing that we're soft defaulting as a country; we're trying to spike a higher inflation rate, which makes it easier to pay back our debts. We pay the same amount of dollars, but they're worth a lot less. That's sort of your best, probably, of your three options, one being hard default, which is a disaster; if the US dollar hard defaults, then the world has some really, really big problems.
Then, austerity measures are just equally very difficult historically to implement. Even in the US, we've managed to run a surplus 4 of the last 50 years, so that doesn't seem likely. So, the sort of debt-monetisation or soft default path forward is really the best of the worst options, and he's already sort of alluded to that, which I thought was pretty unprecedented. But, most people aren't paying attention. You are, we are, we're into this stuff, but most people …
I mean, everyone uses money. You can't live in the world without understanding the concept of money; it's so important to everyone's life, the transfer of value. But, so few people stop to take a look at what it actually is, what it means. That's one of the greatest gifts of getting into Bitcoin and cryptos; even though we studied economics in college, it made us really rethink and examine and challenge all of our assumptions, ideas of money. And I hope, and I think for a lot of people; that has; this has certainly been a reckoning.
I think the average person, or you're more likely to find someone in the street who's like, "Yeah, there's a lot of money printing. I'm receiving a $1,200 cheque every two weeks and where's this coming from?" It's like this helicopter money concept was just, I never thought we'd live to see that day in America where you'd have a helicopter money drop. And, I don't think it's lost on the average citizen, like, "Hey, I've just got furloughed and I'm receiving this money. Where's that coming from; is it just printed out of thin air, Monopoly money? Oh, wait, yes it is. What's the value of money anyway?"
So, I hope it does catalyse a lot of people to getting smarter on money. It's sort of like language. It's this thing we use every day, but most of us don't even think about syntax and grammar a whole lot. But, it's always great to dig a little deeper.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, I'm just not sure how much people do think about it. It depends who it is. I was talking to my personal trainer. It's funny, he's got into Bitcoin, interestingly.
Tyler Winklevoss: Nice!
Peter McCormack: Yeah, and I was thinking about getting him on some time, because he's a really interesting person's perspective, because he's a real just normal guy, right. But, he was furloughed and he was getting money direct from the government when he wasn't working, but he had no concept of where that came from and what it meant, and didn't really have a proper concept of inflation.
I think what it is, as we grow up, we're kind of gaslighted into believing inflation is a natural part of a growing and healthy economy, which really it isn't, but we've been gaslighted into it. And, when I was talking to Lyn Alden, she was with you on the soft default; she said, "A currency devaluation's coming, it's going to be through inflation and it's going to happen over probably a ten-year period; the starting point, not exactly sure".
I'm just not sure people do really understand it, because I've tried to explain it to people and I've tried to introduce them to the concept of Bitcoin and I've bored the hell out of them; I haven't converted many people!
Tyler Winklevoss: Well, it's hard; it's not exactly light cocktail or dinner conversation. And the three of us, we think about this a lot; it's still complicated, right? I don't keep up on the economic data day to day coming out of the Fed and the other bureaus in America, so very few people trainspot that information, even rates. So, it's a good question.
But, I do feel that Gen Zers are becoming more financially sophisticated. I think a lot of people got those cheques, at least in America, and they fired up Robinhood and they were like, "Hey, how do I get my money to work for me when I sleep; how do I untether myself from being labour and just having the billable or the workable hour? And, how can I put my money to work, earn something that sort of compounds when I'm not toiling and sweating?"
So, even though there is a bit of like -- the stock market seems frothy and it worries me that, how are things going so well there when we're in a freaking lockdown and unemployment's record?
Cameron Winklevoss: It's because stocks only go up, right; the numbers only go up?
Tyler Winklevoss: And that's a true statement which is super scary to kind of admit that right now. But, at least people are getting dirty with it and thinking about it and investing, right? I think that's definitely different than it was, maybe even ten years ago.
Peter McCormack: But, things have become more accessible. I mean, technology has enabled it; Robinhood has enabled it. And I think that was one of the points; I actually put it in my list. So, when I was reading your thesis for the £500k Bitcoin, one of the things that I added into this, because you did it as a comparison to the gold market, which is $9 trillion; I actually tried to buy a bit of gold during the pandemic.
I thought, I've got Bitcoin, I want a bit of gold, I don't think Bitcoin's 100% guaranteed; I think it would be useful to just have a small amount. And I tried to go through the process of buying it. It was a pain. By the end, I just couldn't be bothered and I ended up buying more Bitcoin, which is kind of funny when you think about it. But, I think the ease of buying Bitcoin, as a retail customer, is just so much easier and it's just so much more in our face, right?
If you sell somebody on the concept of buying Bitcoin, they can download an app and they can be buying it pretty much instantly and custodying it almost straightaway; whereas, gold is a real effort. And I also had to think about, well, where am I going to store it; am I going to keep it in the house; am I getting a safety deposit box? And I was just like … And then, what if I want to sell it? And honestly, I just couldn't be bothered in the end.
So, I think if Bitcoin ends up being considered a better store of value than gold, I think it far exceeds $9 trillion because it's far more accessible to everyone.
Cameron Winklevoss: I think that's right and all you need really is a data connection and then you can send or receive Bitcoin. I think, you know, we sort of talk about the Die Hard problem in our piece. If you were to actually rob the Federal Reserve in Manhattan, you would need something like 12 or 13 dump trucks to move that gold and get it off the island, and then you'd be loading it into 747s and flying it to wherever.
It's really hard to move a lot of gold. It's really heavy and when things getting really bad, apocalyptically bad, it's much easier to move Bitcoin around; it's hard to move gold. And, if you think about the lockdowns in the pandemic, when people were literally sheltering in place, you're not moving gold during that time period.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, that's Die Hard with a Vengeance, right?
Cameron Winklevoss: Yeah, I think's the third one! Did you ever consider an ETF wrapper for gold, or did you feel like that defeated the purpose?
Peter McCormack: It defeated the purpose for me, because I think the reason was, I can't remember, wasn't there a bit of news where that one company wasn't going to be honouring gold that was --
Tyler Winklevoss: Oh, are you talking about Venezuela's gold stash?
Peter McCormack: No, not that.
Tyler Winklevoss: No, I think you're talking about the windows, right? Don't some of the ETFs have windows where you can actually show up with like a receipt and redeem gold, perhaps, out of the wrapper; is that what you're talking about?
Peter McCormack: I can't remember what it was, but it definitely wasn't Venezuela. We've got the Venezuelan gold in the UK. It was something to do with redeemable gold, or whatever, and I just looked at it all and I thought, being somebody who custodies my own Bitcoin, you know, I don't have the security setup you guys have, but I do have a pretty good security setup and I know it's mine, I've got it custodied, I just wanted the physical gold. I didn't want any situation whereby I'd have some kind of claim, even though it's an ETF, I just wanted the physical gold and it was just too much hard work.
Cameron Winklevoss: Right, you want to be ready for the zombie apocalypse?
Peter McCormack: Absolutely.
Cameron Winklevoss: And the ETF is just not going work. So, Peter, what got you into thinking about these concepts, you know, being a gold bug or a Bitcoin bug; what started you on your journey; what was the "Aha" moment?
Peter McCormack: Well, it's kind of ironic really because of where our conversation started. Do you not remember, my starting point was the Silk Road, but we don't need to go back down that …!
Cameron Winklevoss: But certainly before that, you were talking to economists about soft defaults and currency devaluations. Before Silk Road and probably before Bitcoin was invented, something got you thinking about this stuff?
Peter McCormack: Well, look, there are a couple of things that happened: one, I got divorced, which financially was devastating. Being the higher earner out of the divorced couple, my finances got devastated and my company at the time, I had an advertising agency, it collapsed very quickly afterwards. So, my financial position changed from a very healthy position to quite precarious within the space of a year. And I didn't have a pension. And, there were two opportunities to have a decent pension; that was to build a company, a valuable company and sell it, and to make an investment.
The kind of investment I needed to put into a traditional pension, the amount of money each month, just was not doable, so I was like, well, I'm going to make a bet on Bitcoin; that's going to be my bet. If Bitcoin does what I think it will do, I will have a pension. So, I bought the amount of Bitcoin I needed. But, my conviction really changed this year. So, the change I made is whilst it's only a small podcast, it does do okay. I mean, I've shared with you guys some revenue numbers. I wasn't comfortable holding those pounds in the bank. So, I now hold 60% of my balance sheet in Bitcoin. It's not a huge number, but it's still a number that's relevant to me and that's a profitable number now.
I think the main thing is, I'm very concerned about the economy, for the limited amount I know; I'm concerned about the financial future of my children, because lots of things are changing; and, I want to be a saver rather than a spender and I think the most prudent way to save over a multi-year, potentially multi-decade financial plan, is with Bitcoin. The only fear I have is some regulatory issue. I have no other fear with Bitcoin and its success, apart from regulatory.
Cameron Winklevoss: Right. Yeah, the regulatory landscape in the US is pretty well worn at this point. I think it's unlikely to change for the negative. Of course, anything can happen, but look, we're regulated as a New York trust company; New York banking law's over 100 years old; it's been declared as a commodity in the 2015 coin clip ruling; so, there's a lot of case law rulings and regulatory frameworks that I think are pretty well-established at this point that Bitcoin fits into, on both the state and the federal level in the US. So, I feel good about the US.
I think the same is true for the UK and the EU. There's going to be parts of the world where Bitcoin is banned and outlawed and those are likely the parts where they’re most fearful of the technology and they're trying to control capital; and so, it's pretty obvious what's going on there and that's actually, I think, a good thing. It sorts of validates the thesis when places like Venezuela are trying to crackdown on things like Bitcoin.
But I guess, going back to an earlier part of the conversation, if you grew up in a high-inflation environment, the way you think about money is totally different than someone growing up in the US. So, I think in places like Argentina, you might purchase a motorcycle to store value, in addition to wanting to ride it. And when you lose 25%, 30%, 40% of the value of your money on a yearly annual basis, that's traumatising and it changes the way you think.
We have had, you know -- the US has been relatively well managed. Now, there are people that will tell you that it's still horribly managed and, you know, the US dollar has lost something like 95% of its value since, let's say, the 1970s or so, and gold has increased 26 times or more. But, on a relative scale, it's the best of the worst in terms of fiat currencies. But, the average lifespan, I think, of a fiat currency is 27 years; 27 years. I don't think most people know that, at least in the US.
Tyler Winklevoss: And also, the experiment and the US dollar not being tied to a precious metal is very young. I think it wasn't until the 1970s, when we parted ways with gold as a backer of the dollar, and some people have argued when you even go further back, the dollar has lost its way since the 1930s or just before that. And, we broke that peg in the 1970s because we wanted to spend more money than we had; finance wars like the Vietnam War.
Peter McCormack: The Vietnam War, yeah.
Tyler Winklevoss: So, the US dollar, as we know it today, is only 50 years old. It's not the same dollar that it was back in the World War II era before that. And, in the scheme of the history of money, that's just nothing. It really is an experiment and it's crazy to me how many people assume that's how it's always been, like, "Money? I just grew up with this green stuff in my wallet". That's what money is; it's nothing different.
That's what money's been for the last 50 years and it's an experiment and it doesn't look like this one's going to work out at some point. I can't tell you exactly when, whether it's a year or five years or ten; it's always hard to predict exactly when. But, this experiment is headed towards a cliff and then it's going to go off. That's again why I just say, look, we hope for the best, we wish the best, but I'm not taking chances; I'm putting my money in Bitcoin. That cannot happen to Bitcoin.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, I've got a question for you about that. I'm going to come back to that though, just because of Cameron's other point. It's really interesting what you said about people in Argentina. I was out in LABITCONF in Uruguay and I was sat with two guys from Argentina, and they were explaining to me what happened with the Corralito and he said, "People just don't trust the banks". He was telling me about, I think he was saying about some lady who was buying a house. She kept all her money in the house and she bought the house in cash; she took it with her. And he said, explaining Bitcoin to people, there is really easy.
And another really interesting thing, I think one of you saw it because I think one of you saw my tweet; two weeks after the news of the Lebanese currency collapse, my show was the biggest show on Apple Podcast in Lebanon. It was just really fascinating to see that happen, and that's starting to happen more. So, I've hit three or four different markets at number one now. But, when it happened in Lebanon, literally a week or two weeks after, I was like, "I don't think that's a coincidence.
Tyler Winklevoss: Right, that's really fascinating how it's coming online, where Bitcoin as really the hotspot of interest is flaring up in different parts of the world where there are these real problems. I mean, I remember Cyprus. If you were in Bitcoin back in, I believe, either 2013 or 2014, I'm not remembering exactly right now, where they did basically a bail-in and they took haircuts of depositors, everything above €100,000. People couldn't get their money out of the banks, it was effectively frozen, and you lost your value above €100,000.
That really shook the world, I think, in a big way and a lot of people were turned on to Bitcoin at that time; not necessarily people in Cyprus, but people who saw what just went down and were like, "Wait a second". So, that was kind of interesting. So, there are going to be those catalysts more and more over the next couple of years and I think with the internet and flow of information and things like that, the education curves are probably pretty quick.
And, that's happened in the US. FDR's executive order, I'll try and figure it out, it's like 6102, confiscated gold in the US. So, if anyone -- memories are short. We tend to be, as humans, we sort of have amnesia, but people who are up on their history realise that these kinds of things even happen in the US. The idea of helicopter money was theoretical. I don't think I ever thought we'd see this, right, Milton Friedman's parable; it happened. Could the US turn around --
Cameron Winklevoss: And, Tyler, just to joke, the helicopter money; that imagery is I think a person literally tossing bills out of a helicopter into the hands of people. It's like direct distribution into individuals. It's as if money literally just shows up in your bank account.
Tyler Winklevoss: As it did, right. And so, the idea of all of a sudden the US saying, "Hey, we're going to socialise some losses; we kind of screwed up over here. We're just going to haircut the top of the bank accounts of everyone". It can happen; it happened around the world; it happened in Cyprus. These kinds of things happen outside of the US all the time. And again, the US, we're in completely uncharted waters as a country, so anything is possible.
Peter McCormack: Well look, Cameron, you said earlier, soon it's going to be irresponsible not to -- I think it was you who said it, it was going to be irresponsible not to be holding Bitcoin. Why soon? I think it's now, I genuinely think it's irresponsible now.
Cameron Winklevoss: Totally. I think you're right.
Peter McCormack: So, I think everything, I look at all the cash I have, like what do I need over a one-month, one-year cycle. Everything beyond the one-year cycle to me is risky holding it in pounds, and that's just considering Bitcoin volatility, but I do genuinely think it's risky. So, I'm with you on your whole thesis.
Tyler Winklevoss: The other thing is, it's still an incredible trade for a company. I mean, it's not just a store-of-value trade; it's still early. And, Bitcoin's an emergent sort of value, so the next couple of companies or large hedge fund managers that take massive positions and actually talk about it and tell the world, "Hey, we took a $100 million position [or] a $500 million position in Bitcoin", that could be the trade of the century; kind of like the George Soros trade, you know, breaking the pound. He saw what was happening there.
Bitcoin is still that once-in-a-lifetime trade for a couple of brave companies, or money managers. So, it's even more exciting than, hey, it's a question of responsibility or saving your wealth; it's actually a massive opportunity. And it's out there in plain -- it's right out there in the open and it's just a matter of time before some smart people figure that out.
Cameron Winklevoss: And a lot of people, they say, "Oh, a $12,000 Bitcoin; that sounds expensive", but our thesis is -- it's so early, it's like buying Amazon in the early 2000s, in the noughts. And if we're right, there's a 45X appreciation from $12,000. $12,000 will look incredibly cheap and I think that sometimes, it's almost like if Bitcoin did a stock split and split into 100 pieces, or whatever, people can psychologically wrap their head around buying a $100 share or something.
And, going back to the education piece, I think a lot of people think you actually have to buy one Bitcoin, just like a single Bitcoin.
Peter McCormack: Well, yeah. But, you could test it on Gemini and just sell it based on price per sat; you could do that. But anyway, it is what it is. People will or they won't buy, but I'm extremely confident.
Let me ask you though, and it's a good question to ask everyone; when you first saw the MicroStrategy deal, because I think that came out of the blue for a lot of people, there was a bit of a "Woah" moment. It wasn't like some companies put $10 million in or even $50 million; it was $450 million; it was close to half a billion dollars. It was a real wow moment and I think it shook everyone up. It's been really interesting to listen to Michael Saylor talk; I've had him onto the podcast as well.
So, that, and then following that, obviously we had Square putting money in; again, fascinating, and in some ways a bigger deal, even though theirs was a lot, lot smaller bet. I think it was a bigger deal just because of who they are. How did you take both of those in, Cameron?
Cameron Winklevoss: So, I think that the MicroStrategy, obviously a big bet, and I think that's partly a function of Michael Saylor being the founder of the company and it sort of being a founder-driven decision, which I think is great, right, that he can make that kind of move. We've spoken with Michael and he really -- I think the way he thinks about Bitcoin is very in line with our views of the technology and the promise and the benefits of owning the asset.
So, I thought it was really exciting and I think you were talking earlier of, Gradually, Then Suddenly, and I think we're going to see that play out. I think the Square news; obviously, Jack has been a pretty vocal supporter of Bitcoin over the past couple of years, so it was great to see him put balance sheet behind that. And, I wouldn't be surprised if we see more of that from him. I mean, $50 million is obviously a lot of money on an absolute level, but that's something they could do probably quarterly, easily, without thinking much about it.
So, I think we're going to see, I don't know if it's a couple more and then we start to see a wave, but I think that there are sort of two ways to look at it. One, as Tyler mentioned, Bitcoin's an emergent store of value, so it is a really interesting trade; and then, there are going to be individual corporations that say, "Look, we're kind of crazy if we don't put 1%, 2% or 3% of our treasury into this thing", because it's such a binary, asymmetric, potential payment and outcome, because there isn't sort of, like I don't know how you …
The debt problem is getting to the point of being irreversible at this point and you just can't reverse that; and it becomes sort of asymmetric, I think. So, it feels like you really need to put even a few percentage points there in that outcome.
Tyler Winklevoss: Yeah. I mean, MicroStrategy starts, then Square; do we think there's not going to be a third, a fourth, a fifth or sixth company? I think those chances are much greater than this idea that Michael Saylor and MicroStrategy and Jack Dorsey and Square are the only two in the world for the rest of history that do this. So, it's super exciting because I think we all, all the three of us, believed this would happen; then you start to see it happen; it's only a matter of time before it becomes a deluge.
And then, countries are going to have the same thinking, right, with their treasury services, and that's going to happen; and once one, then two, and then all of them. So, when I go back to part of the conversation, it's so fricking early. Like $500k Bitcoin is conservative; like, that's conservative.
Peter McCormack: I just want to throw in there; what's something that's quite interesting that I've observed is that, I think it's obviously quite complicated for a big, multi-million dollar company that does hundreds of millions of revenue to start considering, especially if they're a listed company, to start putting money into Bitcoin. But, it's very easy for, let's say, small versions of Michael Saylor, like myself; one-, two-, three-man, four-man businesses to do that.
I'm already in Bitcoin; I'm already born into the thesis; it's actually in some ways easier to buy Bitcoin with company money than personal money because personal money, you always think, "Well, do I need that for something?" but company money, it never seems as real; a bit like company expenses. I mean, I don't know what it was like when you first started doing business, but when you go for dinner and you're using the company card, you can be a little bit more out there than maybe with your personal card, because the money doesn't always seem so real.
We've got tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of people into Bitcoin who run companies and maybe small companies who are already wanting to buy Bitcoin. So, in the two weeks since I interviewed Michael Saylor, I've had four companies get in touch with me and say, "Oh, Pete, how do companies buy Bitcoin; how do small companies buy Bitcoin?"
Cameron Winklevoss: They come to Gemini!
Peter McCormack: Well, yeah, they can go to Gemini.
Cameron Winklevoss: Come on, Peter.
Peter McCormack: Oh, come on, I've already got a sponsor!
Cameron Winklevoss: You know this answer!
Peter McCormack: Well actually, the first thing I say to them is to go to Casa and make sure they get their security sorted. But the point being is that, I think there's this in-between stage where a lot of small company or small business owners will be moving in first, and then you'll start to see the bigger companies as they figure their shit out.
Tyler Winklevoss: Right. Well, I think you're a great microcosm; your experience, the divorce, how you got into Bitcoin. People will have those challenges, right, and companies are just groups of people, and countries are larger groups of people. If it's true for you, at some point it's going to be true for a small business, a large business, a small country, a large country. It's not like human behaviour, or the challenges you faced, are so different than what a company or country faces; so, I think it's just a matter of time.
Cameron Winklevoss: Yeah, and if you look at, central banks bought more gold in 2018, the highest amount of gold bought since 1967. Why are they doing that?
Peter McCormack: Well, we know.
Cameron Winklevoss: Any guesses, right?! Because they know they're on borrowed time. They're all bagholders and they're picking up gold because that's the sort of muscle they have. They know how to buy gold; they've been doing that for hundreds of years. They don't really know how to buy Bitcoin yet. And, I think it makes sense that you, other companies and some now publicly-listed companies are sort of the first off the diving board, but eventually the central banks are going to realise that if they don't start getting in there, they're going to be the last ones at the party, and that's not a good place to be.
There will be a MicroStrategy version of a central bank that takes a risk and says, "Hey, we've done this". And, they're going to do it quietly and accumulate their position, and then they're going to go out and talk about it, and then things are going to get really interesting.
Tyler Winklevoss: Completely bonkers.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, crazy, crazy stuff. Well, look, a couple more things I want to talk to you about before we close out. Firstly, just a kind of broader question around, you've been in Bitcoin for a while now, what do you think are some of the key issues and challenges that are on your mind right now for the future of Bitcoin?
Cameron Winklevoss: So, I think a lot of people in the peak of the pandemic thought, "Oh, is Bitcoin a safe haven asset? Wait a second, what was up with that big selloff?" And, I think what we've learned is that cash is still sort of king in a liquidity crisis, when people have to make margin calls and settle and all that thing. So, it's not there yet, right. People had to go into cash to buy Bitcoin and when your hair's on fire, buying Bitcoin isn't the first thing that's top of mind.
I think though now, as the dust is settling, people have the headspace to think about what's been going on, and then the bandwidth to then go buy Bitcoin. So, I think that was one of the things that I saw in the past six months, and I think a lot of people are just quietly accumulating. There's going to probably going to be some kind of catalyst or inflexion point over the next 12/24 months or so, but I think that a lot of people thought, "Hey, this is safe haven, people are just going to rush into Bitcoin", and that didn't happen. Next time, it may happen, because a lot of people are --
Tyler Winklevoss: But also, this was a bit different, right, because the whole economy shuts down, right. I don't think Bitcoin's necessarily a hedge against the economy and being on complete lockdown. It's ultimately a hedge to all of the Faustian bargains that governments have to make to get through the pandemic and lockdown. It's a hedge to the next decade, or two decades of hyperinflation and all of the distortion and disruption that that leaks on economies.
But, I'm really optimistic about Bitcoin. It's definitely, in terms of the store of value gold 2.0, it's Bitcoin's to lose. Frankly, the two blockchains right now that have a lot of activity are really Bitcoin and Ethereum, and that's sort of a measure of the demand for block space in each, you know, transaction space. So, you look at transaction fees of Bitcoin or Ethereum, there's actually demand, there's scarcity, there's a lot of people who want to get in there.
Almost every other blockchain's a ghost town. There is no demand for a scarce resource, which is space in each transaction block. And so, it's really Bitcoin's race to lose in terms of taking up the mantle with gold 2.0 story. Something really catastrophic would have to happen to Bitcoin for that not to work.
And, I don't know, maybe I'm not as close to, I'm definitely not as close to maybe the current events with core developers day to day, but I see just good news. I see MicroStrategy; I see Square. I see, not that this is news we want, but I see really bad news coming out of fiat regimes and feds and money printers and European central banks. I see zero interest rates, negative interest rates. People are like, "Where can we go?" There's only one answer; it's into Bitcoin and into crypto.
So, the stage is set and I think all of the levers, all of the catalysts are there. I think we're going to see a tremendous bull run, and there aren't a lot of things that give me pause or make me worry, frankly.
Peter McCormack: Obviously, you just mentioned the Bitcoin Core developers; do you guys sponsor any core developers?
Tyler Winklevoss: So, I saw this question coming.
Peter McCormack: You knew it was going to come!
Tyler Winklevoss: Yeah. So, directly sponsor; I don't believe we do. It's a great question; we're open to it; I think, as the world works, we all get really busy in our bandwidth, but it's something we were open to, so if you have any ideas around that, let us know.
Peter McCormack: Well, look, I had the chat with Brian and he took it really well and fair play to him; he went away, he did it and they've committed to sponsoring two developers. I'm not a techie. If it's something you guys want to do, there's people I would put you in touch with who know better than me, and there are different people.
You could go via someone like Alex Gladstein, who is always looking to support open-source development, which helps some of the more Human Rights causes. You could put out your own piece where people could apply to you for a grant. There are some developers you could speak to. I know Luke Dashjr, who is looking for funding right now.
So, look, I think if you want to do it, it's a cool thing, but I would suggest you just go away, have a think about it. If you want a suggestion from me, all I would do is just introduce you to somebody who would know it better than me. But, it's a bit of a mission of mine just to kind of raise it in a lot of the interviews, because I know it's an ongoing issue and without the developers, we don't really have the network.
Tyler Winklevoss: Right, yeah, definitely a good point. Yeah, it's interesting because I feel like over the years, I've sort of lost touch with what the community of core developers are on Bitcoin. I'm not sure quite why. Years ago, in our early office at Gemini, we were across the street from Chaincode Labs. I remember the days back when Mike Hearn was in Bitcoin as a core developer, and then he left. And so, the thing that's interesting, also ironic I guess, is I'm more active on Twitter these days than I was even back then.
Peter McCormack: You both are.
Tyler Winklevoss: Yeah. That's one of the, I guess, silver linings of the lockdown pandemic. But, back in the day, Gavin Andresen was a big thought leader on the core dev side; it was just clearer where that was. And then, there was the block size debate, civil war stuff, and to be frank, I just don't know where core dev is these days. I don't know if some of the characters I followed on Twitter are still there; I don't see them tweeting as much. Obviously, there's Blockstream going on but, yeah, frankly I'm not super close to where it is and what factions or whatnot.
But obviously, we care about core development, we care about Bitcoin deeply, we don't have our skin in the game, we have our whole bodies in the game. So, maybe that's a little bit of the problem is the fact that, guys who run an exchange like Gemini, who own Bitcoin, who are on Twitter, who follow a lot of people on Twitter in crypto, that's really why I use Twitter, I'm not really sure where the current state of affairs are with development. Like, what is the foundation; where can I send my Bitcoin or my fiat dollars to support? So, I'm sure it's there.
And then, of course, we all have our busy lives, right, and we're sort of just chugging along and now we lead 300 people at Gemini, 300 and growing. So, yeah, that's just me being as transparent with you as possible in terms of, yeah, we haven't thought about this a lot. We should know this; how do we not know this; but, it's really not clear who's doing what and how to get involved. It sounds like you know and it's awesome that Brian --
Cameron Winklevoss: Tyler, I would just throw in that we are on Twitter, as you mentioned, and so anybody, you know, feel free to DM us, any core developers that are listening; happy to hear what's going on. That could be an easy way to --
Peter McCormack: Your DMs are going to be flooded!
Cameron Winklevoss: They already are!
Peter McCormack: I think the thing to do, I mean, you know Brian, you could probably chat to him about what he's been through. Look, the first step is have an interest. I guess you'll go and talk about it. If you are committing to it, then it won't be difficult to find people; there are always people looking to be sponsored. I always think it's quite nice when a company specifically sponsors one, whatever, two people, because it's kind of like they can obviously be very grateful and thankful directly back to you.
I've got an interview with a developer out today, Amiti. She started at Chaincode and then she was sponsored by Xapo. I always think that's kind of nice, but I think the first step is for you guys just to probably think about it internally once you've rationalised if you want to do it. Then you can ask me, but I'm really just going to put you in touch with a developer themselves who will help you navigate it. But, the fact that you're open to it is pretty cool and I think you'll get a lot of thanks and appreciation for that.
Tyler Winklevoss: Yeah, that's cool.
Peter McCormack: I think I'll chase you down, though!
Tyler Winklevoss: And it's interesting because, as an exchange, if we support a new protocol, we're talking with that community, that team, and oftentimes, finding bugs; you know, we're helping troubleshoot. So it is a very collaborative, synergistic thing when an exchange takes on a protocol, taps into a community. With Bitcoin, it's just the oldest and it's worked. We support in our own way by helping people get into Bitcoin.
Peter McCormack: Of course.
Tyler Winklevoss: But, you're right, we should have a better lead on the core developers, who's contributing right now, and try and help that way. So, I'm glad you raised the question and we're definitely open to it.
Peter McCormack: Amazing. All right, last question, because then I'm going to let you go; what's going on with the sequel?
Tyler Winklevoss: Bitcoin Billionaires?
Peter McCormack: Yeah, what's going on with that?
Tyler Winklevoss: It is happening. I mean, it's en route. Obviously, nothing's filming yet, but in the process of screenwriting; not us, but other folks. So, pen is going to paper and it's starting to come to life, so hopefully a script sometime soon and then, you know, go into production, get the right studio, I don't know, maybe Netflix will see and just move along. But, I think it's a really fun story and I think it does a pretty good job.
It's a bit of escapism, right, but it also explains Bitcoin and I think it could help people make it more approachable, have a fun sort of rollercoaster come-back story, and learn a little bit about -- one thing that's important to me is that people learn something. They leave the theatre questioning a little bit about the dollars in their pocket, or be a little bit more open to Bitcoin and just get the conversation going about money, because it's so fundamental to all of our lives. It's something we rely on, we use every day and I want to see more people get more financially independent, you know, have more access and sort of take control of their lives.
So, if this movie, just like The Social Network, if the best thing that came out of it, it encouraged and inspired a whole generation to try and become entrepreneurs, do their own startups, don't go work for the company and work for "The Man", but take a risk, go out there and do that. So, I think it's very dear to our heart for this movie to not only to be fun, entertaining, but also inspire and teach.
Peter McCormack: Who's going to play you?
Tyler Winklevoss: It's a good question; undecided, but I feel like you --
Peter McCormack: That guy, was it Josh Pence, was it?
Tyler Winklevoss: So, he played me from the neck down.
Peter McCormack: Oh, was that what it was?
Tyler Winklevoss: Yeah, Armie Hammer played --
Peter McCormack: I'm not going to try and play smart; I've got IMDb open here!
Tyler Winklevoss: Yeah. So, Armie Hammer played Cameron completely and then, they superimposed Armie's face onto Josh's body, so Josh was a neck-down actor and Armie got my head and Cameron, his full body. So, he could be cool. That could be interesting. I'm sure there's a lot of good options but, I don't know, maybe I guess my question to you is, are you going to make a cameo in the abusive scene?
Peter McCormack: In the which scene?
Tyler Winklevoss: The abusive scene.
Peter McCormack: I mean, I would love to make a cameo, I would absolutely love to make a cameo, but I don't think I'm worthy of it. Do you know what? The Social Network set just a really, really high bar; I'm looking forward to it. Also, the funny thing was, when we did the last interview, I hadn't listened to the full book. I got it and I got the audio book and I'd got through kind of about a third. I finished the whole thing out running during the pandemic; I just used to go for a run round the park and did the whole thing.
Tyler Winklevoss: Nice.
Peter McCormack: It's a really engaging book, really engaging to listen to what you went through, especially the whole bit when you set off on the planes. To do what you did there was really interesting. There are just little bits that stood out. The paper cup, I don't know why, I just kept remembering the paper cup as well. Is that in the lawyer's room?
Tyler Winklevoss: Oh, just me in mediation.
Peter McCormack: And then the pizza drooling off someone; just little things stood out. But, the whole bit with the planes was fascinating, just blew my mind. So, I'm looking forward to that. I hope it will hold up to Fincher's work with The Social Network and yeah, listen --
Tyler Winklevoss: Yeah, it's great. It's a little bit of a different story.
Peter McCormack: Of course.
Tyler Winklevoss: And it's also, you know, I hope it hits the standard too. But, it's also a different world. Our movie theatres, our feature releases, the way things are done these days, or is it in-over-the-top streaming; is it episodic in a couple of different episodes; or, is it a two-hour feature? So, it's really interesting just to see how much the world changed, and we had nothing to do with the original movie, but we had a front-row seat to watch it all happen, and the award season and all this stuff, and the Oscars.
Is that the same way you would do it today, or is this that type of story? Is it still relevant, the structures of power, you know, the same way? And, I think it's different and I think this story's definitely a little bit more upbeat, less of the betrayal, the Shakespearean betrayal kind of stuff; but more of the phoenix from the ashes comeback story. But, look, we're going to work hard to make it, make it great.
Peter McCormack: How's the trilogy going to end?
Tyler Winklevoss: Bitcoin trillionaires?!
Peter McCormack: Well, yeah. Well, I've got an idea by the way, I've got a really good investment idea for you if you become trillionaires; I think you should buy a soccer club. I don't know if you've heard about these actors who've bought a soccer club?
Cameron Winklevoss: Is it football or soccer?
Peter McCormack: Well, I'm calling it soccer just to help you guys out; it's football.
Cameron Winklevoss: You're being kind, thank you!
Peter McCormack: Yeah, I'm being kind. But, I think you should buy Bedford Town Football Club. They're in the lowest of all the low leagues, so they're really cheap. I would run it for you and I think you could get Bedford Town in the Premier League with a Bitcoin logo on the shirt. I think that would be a good investment for you if you become trillionaires; what do you think about that?
Tyler Winklevoss: We'll consider it!
Peter McCormack: You've said it now. Now look, I appreciate you both coming on ago. It's always a pleasure to talk to you, love talking about Bitcoin with you both, and everything you do. And, I appreciate you considering the idea about open-source development. I will chase you up on that like I did with Brian, so sorry about that. But listen, love everything you do. Just tell people how to stay in touch, how to follow what you both are up to.
Tyler Winklevoss: Yeah, great, thanks for having us, Peter. We're on Twitter, probably the best way to stay in touch. Our DMs are open, so hit us up there.
Peter McCormack: Right, wicked.
Cameron Winklevoss: Thank so much, Peter.
Peter McCormack: No worries, man, I'll put it in the show notes. Take care and I'll see you soon.
Tyler Winklevoss: Sure, take it easy.
