Speaker A: All right, hello and welcome everyone to a special episode of Waiting to Be Signed, an interview discussion episode. We've got our friend Lars Pronoia back on the show. How's it going, man?

Speaker B: It's going very well. Excited.

Speaker A: Yeah, it's been, I was estimating maybe 18 months or so since the last time you were on and you guest hosted an episode when Trinity was away. That was a great conversation and I've always kind of wanted to have you back on and we have an amazing opportunity here to just chat about everything that's been going on with fxhash and $fxh and art tokens.

Speaker B: Time flies, man. Time really flies. 18 months already. Yeah. And it's been— fx hash release was, was it December 2021?

Speaker A: fx hash came out, I think, in like October 2021.

Speaker B: Damn, that's been a while, which it feels, still feels like yesterday, which is kind of strange.

Speaker A: Well, it goes without saying, since we're going to be talking about fx hash and stuff in this episode, that none of this is financial advice. So all those disclaimers there. But we will be having to talk about price and trading and all that stuff. And that's kind of the point. So use it for entertainment purposes only. And with that outta the way, so dude, last time you were on, maybe you were working already at Trillitech or maybe you hadn't even started there. That's how long it's been since you've been on the show, but you went in, you're out. So like, what have you been up to since we last spoke?

Speaker B: If I'm thinking 18 months ago, it's like at the start of when I started at Trilli, cuz I think I was at Trilli for like 1 year and like 5 months, something like that. So it comes close to that. So yeah, I was just going to start out. I had a lot of great times at Trilli, learned a lot about the ecosystem, had a lot of great interactions with different partners, different artists and such, working with fx hash as well on what programs we would be doing. Things like I went to the Entangled Gallery release as well, which was really amazing getting to see that up close, the technical process as well. I stopped about, I think, 3 months ago now after I made a trip to China for a few weeks. I came back, I decided that I needed some time away both from the space but also going away from Trillitech at that point. I had felt a little bit of a lack of impact in the space in general, and I needed to sort of shift that for myself and see what I wanted. Since then, I took like 2 months off. After that, I decided to take a job at the Central Bureau of Statistics, which is our sort of statistics bureau in the Netherlands. So I'm doing that work now. It's part-time, it's nice. And I'm doing some consultancy on the side, more on the NFT and art side, which has been fun. But yeah, I've been enjoying having a little bit more free time since I'm doing like 24 hours a week right now, which is, uh, is a change of pace, uh, especially since I kind of went straight out of university into working and then my first real 2-3 months of like complete freedom. So this is nice. Yeah.

Speaker A: One of the narratives, or maybe not even narrative is the right way to put it, but one of the controversies around the launch of this fxhash token and the new Open Forum protocol and everything they're doing with the platform has been this, I guess the kindest way to put it, they've really deprioritized the platform from supporting Tezos, right? They're still going to have the legacy contracts, but they're not going to allow people to mint new art. You can still trade on the secondary. So yeah, how do you feel about this shift to Base?

Speaker B: Okay, I have a lot of things here. So I think there's like, A few things, with one being sort of the core center, which is just like the financial reality of running a Web3 company, and especially an NFT web company. We could talk about like DeFi and their sort of cash flow problems. But I think the core problems with cash flow on an NFT platform is basically like you have to get these artists in, you have to get the collectors in, there's an ever-increasing supply, you have to manage both the old collections that are still doing some secondary volume, and then you have to create new primary volume. And I think balancing that is always difficult. And we saw that FXHash had a period of, let's say, 2 to 3 years where I think they frankly were burning money. If I just look at from the outside and looking at all the other NFT platforms deciding to shut down like MakersPlace or Rodeo shifting to a whole new model, I think it was inevitable. That the model which they had employed before didn't seem to be working in this cycle and didn't seem to respond as well for new, especially primary drops this cycle. I mean, we have seen some secondary success on Art Blocks in recent months, but it's really been like a silo to a few what they call blue chip, but are actually like sort of investment vehicles at this point. So that's one part of it, which is just like the financial reality. Then there is a different part of it, and I mentioned the word decoupling. You said deprioritize, but I think decoupling, I might take it like a level higher, saying that I think they're decoupling from their relationship with Tezos as a partner and artist support entity. I think they don't want to work with Tezos anymore. The way they have been communicating about it has been quite transparent. First, sort of teasing the bridging already. Then coming out with the contracts stopping being open for minting. I found their response to be a little bit, I would say, unnecessary. I think it wasn't necessary to decouple this hard. I mean, I cannot say since I've been away from Trilli for quite some time now how that conversation went behind the scenes. I wish they could have come to some sort of resolution where Tezos support would not be fully decoupled from the platform and left over to the community. And then secondarily, I wish they had discussed with some of the major artists as well and discussed with some of the community members, like, how do we resolve this? Is there some sort of open source way we can maybe manage this or someone else work together with people on Tezos? I don't know. Still, I'm on the outside and not looking. The team must have made some very hard decisions. Especially because they love the art that's on Tezos. They love all the people who probably worked on the Tezos contracts as well. So I imagine those conversations and those situations were hard. So I'm giving the team some slack and I'm hoping, yeah, I'm hoping they respect the heritage and also acknowledge that that heritage and building sort of the story around it is very important. And I think that's where parts sort of 3 and 4 come in for me. So those are the first 2. The 3rd part is that heritage, right? So I think It's essential for the growth of the platform in the future to show that that heritage is what led to FXHash being the platform that it is now. I know that they're doing something completely different, but I think the strength of that story is very important even if you're doing something different. It's cultural values, cultural capital. It's those core artists that you started out with that you want to come back, that you want to take on your new journey. You got to show some level of respect to that. And then the last area of this is Base, sort of as an entity and as an opportunity for them. This is just pure speculation. I think their idea is that if we also show to the Base community and to Base core team that we're like really committed to Base, we're doing Base Summer, we're going full on Base token launches, Base app, etc. That way we will be able to work more closely together and our company might be more viable in the future, both from an investment perspective, but also just from a distribution perspective with Coinbase allowing them to sell their tokens in the biggest distribution app there is and on the chain that has like a super liquid environment. So I completely understand it. I do still have questions about decentralization. But I'm seeing Base right now as sort of a fun L2.

Speaker A: Yeah, you got to get those coveted Jesse retweets, right? Or tweets to—

Speaker B: it's a strange— I mean, it's just to me, it's a strange mechanic. I've been very critical of Jesse in the past. I think he has a tendency to present things in a way where they are quite rosy. He said one of these statements like, oh my God, I am making money on Sora right now. Like, oh, I can't believe it. I'm using this app and I'm making money. To me, that's like, that's getting close to like scammer territory almost, where the economical reality of Sora is that the money you're getting is coming from the users and especially the money that he's getting. Or at least he's not selling the tokens, but he's talking about his number going up. That money is purely because people are like following his wallet and doing all these things like looking for retweets, getting the project going. So I hope he stays away from those kinds of statements in the future. I think Sora has a place, but I think they shouldn't be presenting it as some sort of magic money solution.

Speaker A: Yeah, I'm not very interested in Sora or the idea of tokenizing everything. One of the themes of the show over its now almost 4 years' time has been like, we don't really like a lot of what crypto has to offer other than the art and culture side. And I don't think tokenizing tweets essentially is culture or a substitute for culture. Maybe 0.01% of tweets could be worth collecting, but not everyone should be issuing a coin. And that's kind of why I like fx hash, the token thing here, right? Giving artists a way to tokenize the culture they're producing, because at least they're actually, at the end of the day, making art that you can collect with this protocol.

Speaker B: So once, just like small note on that, my media research sort of thing went off where I'm like, the medium is the message, right? And if I'm comparing Sora to fxhash, the medium is the coin, right? It's coining things. And I think the message with Sora is coins don't really matter. It's just haha, fun. Let's just have an economical vehicle for everything. And with fxhash, the message of the coins is really like focus in on your craft, create something long-term, and create a brand thing. I think that's sort of a difference that I like personally with a more focused approach.

Speaker A: Maybe we can find time to come back at the end to the bridging between Tezos and Base thing that's on their roadmap. But let's focus in on fxhash for now. What's going on? I'm sure you remember as someone who was really early to fxhash back in the day, the earliest docs on the website talking about and fxhash and $fxh token, though back then it was all about revenue sharing, subDAOs and curation, decentralized governance of the platform itself. Then we had Paul on at the end of last year, at the end of 2024, and he was just talking about the, I guess at that point, nascent art coin plan they had that sounded very much like it was just meme coins with no actual utility attached. And now today, where we are in August, they've launched the platform. It's been live for almost 2 months and this current shape of this art coin protocol that they've launched. So like, do you feel like they arrived at the right place as someone who cares about decentralization? Like you already said, like, do you want to see governance and things attached to the FXH token in the future? Like, what do you kind of think about this journey that they've been on?

Speaker B: So the core of your question is, have they arrived at sort of the right place or at the place that I maybe would like? Again, I think some of it is a means to an end in financial reality, just like needing to get out of this cycle where NFTs are not like the best investment vehicle and earning vehicle, especially for the platforms. But also another part of it is them seeing the sort of cultural shift around that as well, with the coining, with the more TradFi sort of approach to art. Had I ever imagined them coming to this point? No, it's not like I thought, oh, this generative art platform that is doing a sort of open source Wikipedia-like version of art blogs where everybody can just participate is gonna at some point do like brand coins or art coins or whatever sort of DeFi. I don't think anyone when looking at like Cypher talk like 2, 3 years ago is gonna say, oh, that's gonna be like a financial DeFi thing. But at the same time, I think we weren't at a cultural point at that point yet where personal coins and just coining things in general was accepted in the way that it is at this point. I think American regulation specifically has allowed for these cultural shifts to happen even at a higher level. I think back to like the tweet by Jesse, I think if you had a President Joe Biden, Jesse would think like 3 or 4 times before tweeting such like pumpy things. But that has normalized at this point. I think major artists are also normalizing to this fact. I think if you look at Refik Anadol, And the example that he's setting by completely financializing his art, even to the point of recommending people to buy his art in his Discord and keep pumping it and keep talking about it. So on the one hand, it brings a lot of cult of personality around this whole coining thing, and it's all about brand value and it's all about financials. But at the same time, I think it's a sort of social cultural reality that's happening in crypto. And even though I'm not like happy about where crypto as a general space is going. I really appreciate that FXHash is trying to find a novel way to interact with this new cultural shift, and I think they've done that quite powerfully by introducing a new art format that's directly tied into both the supply financial of the coins, but also at the same time is challenging artists to do something new and creative. So I think that as a starting base is great, and while I'm excited about them also broadening the scope to other forms of art, like still art, one-of-ones, AI-based long forms, maybe in the future, AI art agents, whatever all that might be. Yes, the platform is going to become even more decoupled from that original idea. I still think because the team is so central and core to their morale and the way they work with things, I trust them to actually still apply their creative thought to each one of those processes. And I think, I hope at least, they're going to come out on top. So did they arrive where I thought they would? No. In my head, if I had to, like, 3, 4 years ago, I had to think like 3, 4 years ahead, I would say cultural institution, really working with large curatorial platforms, etc., on big releases, doing like festivals, etc. But also seeing that from up close while working at Trillitech, It is hard, it is expensive, and the ROI on something like a booth at a fair where you sell 2 or 3 big artworks, you cover costs, you get some level of attention from mainstream, but mainstream isn't streaming into crypto, as we all know. I think crypto can be quite a hug box. That's sort of the reality. I wish, I wish crypto would have like expanded beyond the degens and gone into sort of consumer-friendly art lovers, etc. But those people seem to stay on Instagram for now.

Speaker A: Yeah, I think we're quite far away. And first, like, yeah, what you're talking about events, you're basically talking about marketing. Like, that's the problem. Like, at best, you're getting revenue-neutral marketing or marketing that covers its own costs. So you can't really grow that way. Maybe in theory, you could long term if you did get a lot of adoption. But clearly, we didn't get the adoption that we were hoping to get. But Adam with the HEFT Gallery and some others, right, in New York at least, have launched galleries now where they're really trying to de-emphasize the NFT side. And you go to HEFT, and I don't know if you've been to New York since they've opened, but there's not a mention of an NFT anywhere in there. All you see is really great art on the wall.

Speaker B: You can kind of lean 2 ways, right? I think you can lean heavily into the financialization and the NFT side of it, which fxhash is doing. And then what HEFT is doing, of course, is just leaning into— because that side of the art world is so hard to get in, I think it's especially important to sort of remove these barriers of thought that will come up in every collector's head when they walk past the thing and it says NFT. It just happens. There's just a cultural bias against NFTs beyond, again, the hugbox that NFT Twitter and NFT crypto is. But I appreciate fxhash daring this space to be a little more creative with their thinking and daring these degens to appreciate art a little bit and don't always to be looking at the charts, you know. Yeah, some Sora posts go to like 3 million, but it's just one post image thing. It's— you're not exploring it with your mind beyond that.

Speaker A: I think a little bit of what they're trying to do with this new system too is dare the degens to care about art again. And from talking to Cypher a few months ago, right they launched, they acknowledge as a platform, as a company, that the flippers and the degens that we kind of rued early on as collectors who sniped all the drops and resold them, and we'd have to pay the flipper price and stuff like, yeah, that was annoying to earnest collectors to have to deal with that and figure out gas. But also it created a lot of the liquidity and attention and the fun in a way of collecting to to see the number go up. Like, there's something undeniable in crypto about the necessity for a number to be going up. And now they've externalized that into this kind of multi-layered DeFi system that has been memed into what we're calling the flywheel, right? So I guess, first of all, can you explain the flywheel to people who might not be familiar with this term or concept? Or do you have a kind of understanding of the flywheel? And do you believe in the system that's designed here to actually fly and wheel like we hope it does.

Speaker B: You said a few things there that I think are interesting. I think the platform as a whole trying to get the degens in, well, what Ciphrd said, I think crypto as a whole, when we are in these conversations and like you talked about with the bots, we tend to talk about it like the art world itself is sort of this fair place of artists just making art and like sharing it on the street and selling it and you can just buy it, you can come up. That's not the reality of the art art world, right? And I am very much against this sort of, um, oh, we deserve to get the drop at this price, we deserve to be treated all equal, and whatever it is. I mean, they think the economical reality of platforms, the economical reality of the art world in general, is yes, there is a first mover advantage. And if you're on the platform and you get into a drop that becomes big, you'll have a first mover advantage. If you're in front of the bots, after the bots, or after they sold If you're still early on that long-term timeline, you don't have to worry about all that stuff in the beginning. If you're afraid to lose money in the beginning and you don't trust the artist to actually build up the coin or the coin to go up after a while, then don't buy it. Nobody's forcing you to buy it. Just mint it straight away. So yeah, I don't like this entitled sort of thinking about the flywheel where, oh, we all have to be in the flywheel and everyone's making money. That's not the case anywhere. Again, this is like sort of a check for people. This is a PvP space in like the most essential form. Unless there's other people coming in that are not from our base and that are bringing in VC capital or liquidity, or the degens are coming, we are all trading against each other unless that happens. And even if those people come in, they become part of the in-group and you're trading against them. That's the reality of trading, and especially in the art sort of side of crypto, I think it stops us from moving forward if we're constantly focusing on how to make everything fair for everyone. What the flywheel is, it is an opportunity for people who are invested in a product from an early stage to make money over the long term, because the flywheel will make sure that everyone who's coming in afterwards is either burning some supply, which is, is lowering the supply, buying artworks, which will increase the value of the artworks, which will in turn increase the value of the tokens to mint. So that's also like a 2-way street. And then the 3rd thing is like the brand flywheel, where if they release a 2nd project, it will still be on the same coin, it will still be burning tokens. So over a longer time frame, you can also speculate on the flywheel. But the flywheel is not this idea that once you buy a token, it will sort of automatically make money if people trade it. That's not real. People might present that as real in the sense that you're like, oh, I have this. What will happen is you will have this full wallet of coins and maybe 1% makes it to some sort of high and gets the flywheel money, but most of them will not. It's also a reality. So when you hear people use the word flywheel, think about it in the sense of we are intending for the platform to grow and we are intending for that growth to flow back into the community. And not to flow back into like the standard capitalistic, uh, the shareholders, the VC, etc. Some of that flywheel will still go to the platform. The platform, the people have to eat, the salaries have to be paid. So you're still paying a sort of a tax even on the sort of flywheel input. So it's PvP minus the platform flywheel. Keeping it real for people, right? Because it's like people talk about this stuff, especially in crypto and especially crypto podcasts, to be honest. They talk about it like it's some sort of a positive-sum game, even if we're all just 1,000 people trading amongst each other. It's not a reality. So yeah, use the word flywheel. It's fun, it's memey, it's cool. But we should also understand that it is a meme, and real growth is more important than the flywheel system that you've built. And I think they've built a great flywheel system where the money comes back into the center.

Speaker A: It seems that way so far. And, you know, we still are in this period of time where It's 2, sometimes 3, sometimes 1 releases a week and they haven't fully opened it up. And I think right now our view of it is a little bit warped because it's so metered out, these releases. For example, probably right after we end this recording, there's going to be a release today. Beezora is going to drop something and that's the first release in like 3 or 4 days. So it's going to get a lot of attention to it. But once the platform opens, and we're getting 10 coin drops a day, maybe in some cases maybe more, depending on how many artists are like ready on the sideline. I think you're right, there's going to be people who really struggle to graduate up the bonding curve, have to graduate early, maybe have 2, 3, 4 projects ready to go, and they're still not going to get that accumulated effect on their coin. Because just like we would see with any other open platform, not all art catches people and gets their attention and mints out. And I do think it's a little bit tricky right now because of the way that they've rolled out this release, where it does feel like every coin can find some base level of success right now. That's just the nature of this like slow drip, I think.

Speaker B: Yeah, I think if you're just looking at like, um, Virtuals, for example, they have a similar bonding curve also on Base. So most of the projects that even go into Genesis, right? So that's a point system they have for early backers. They don't make it out of the bonding curve. Like, most don't make it out of the bonding curve. Most try like 3 or 4 times even. I don't think there's like an early graduate option. And then some of them go to like an instant publishing version where you don't even do a bonding curve, you're just throwing it on the market. I'm really curious to see what happens when they open up. I think because the approach is more focused and centered on art and an artist coin or an art coin being very specific to a person and to a project and not just like a post, I think people will be more wary to actually launch. And I assume like the artists that wanted to launch before probably reached out to fxhash to figure out how it works. So those are some of the releases we're getting now. What I'm curious about is like, is fxhash able to attract enough attention in the coming months to get some of the bigger artists interested in the tokens? And I think the Ciphrd token might be important to that, in my view. And it is the highest value token, but it's also the token with someone who's behind it who, you know, is committed to the platform but also to his own craft. And the features that they will be releasing, my assumption is that Ciphrd will try out some of these features and will be doing more releases, kind of to show the way to make an art coin successful. I think he should, in my view, to show other artists as well. So I think when we see that, we see some of that success, I hope we can get some of the larger artists in. I'm really excited about some AI artists coming in. I think AI long form is an underappreciated format. Emprops, for example, it is underappreciated by a long mile because it's like not a lot of people are minting on there. And like K11, it was called the other platform. So yeah, I think that format is really interesting. Opening everything up. I think stills are also a really interesting idea if you can get someone like Grant Yoon, someone who already loves the generative art ecosystem and who wants to try out both generative projects and still projects and one-of-ones. I think catching some of those as well, because I think there's a lot of artists who are fans of FXHash and they want to see them succeed, but they're also a bit wary seeing some of these tokens not performing well. And seeing that a creator coin on Zora goes to like $2 million in whatever time. So I'm hoping they get a lot of new artists in. And my advice would be broaden as fast as you can. Try to push for futures. I would rather see a lot of futures on the art side than I would like to see them focus on trying to make everything fair and try to adjust everything to appease people who are angry.

Speaker A: I'm going to caveat this next question with the truth that we both were like probably top 100-ish users. I know for sure you were. I was right on the cusp in the top 100-ish users of fx hash. We both got pretty good airdrops, I assume. I know I did. And that probably biases how we feel a little bit about the platform and also like our investment. But I know that you have been watching this whole thing unfold pretty closely. And I know that you do some up some trading and I know you've participated in virtuals and have a lot of, just as a young guy in crypto, you know a lot about this stuff. So what's your strategy been for trading FXH so far since the release? And like, do you have a methodology that puts you at a price prediction for like market cap around where this whole thing could go?

Speaker B: I'm a vibe-based trader mostly. I've been in crypto since I think 2015, 2016. At that point I was like, 16 years old, so I got quite kind of familiar with like charts and resistance levels, etc., pretty early. But I always have traded sentiment and vibes above resistance levels and structures and time frames. I like those 3 sort of— the vibes are important, the sentiment in the community itself, and the time frame. So when I'm looking at a coin, I'm thinking So this artist has X amount of vibe-based clout. People are loving the artwork, people are talking about it, etc. Then there is the sentiment around the platform in general and the tokens and how the market is moving, which will influence how the token launch will go. I think Ty Vek is a great example, right? The art is super good. I, I was looking at the site like a few days before, so I'm vibe checking basically, if you're doing it financially, looking at all these outputs thinking, okay, people are going to want to mint this, people are going to go at deeper depths. Which will mean they will use more tokens to mint, and they will also pay 200, which is quite a large portion of the supply to be paying for mint. So I bought in right after the bonding curve. I didn't want to fuck with the snipers. Sorry, can I curse? But I didn't want to mess with the snipers. I went in right after the bonding curve, and I still got quite a lot of tokens and, and sold throughout that time that people were minting and going deep into the collection. And then I retained 20% of the supply that I bought. So that's kind of how I'm approaching coins. And then the timeframe that I choose is really dependent on how fast things are moving, how high the volume is. If volume goes to zero, which has happened with a lot of some of these tokens, I am not afraid to sell at that point and make sure to cash in that liquidity if there's not a lot of movement. My only one that I have a different timeframe approach for, like I talked about before, is the Ciphrd coin. Which I will keep buying even if it goes down or goes up. It doesn't really matter to me. I think that's just a future investment in the platform, as is holding FXHash in general. So my strategy has been I take out about 20% to cash after each coin drop, 80% I drop back into FXHash. And as such, I think I 2x or almost 3x my airdrop at this point. So I'm trying, I'm doing my best. Oh yeah, dude.

Speaker A: That's pretty good. That— I'm sure that puts you at least in the top 10% of— probably very high up for people who are not botting and sniping, for sure. You must be—

Speaker B: yeah, I think Pierrot is probably doing a lot better, but yeah, I don't have a script.

Speaker A: And do you think about fxhash though, like the market cap and the platform of like the overarching, you know, the virtual style token at all, like in a particular way? Like I know now we're kind of at the bottom of the second major move up, and it seems to be very much driven by outsiders coming in, getting excited based on posts, then the price goes up and then it looks like either they're taking profits and bringing the price back down, or maybe people like us or, you know, who had big airdrops are deciding to sell for whatever reason, right? Like there's any number of reasons someone could want to sell aside from their faith or belief in the platform. So it feels to me rather obvious that when you see the success of Zora and you see the success of virtuals, like, you know, granted Art is smaller, but art is also, I think, fundamentally cooler. And it's a place that we've seen a lot of attention at before. And seeing the market cap back down at like $6 million now, it just feels like inevitably we have to keep going higher and higher over the next year. Do you kind of agree, like, directionally, that there's a path?

Speaker B: I'm avoiding the word inevitable or anything close to the idea of we're going to make money on this token. When I get an airdrop, it's non-risk-averse money. It's money that will be used in the most risk-seeking way possible, looking to increase that amount since to me it's like play money at the end, already taken out some cash. So I'm looking at it from that perspective. When I'm looking at it from a very risk-seeking perspective, yes, at $6 million, I think it's a good shot. But you don't know if, let's say, the base hype sort of dies down. Zora comes back from a valuation of $0.5 billion, maybe something like $100 million to $50 million, kind of settles there, mints dry up, fxhash gets dragged down with it even lower than the mint price, things don't really mint out and the company goes down. Something like that, right? Just painting the different scenarios. I'm not saying any of which is more likely. I'm willing to take a chance. I'm not telling anyone to buy more tokens. But the bullish case is appealing to me. For sure. Would I hold this much of this asset if it was not an airdrop? No. I think at that point it's a— it's still a very risky asset at a very low price with a super relatively low volume coin which can go up and down in very quick— like, if you're just trying to trade for 2 or 3 months right now, be careful, right? So yeah, I'm attracted to my bull case, but I'm also very mindful of keeping risk very close to my mind.

Speaker A: I've made my views pretty public. I think to me, it makes a lot of sense that even if it's temporary, I think there will be at least one moment where we see the price really go up and maybe we get to something like a $50 million market cap. I don't know if that's something that's sustainable because there's so much, like you said, there's so much hard-to-predict risk, like a vulnerability in the contract could be discovered all of a sudden that didn't get caught in an audit and like that would blow up the whole platform, things like that you just can't really predict.

Speaker B: Yeah, technical is sort of, um, if it's— so I have the vibe, sentiment, and then timeframe, but like technical is sort of a part of it and security risks are always a part of it sort of in the broader assessment. But I would fit that into timeframe because everything will go wrong at some point over time somewhere. So you have to always take profit, you have to always make sure to scale out when something is happening and you're in a high-risk asset. That, that's like base rule. People don't do it in crypto. I see a lot of people in crypto who get hurt. Don't get hurt that bad. But on the vibe and sentiment side of it, I fully agree with your assessment. I think there will be a time where the vibe will be higher than it is right now. And the sentiment around BASE and the general liquidity in the ecosystem, I think will probably be higher at some point in the future. But I also think it might be much, much lower at some point in the future. I can't really predict what's coming first. I think that's very hard. I'm willing to have it go down to like $2 million. But I think a lot of people might not like have the hands for that.

Speaker A: Right, right. So it sounds like to kind of summarize, you're happy to hold FXHash in particular because you got such a generous airdrop. And then you're kind of trading art coins as a way to chip up in FXHash, but also to get some cash back out of the system.

Speaker B: Yeah, that's making use of the flywheel we talked about, right? Because the money that's going into the art coins is coming back to FX hash, but because they're all on a trading pair with FX hash as well, from the point of the bonding curve to sort of the highest point of demand just after the drop, at that point it's just FX hash streaming into the token liquidity. So that means there's always liquidity to get out if the coin graduates and has some, for some form of volume at the beginning. So I think people need to be mindful of that, like there's always people willing to take out liquidity when that happens. So maybe wait a little while, you know, maybe take a few days to look at an artwork or wait till it's explored into a deeper depth like with Tyvek right now and then invest at that point. Leave sort of the liquidity grabbing trading to people with not a high sensitivity sort of emotional trading. That's my advice.

Speaker A: You mentioned you really like the Tyvek project from the art standpoint, from the vibe standpoint. How do you feel about actually like OpenForm in general as a new way to create and mint generative art? And like, do you have any other projects that you've really enjoyed and collected? Like, are you actually using any of your art tokens to collect right now, or is that something that you're waiting on doing?

Speaker B: I've minted the Ty Vek project. I minted the Galoh project. I minted quite a few of the Ciphrd project. I minted a few Slips as well. And of course I minted Wanderer on my secondary account. The minting equation is very hard for me to calculate from a financial perspective because the prices is relative to each other and it's always going up and down. So that's very difficult. So I'm not doing that from a financial perspective. What I like right now is, again, it's like airdrop money. I can spend it on art, I can enjoy the art, and I can still sort of financially find it viable without feeling like I'm spending too much on art. I wish I could just pay the artists sometimes. I could pay the artists just straight away instead of them having to sit on their coin, but think in a long-term perspective, that is a very interesting concept. Open Forms as a conceptual thing, I think it's a very good introduction. And it's a very good way to showcase that there can be a synergetic nature between generative art forms and coins. But I think what will be the more brand-friendly and appealing thing to a broader scope of users and artists is the ability to make like all types of artworks, have all types of tools at your disposal, have a market that's integrated into the platform, have a visualization of all the artworks together, really like that artist experience that started from generative but is much broader than that. That's what I'm looking forward to. And I think Open Forms is a great start. And I think the other forms will probably be easier to integrate. So I hope the timeline isn't going to be like that, that's happening in a year or something. If I had to say to the team, I would say like right now is the time to like spend some extra money, get some extra, maybe extra devs from the money you've made this past month or 2. Just like go at it.

Speaker A: I know it's on their roadmap. I have— I don't know enough about the technical side, but I know they're working with like a new system for doing the pools, Doppler, right? So I think that's kind of like what they're waiting on, that integration to then open it up to artists. And I'd have to imagine that opening up the platform to artists again would also mean at least bringing in what we would call traditional long form again. I don't know, there might be something, might be some reason to hold one-of-ones for a while, because I kind of feel like launching a coin off a one-of-one, it would have to be off a set. It would have to be off of like, I'm bringing 50 curated pieces, right? Otherwise, I don't know how you're going to get enough action and interest in an art coin if you're just like dropping one?

Speaker B: I think you wouldn't launch it on it. I think you would either attach it to an open form or a long form. The best version I could think of is like Zancan releases Garden, and then at some point he releases Garden Zero as a 1 of 1, and then maybe at some point he releases another version of the Grass.js that's tied to the original collection in some way, allowing people who bought the coin from the first collection to further invest in the narrative and also to auction, right? I think auctioning is, is a very special mechanic. I think we've seen it with Boom, Dark Farms coin, where it's very effective if you're auctioning in the token by the artist because the collectors will sort of fight amongst each other. And it's very much a feeling of we're still increasing the value because it gets burned, but we're also outbidding each other and we're getting an artwork back for it. So I think that's very effective. I think they're going to probably do a similar system. And beyond that, I think having as much options as possible— like, I wish like someone like, uh, Zancan or William Mapan or anyone or Iskra would probably want to try a few different things if they're bringing out an art coin. I think they wouldn't just do an open form and then another open form. So getting as much of those options ready, I think, would be good. And I also would recommend to them allow people to launch a coin with the prospect of art releasing at a later date. I think that's an interesting mechanic as well because you can release a brand or artist coin fundraising in a way, and then at some point release a special project, a tight of it, or multiple projects over the long term. Maybe a gallery coin could do something like that, or an artist with a longer-term plan. I think having to release with a singular project also gives people sort of a very deep connection to that project and the coin, which I think isn't always the best route for people who want to do like an artist coin, like a brand personal coin.

Speaker A: I can see it being a challenge for a lot of the bigger artists, especially that you mentioned, because open form is new and kudos to all the artists who have participated in this launch, taking a risk, trying out this new form, right? Like it's not as simple as I'm a good generative artist and I'm great at code and I've got great taste. Like there are these extra degrees of planning and thinking about how to do a successful or what, what probably in the future we will regard as a successful open form release, right? Like I think even us as collectors and spectators are still kind of thinking out loud about what makes a good open form project, but I don't think we've really figured that out, even like how to appropriately evaluate.

Speaker B: If you look at long form, right, long form is basically for someone like Snowfro or someone like Zancan, it's limiting an existing algorithm that you have on an infinite scale. You've already built like an infinite scale, you've already built like a refreshing thing, probably like Grass.js was probably developed for those one-of-ones and for curated things beforehand because he had already released those. And Snowfro had a squiggles algorithm just for fun. In open forms is a very different concept. You have to work through the idea of evolving. You have to add extra mechanics. It's not just a limiting factor, it's also an extra requirement. So I think it's a more difficult art form, which is also why I am very excited to release long forms with coins because I want to see the next big long form come out of fxhash. I mean, Art Blocks is closing shop, right? Or at least they're—

Speaker A: we don't know. Yeah, but it seems like they're winding down, going into art and different things.

Speaker B: They're becoming a spiritual being. They're becoming sort of the ghost in the sky for the space. That's kind of how they're approaching it. And they want to keep the value in those 500 collections. I totally understand it, but I still want new and exciting long-form collections. And I want to invest in a generative artist with a career that spans longer than just a few years. So I'm hoping they can drag those in with the long forms as well. Mapan, please.

Speaker A: Yeah, I know. Well, I mean, I think I use William as a great example of someone who I wish the art coin stuff had been ready and done and proven for like his sketchbook series, because I personally didn't love how constrained those projects were. And my take was that they were limited to like the 64 pieces primarily to drive price and not for the sake of the algorithm. When I think of like what an artist ideally should be doing is expressing the algorithm to its fullest extent and not going like what's best for price and kind of like art coins allow you to have both in theory. You could have supported 800 Sketchbook Bee mints because every single one now puts more value back into the art coin itself. And so I thought Sketchbook B, I preferred it even more to Sketchbook A. It ended up going for like an 8th of the price of Sketchbook A because just of market conditions at the time. But like, I would have just loved to see that project done with an art coin execution and a bigger series. So hopefully they'll pay attention.

Speaker B: I think for an artist like him specifically, the mechanic that I just mentioned where you just release your art coin is a big enough event by itself. To give the attention that it deserves and not sort of mix it up with the expectations and feelings about what the next drop looks like. Because people love Mapan, people love the history of artworks he has and think he is a valuable cultural institution in the space. So if you tie the coin right away to a singular project and people don't really mess with the project as much, it will tear down on the sort of the initial hype and value of that token. So I do wish they allowed a system where you first release your token, create like a big event around it, see it as a sort of fundraiser as well for your future career, and then start pumping out artworks throughout the year.

Speaker A: I kind of see it the other way, although I guess it just depends on what kind of artist you are, because having talked to a lot of artists, I don't think that they like the pressure of expectation and demand on them from collectors. And if you're going to release an art coin, without a project with the expectation that the future value of it's going to come from released works, and you're someone like William who is accustomed to being able to spend sometimes a year or more between releases, like, okay, the initial release of a Mapan coin might be a big story and it might generate a lot of temporary volume, but even just days or weeks down the road when no project materializes, what's going to drive the volume of that token potentially leading up to a release. And not that he checks Twitter, I don't think anymore, but like, people are going to be pissed and annoyed. Like if things don't come out.

Speaker B: I have 2 sort of thoughts about that. First is NFTs already do this. If you're buying an early artist, especially, I think Mapan is a different story. But if you're buying an artwork, and you like the artwork, there's also the expectation that the artist will stay alive, do something in the future, work on their career, even be online sometimes. It has come to the point where someone like a Tyler Hobbs has to hire a full-on gallery management Twitter system to put out his posts so he can relax with his family, so that his collectors are not chasing him about the fucking price of Fidenza. That's how heavy the pressure of collectors already is. So I don't think that's going to be particularly extra with the coin. Artists should express that they see this as a, if you trust me, As an artist, as just someone creating, I'm not going to promise any specific project. If you like me, this is my brand coin. This is the artist coin. The works that I'm going to release on fxhash and in the ecosystem are going to use the token in some way. I'm not guaranteeing— also, I think it's important for artists to say I'm not going to guarantee that any artwork I release in the future has to do with this token. Just something important to state, like advice to artists, like be clear, be aware of expectations that might occur if you're not clear. And don't give in to anyone with like these expectations. So just block if someone's like, hey, are you gonna release something for the price? I mean, are you holding a Mapan token because you think Mapan is a great artist and is going to do great cultural things? Yeah, but can you expect it of him? Are you like a customer that can get like a check back? No, no, you're just investing in a speculative asset.

Speaker A: At the very least, it's goes through the liquidity pool. And if you get tired of holding, you can sell, unlike with a lot of cases, NFTs, like selling might not be readily apparent, which is even more painful for a lot of people.

Speaker B: And it drives them to even more sort of insane ways of driving expectations of artists. A collector will say like, this collection that I hold, you're not promoting that collection enough. And this collection that I love is not being appreciated enough. And you can have that opinion, but like the way they sometimes state it to the artist and almost the madness of it, I don't— that's— I don't like that. I don't like it. Just bullpost. You can bullpost. That's all.

Speaker A: Well, if you were an artist or just thinking about an artist like who was going to release an art coin, and let's just assume that it's the paradigm now where you do have to release it with a project and not launch a token without one. How would you be thinking or how would you advise someone to think about pricing in their native token, ETH fees for the various modes of collecting and evolving and also like future things like cadence of release or buying more of your own coin or selling more of your own coin, right? And like the need to pay bills. It's a very big question. I think a lot of artists are still, I think it's still too early to know for certain a lot of these things, but like, are you intuiting anything around how maybe artists should be thinking about ownership of these coins? Not ownership literally, but like, right, owning the process.

Speaker B: I would just approach it from a like business timeframe perspective. Just be very clear-cut about it. I think artists are figuring it out on the platform a bit right now, but if I was an artist, maybe that's also just the way I think about finances a bit, but I would just set out a TWAP over time with my own coin. Do you want selling over a certain period of time with like set amounts over time unlocking and publicly just selling that and being clear about the sales you made? Keep them small, keep them over time. Make sure to not dump everything you get into the liquidity pool. Market management is something that I don't think artists need to learn. Just don't shoot everything at one time. Just take a time frame. Either it's something a week or something every month. That's needed for salary or paying something, do that. If you don't feel like you need to sell at all and you're a larger artist and just want to build it over a very long time, you can also do that and just keep building capital. Even artists who might consider not even owning their own token and just being a shepherd of the token but not being financially involved to the point that they have to sell or do things with the token, I think that that's an interesting approach as well. Much more difficult approach though.

Speaker A: I think a lot of artists right now, they're buying at the earliest point in the bonding curve. They're getting like 20, maybe 30%, or in the case of Ty Vek, who bought 50% of the initial token supply, they have this temporary, you know, the bots come in, the snipers, the price goes crazy up and down, then they exit back out and the price kind of settles to like the natural place where collectors are now actually interacting with it. And they're looking at $10K, maybe $20K worth of market cap. That really selling even, you know, 1-2% is not going to pay a lot of bills for the average person there. No, it feels like the strategy around selling the coin is really would come much, much later when you have released more projects.

Speaker B: A flywheel needs to start up, right? It needs to gain a bit of traction. It needs to start doing its thing, start moving. If that's not going to happen in like the first week after a project, unless you already have amassed so much cultural capital, that's a big release by itself, the token, right? If you make an amazing project that has like amazing depth, I think the token mechanics will really help driving the value up. And I think we saw that with Tyvek. But over time, you will still need to do things to keep that buying pressure up. So there will be high times, there will be low times. As an artist, I would sell more in the high times, of course, when you're releasing projects. But also don't forget to take out some liquidity during the low period.

Speaker A: Yeah, I think there's interesting opportunity for messaging around, suppose you're on project 3, and every project, of course, is naturally, if you're a reasonably successful artist, going to be additive to the flywheel, right? It's more pressure on the token, more tokens getting locked up. So in theory, like project 2 is going to be priced in fewer art tokens than project 1, and then project 3 is going to be priced in fewer art tokens just because the art token should be worth more than it was when you first released. Now maybe the art token's like 5x more expensive than it was on genesis for the first one and say, hey, I'm gonna like sell 5% of the supply because there's people who still want to go back and collect project 1. And now it's like really expensive just because of the nature of the floor.

Speaker B: Yeah, like lowering the price through the selling.

Speaker A: Yeah, it's gonna come with blowback because there are gonna be people who are holding the coin long term And then of course you're going to get those complainers. But like you said, like, that's just a block scenario, right?

Speaker B: Like, the only thing that you need to worry about, if you care about sentiment and your coin doing well, that's something you can care about. And that's why you might sell slow. The expectations of people on a personal level and sort of what they want you to do, don't bother yourself with that. Just think about it in terms of what's good for the coin What's good for me and how can I balance those things? That's really all you need to worry about. And if selling really quickly means other people will sell too, it's not because they're mad. It's because that's the way markets work, right? So you have to be aware of that. Markets will respond if you dump a lot of liquidity at once. That's going to be a reality. But please, artists, don't listen to these whiners. Yeah.

Speaker A: And a lot of that kind of price action that you're referring to, we just don't— we live it, but we don't see it because we live it with NFTs and just nothing is selling. Here it's a little more visceral because you're going to see the line go up and down and you're going to see the -15% in red or like the +10% in green. It's so much more like, just because of the non-fungible nature, right, of the NFTs. Like, it's just, you don't— it's more visceral with an actual moving market. Like, everything is constantly being accounted for or manipulated or, right, like—

Speaker B: Right, but NFTs, you sometimes don't even notice how much money you're losing.

Speaker A: Yeah, yeah. You go in and you see the floor piece is, you know, oh, that's actually not that bad. But then you realize it's like been sitting there for a year. Yes. Right. And then you look at offers and the offers accepted are like 90% under what that floor piece is. And it's very hard to get a proper sense of like what the value of a given piece in your collection might be, especially if it's not a William Mapan or a Zancan or someone who has more readily available interest.

Speaker B: Yeah, I always assume the price is what the offer is at the moment. Not the floor price.

Speaker A: This has been awesome. I love just thinking about this stuff. It's like an exciting— I know it's probably for artists to hear, maybe kind of cringe to say, but it's like, it's exciting to think so actively around art markets again for me and like jump on the platform and have a reason to be in Discord and be collecting and like posting new art that I'm collecting on fxhash now. Like it's really been an awesome experience for me. Hopefully you've been enjoying it too.

Speaker B: I've been enjoying it. I've been enjoying yapping as well. I mean, it's a, Yapping is very— do English people say on the nose?

Speaker A: Yeah. Okay.

Speaker B: Yeah, it's up the nose. It's like, it's very clear what you're doing, right? You're yapping. You're yapping genuinely about things you might care about, but you're doing it quite forcefully, which I think it is on the one hand annoying to some people and some people want it gone, but I think it's fun and I think it's a good way to sort of increase the project's relevance. And I think people can sort of find out the more genuine and less genuine yappers themselves.

Speaker A: I've given myself a rule of just trying to do like one good tweet a day that expresses like earnest sentiment and is not just empty, right? I'm trying to like write something that actually has a little bit of content to it, but it's hard. I want to stay on the leaderboard at least for one more month before the platform gets probably too big or too difficult for me to compete.

Speaker B: And what I hope is like, I've been in like top 10, top 15 of the yap thing. I hope I get bid out because I'm like, I had a whole period of time, especially when I left Trillitech, where I haven't really tweeted as much and haven't really interacted as much. So my engagement is like pretty fucked, but I'm still doing quite well. So I hope some bigger players come in to yep more than I do, and I'll take the hit in terms of yapping and I'll probably cash out on the other side.

Speaker A: Yeah, yeah, yeah. I guess that would be the benefit. Before we go, I'm curious to ask, let's go back to the beginning. How do you feel about this plan logistically, morally, technically to bring Tezos projects over to Base or to ETH L1? I think it actually is ETH L1 that they're going to do.

Speaker B: I gave some fair words of criticism on Twitter. What I will say is like, I wouldn't want it to happen if they chose to remain with Tezos. And my preference would have been for them to at least spend about 30 to 40% of their sort of cultural, social, technical capital on Tezos. They have not decided to do that. They have decoupled, they have broken off, and the only thing I can do at that point is accept, right? When I was at Trilli, I was very much hoping it wouldn't happen and very much trying my best for it not to happen. It did happen. It's their decision if I agree with it or disagree with it, but I have to deal with the situation now. And with the situation now and the decoupling that has happened. I think having markets close together and synchronously working, especially when you have a coin— so the FXH market on Tez on secondary is in no way connected to the main value drivers of the platform right now. It's not like I can make a little bit of money, like $500 on FXH, and be like, oh, I'm gonna spend it on the cultural capital of the platform, which I think is sort of a must. Like, to me, it's like Push that future even closer now that you've already decided to close shop there. Get those connections by the people that want it on OpenSea, on the same coin trading platform, within the same wallet infrastructure, right away purchasable with fx hash via direct transfer, also via direct swap or swap with ETH between it. I think that's going to increase liquidity for the collections. It's going to create attention for the platform. With these beautiful genesis collections that have a place in people's heart, but will also come more to the front. I think fxhash is underestimating the power of those collections. And I wish they would acknowledge more that those collections are essential to their cultural capital as a platform. So I don't agree with the move from Tezos. Now that the situation is here, let's get this thing over with and let's get this market integrated and allow people to spend their profits on that beautiful classic art. I mean, that's a real flywheel, in my opinion.

Speaker A: It's a lot of steps to do that currently.

Speaker B: Yeah, you see it. Nobody's doing it. I mean, there's traders making $5,000, $6,000 on each of these trading coins. I think the community would be a lot less angry about those traders if they were then turn around and spend it, even if it's $1K or $2K on those classic collections, because that's going to freak everyone out.

Speaker A: What you said makes sense. But the biggest inhibitor I see is that looking at the Coinbase wallet right now, it doesn't support Tezos. So it would really take them as an entity choose to do the work to like bring Tezos into that?

Speaker B: No, no, I think it needs to be the bridging at this point because the wallets are a layer on top, right? Like Temple Wallet does ETH and Tezos, but it doesn't mean that ETH people will start using Tezos on a Temple Wallet. And the same way, I don't think people in the Base app will suddenly start buying all these Tezos NFTs, and I don't think they're going to integrate. So get it closer on a technical level. So get it at least to ETH L1. And I would keep it there, bridge FXH automatically one click on the OpenSea. And that's already possible with other tokens where you can just buy from BASE directly to ETH L1 directly in your wallet. That integration is so smooth, nothing's going to beat it in terms of sort of market synchronicity when you're adding Tezos to a wallet. Even if MetaMask today added full-on Tezos support, it would be a great day for Tezos. But I don't think it creates value right away.

Speaker A: I only see it creating value in the simplicity of swapping. So like in the scenario that you were describing, I was just thinking of like, yeah, like I make $6,000 in profit of FXH, I want to go buy an RGB. If I could just one-click swap that FXH to Tezos through the wallet and only have one wallet connected to fxhash, then I feel like it's a lot less friction. But you're describing, well, like if those classic pieces were already on ETH, they were already bridged over, then that it becomes a lot easier for the traders to collect.

Speaker B: Yeah, 100%. Like, in an ideal world, they would have still supported Tezos contracts and all of that. And then that situation that you're drawing where you can directly transfer to Tezos, but that means like setting up contracts for locking tokens on Tezos, making swaps cheap enough for that to actually make sense between the 2 networks. Keeping all the contracts alive and keeping the full secondary marketplace working and adding new features that are coming onto Base as well, because they need to be synchronous if you want that to work. It's difficult having those 2 layers synchronous. So get them to, to eat, I guess. I would never thought I would say that, but the scenario that you just described where someone makes some money, buys some RGBs because they love the platform and they care about the cultural capital and don't know what to do with the fx hash, tokens right now that they earned. And it's also a way for those collections to then get more attention, people recognizing fx hash more. I think they really missed out on not having some sort of form of that at day one. Let's see how fast they can get that done.

Speaker A: I'm curious to see what their logistical solution to it is, and to what level they're going to involve artists, because I know, I think we can think of one artist, right, Zancan, who probably would explicitly not want their pieces moved over. But if this is a tool that's being put in the hands of collectors to just have autonomy and move their pieces onto a different blockchain?

Speaker B: I don't know how that's going to work. If you want to transfer a token, you can transfer it, right? I mean, the artist has allowed you to buy the artwork. The artist might not like it, but if I throw the artwork out of the window and/or step on it with the booth, it's not illegal. It just might be immoral and the artist might not like it. But this space is most of the time not about sort being moral with the way you treat artists' assets. That's not a reality. That's, especially now that you're dealing with all these degen traders. Yeah, they're really not caring much about dilution and bringing things back into the market when it's not the right time.

Speaker A: I would not be surprised if there were some degen traders who have done a lot of art collecting who see this as a potential arbitrage opportunity, and could be throwing out low, low bids on RGBs, Zancan pieces, you know, Contrapuntos, Dragons, like a lot of the revered, you know, historical fxhash collections just to be the vector for bringing them over and like being first to have them on EthL1 OpenSea and just be like, I bought this for $300 in Tezos and I'm trying to get $1,000 for it on ETH, something like that.

Speaker B: It's an arbitrage opportunity and it's also an opportunity to spend within the ecosystem. Without removing your tokens right away or selling them back into the liquidity pool. Because once you've made money on artwork, you probably still have some tokens left of the artist where you're going to be able to mint at some point. And then you have your FX# stack, which only can really buy those artworks, but not all the artworks that have come before. Team, come on. I know you guys have it like on the right side of the roadmap right now. You're not thinking about it too much, but I would Maybe even like just hire someone to get that done, even if it costs a little bit more. I think the return rate will be good and you will be getting a lot more money to be held within the ecosystem instead of flowing out into liquidity pools and people just cashing out dollars.

Speaker A: Interesting. All right, well, I feel like that's a great place to end it. Give Pronoia a follow @pronoia10 on Twitter. And do you have anything else that you kind of want to plug or talk about before we wrap it up? Any final words, praise for Tyler, the Creator, you know, anything that—

Speaker B: oh, Tyler, the Creator is really good. I, I went to the Chromacopia tour with my little sister. That was really, really sick. Uh, he's amazing. I like the new album. You don't like the new album. We can respectfully disagree on that.

Speaker A: I gotta listen again.

Speaker B: Yeah, you should get some good speakers on, get a vibe in. No, uh, if someone like— I'm doing 10 hours of consultancy a week, so if anybody like an artist— for artists specifically, I do good rates, so If you're an artist and you need some help designing your tokenomics, thinking about like how you're going to work with the community and curating artworks, I'm always there. Same goes for crypto companies. That's it. And for the rest of the time, I'm just working my government job, so I don't have anything to plug.

Speaker A: This was great. It was awesome chatting with you again. Thanks so much for coming on. Hope everyone listening enjoyed that.

Speaker B: I hope you enjoyed the yapping and thank you, man.

Speaker A: Thank you. All right everyone, we'll be back again soon-ish with another episode. Thanks for listening.

Speaker B: Peace.

Speaker A: Thanks to Lars. Bye man, see ya.

Speaker B: We're waiting to be signed. Moreno of the week. To be signed. We're waiting. Always send. We're waiting to be fried.