The conversation explores the rise of prediction markets, centered on Calci’s strategic push to financialize real-world events through transparent, regulated markets. Calci, in a pivotal legal win, successfully challenged government restrictions on election betting, establishing itself as a leader in regulated prediction markets. This positions it against Polymarket, which operates in less regulated, offshore spaces, creating a sharp competitive dynamic. Calci emphasizes regulatory compliance, banning insider trading and employee trading to maintain fairness and trust. Despite early challenges in mindshare, Calci has gained significant traction, now matching or exceeding Polymarket in public awareness. The discussion also touches on broader tech trends—like storytelling as a core tool for founders—and platform evolution, such as X’s efforts to attract journalists by improving content integrity and transparency. These developments signal a shift where financial markets are expanding into everyday decision-making, from sports to politics, with prediction markets offering deeper insight through collective, market-driven pricing. The conversation underscores that while unregulated markets may grow quickly, regulated, transparent models—like Calci’s—are essential for long-term trust, legitimacy, and public adoption.
You recently made a comment that went kind of viral.
I think you got a lot of heat for it.
You said you want to financialize everything.
Do you really mean that?
Why'd you scare my grandma with that comment?
If you believe that markets work,
what they do is they discover prices.
But what if we applied it to some of the most important
pressing questions about our future?
Should you be able to bet on anything?
Calci is one of the fastest growing companies on earth
and it lets you do exactly that.
They fought the government and won,
raised billions of dollars,
and are in the middle of a fierce rivalry with PolyMarket
to win the prediction market race.
Okay, PowerShift is brewing in the sports betting world.
What does this mean for sports betting and the gaming stocks?
This week on the show, we have Calci CEO Tarek Mansour.
We talk about insider trading,
why Calci employees aren't allowed to use Calci,
what he thinks of PolyMarket,
and his controversial comment
about wanting to financialize everything.
But first, Ellis and I talk about
the rise of storytelling in tech
and why X is pleading for its hate.
And also why it's so important for creators
to return to the platform.
This is Access.
Ellis, how's it going, my friend?
I'm well, how about you?
I'm good.
We've got a lot to talk about today.
We've got Tarek Mansour on the show,
the CEO of Calci.
But first, Ellis, I've been noticing
that everyone seems to have FOMO about what you do,
about being a quote-unquote storyteller,
that storytelling is the hot new thing.
Well, it's the Wall Street Journal, at least.
They had a big story, was it yesterday,
talking about the rise of the storyteller
and the, frankly, the decline of reporters.
How did that feel?
Going from earned media to,
maybe we'd call it invented media,
co-created media, masturbatory corporate media,
one of the above, take your pick.
This was one of those stories
that got viral screenshotted on X by a bunch of people.
They both follow in the tech world.
Everyone glamping on about their savvy media strategy
that they have, and I just think it's kind of interesting
that this is becoming a hot topic.
And I think it kind of signals where everyone's head is at,
that in an age of infinite AI everything,
and products that all kind of do the same thing,
maybe the thing that matters
is how you talk about your company.
I don't know, you're the professional.
You tell me.
- I think we have never been more important.
What we need is storytelling.
I mean, to me, it's nothing new.
I feel like this is just the next evolution
of content marketing and social.
I mean, it's so crazy to me.
I remember being back at The Verge like 12 years ago,
and our friend Sam Sheffer was doing social,
probably paid a pittance to do this,
like every other social media person in the industry.
- Shout out Hype Desk.
- And that's all there is now, is social.
And fortunately, these folks are being paid a lot more now
for the value of their work and their skill
at packaging content to fit in algorithmic social feeds.
To me, this whole storytelling revolution,
I think kind of coincides with this whole idea
of founders and creators being interesting.
And when you are telling whatever you have to say
from the horse's mouth,
it's typically feels more authentic or more interesting
than it's being translated by somebody else,
whether it's a reporter,
or the social media desk, or otherwise.
So yeah, to me, I mean, this is just kind of the next step.
I mean, selfishly, the way that I think about what I do
is that it's more than just telling a story,
but actually understanding all your audiences these days.
As a tech founder, whether it's investors, or candidates,
or internal teams, or advertisers,
or in retail even before your IPO.
And so I do think there is a meaningful difference there.
I guess when I reflect on this,
I'm glad it's being appreciated,
I'm glad people are seeing this convergence, I guess,
of the way that we communicate with the world,
and just being real about it.
But yeah, I don't know.
I mean, it definitely, it feels a little funny
as the attention turns away from creators
or even influencers and reporters,
in terms of how you get your narrative out to the world.
Do you know?
- You can still get your narrative out to the world
through sources.news, thank you very much.
You bring like immense context I feel like to every story.
And so if you're a company that has trouble
translating their differentiation,
I mean, but that is what a storyteller is in my mind.
- Yeah, I don't know.
I think founders should go direct more,
but I think a lot of founders are wet blankets
and have no personality and no ability to talk about
what they do beyond the nuts and bolts of the actual thing.
And to really do this well,
you have to be, I think someone like Tarek,
who we have on later in the show,
who can talk about it more at a high level.
And that just takes like a certain personality,
it takes experience, it takes training.
But yeah, I mean, I just think storytelling as a concept
in the tech world becoming so popular right now with AI,
I think, yeah, just to me suggests
that there's a lot of copycats
and a lot of cookie cutter type things out there.
I'm reminded of a,
a quote that Ilya Seskiver gave
the Darkash Patel podcast recently,
where he was like,
"Silicon Valley has more companies than ideas right now."
And it does feel that way.
- Yeah, and when there's less differentiation
or when everybody's building the same thing,
the story becomes even more of a potential lever
to hook people or just talk about yourself to the world more
without pitching your product every day.
I mean, that's really how I think about it.
It's just a world now where everything is content.
And that applies to us as well
in the way that like we package this podcast,
what clips we choose, what platforms we post on.
And in some ways I think it's nice
that it's a bit more of a meritocracy maybe
than it once was where it was all follower driven
and it took years and years and years to build followers.
So you had any leverage.
So I think that's the bright side of it.
But yeah, when everybody's building AI wrappers,
it is awfully hard to stand out now.
So we need to invent a new job for that.
- Everything is content.
Is that the first slide of your deck?
- Kind of, I think the first slide of my deck,
which is no longer as relevant as it once was,
was like, if you build it, they will come
and it's just crossed out.
And that was a more of a hot take a couple of years ago.
Now that seems kind of like obvious, you know?
How's anybody gonna use your app
if they haven't heard of it?
- Right, right.
And I mean, I definitely feel this
from my perspective of being an independent journalist
now for just a few months,
but the amount of outreach I've gotten from VC firms,
startups, big companies that want to work with me
on quote unquote storytelling,
and I'm like, no thanks.
You can just give me an interview.
But it is a huge--
- Wait, you don't plug me in that conversation?
- I do if it's a--
- You had a perfect opportunity there
and you didn't take it.
- No, I plug you a lot, I plug you a lot.
But I'm not, you know, for the person
to come in and like brand the company, right?
It's like, figure out how to reach so and so audience.
You know, I think of what you do at a little more high level.
But yeah, I just, I think there's a lot of people
who think analytically and from an engineering mindset
or a product manager mindset,
but very few people who actually can step back
and think about how is this actually gonna engage an audience?
And you know, I struggle with that.
You know, it's something that I can rotate too much
in one way or the other all the time in my work.
And you don't want to like be overly, I don't know,
programming, overly trying to game the algo.
I mean, we talk about this with the podcast
and how we do the podcast, but you also want to be relevant.
So it seems like a very hard line to walk.
- I think maybe in some ways you have had
a bit less practice than others
because you have scoops to lean on.
- Yeah, scoops do help.
- You don't need to sensationalize what a company
is about when you are breaking news
that has that inherent value.
You know what I mean?
- Yeah.
- And that is the core of the storytelling to me
when I work with any client is in some ways
just trying to find what's most newsworthy about them.
And you are right.
I don't know if I'd call them all wet blankets,
but they all do think that what they're building
is inherently interesting
'cause that's why they're building it for 24 hours a day.
And I do think as that Wall Street Journal article points out
the reporter's instinct to know what is gonna break through
that's all you do every day.
Three, four, five times a day, a bit different for you.
You're probably spending a lot more time
over the long term building these relationships.
Sometimes the source will tell you something in a year
that they may not tell you today.
But back when I was doing it, it was like,
I mean, especially at Business Insider
when I was writing fucking five articles a day.
- Oh, I was there too.
- Getting immediate feedback from the algorithm
and also the clicks on the front page
of what headlines are working.
- Sharpie.
- You get pretty good, right?
You get pretty good at understanding
what type of language people need.
But yeah, I mean, I guess one other nice thing
about former reporters is that we also have some pride
and dignity in trying not to like completely give in
to the tricks, if you will.
Like, I don't feel comfortable doing that.
I think a lot of people probably do.
- That's why we're all broke as reporters.
- Yeah, yeah.
So I do think we embody a better balance than many others.
This episode is brought to you by Google Chrome.
You think you know a browser, but Gemini and Chrome, that's new.
It can help you with practically anything on the web,
like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50-page restoration block,
or finally break down that long article you've had open for weeks.
Gemini and Chrome is here for it.
Ready to make anything online make sense?
There's no place like Chrome.
Check responses, setup required, compatibility and availability varies 18+.
This episode is brought to you by Facebook.
So you were scrolling on Marketplace, and there it was,
the bike you'd been searching for.
You sent a message, and it turned out the seller was super chatty,
kind of funny, and an avid cyclist.
The next thing you know, you're in a cycling crew.
Well, a community cycling group.
The thing about Facebook, you might find more than what you're looking for.
From a browse to a bike ride, this summer, find more on Facebook.
Well, speaking of scoops, you want to talk about this interview I did recently?
Yeah, I want to talk about the interview you did.
I mean, this was a good one, man.
I mean, this is some stuff I've been wanting to hear for a while.
So, yeah, Alex, you sat down with Nikita Beer,
who is the head of product now for X, formerly Twitter,
and you sat down with Nikita Beer, who is the head of product now for X, formerly Twitter,
and nice to hear someone actually talk about what they're doing
with a fine-tooth comb, an actual product builder.
I mean, what do you feel like when you look back on this?
You know, you took away the most.
Nice to hear that there's someone there, like, keeping the lights on
and thinking about the product direction.
Yeah, for sure.
Yeah, I mean, I've known Nikita for a long time.
He's this, I would say he's become a personality in the tech world.
He's this viral master of social apps.
He sold one to Meta back in the day, TBH,
and then another called Gas to Discord.
And I think Nikita's hilarious.
Like I said, I mean, he's in LA too.
We've known each other for years.
But, yeah, when he reached out and was like,
look, do you want to do an interview about bringing journalists back to X?
I was like, yes, of course.
It was his first interview since he took the job about seven months ago.
He reports to Elon directly.
And, yeah, I thought this was interesting.
It's interesting that this was the first thing that a senior leader at X
is coming out and saying, which is we really want media
and even capital J journalists to come back.
And I think I know why, which is that I've been covering Twitter
before Elon bought it for many years.
I extensively covered when Elon bought it.
And Twitter has always had this problem where a very small person
in a percentage of the user base posts most of the content.
And that's true for, I don't know, I guess Snap was a little different
because that was messaging, right?
But these one-to-many platforms, that's usually the case.
But even by kind of industry standards,
Twitter was always pretty top-sided that way.
And they would call them like VI, I think they were VITs.
Someone's going to, an ex-tweep is going to.
Very important tweeters.
Yeah, something like that.
Very important tweeters or something.
And they would track this obsessively
because this would kind of, this factor would basically determine
whether Twitter was working or not.
And I mean, what you saw with Elon, right,
is like obviously a bunch of people in the media left,
including many of my peers and close friends in the media
who, to be honest, like kind of made me feel like shit for staying on X.
It became like a. Same here.
It became like a, it is a political thing.
And, you know, you had Blue Sky happen.
You had threats.
You had ads happen.
And this diaspora now where everyone's kind of spread out.
And like I wrote in this interview,
and now I check three apps a day instead of one
to find out what's going on in the world.
And that hasn't changed, you know, three years.
It's crazy to think like it's been basically three years
since Elon bought Twitter, which is wild.
And Nikita basically just outlined with me that, you know,
they're making changes in the product that he thinks
will hopefully incentivize people to come back.
And that's a new link viewer that is driving more traffic to web pages.
I can attest to that personally in my traffic to sources.
Are they still like completely shadow banning
Substack links as they want?
So he says that's not happening.
There's not no shadow banning of like certain link domains.
There's no. That was not a shadow ban.
That was a public ban.
That was a, no, that was a direct Elon ban.
And the interesting backstory to that at the time when that happened,
that was again around the acquisition was Elon was trying to buy Substack.
He was actually trying to.
Pitch Chris Best, the CEO on being the CEO of, you know, de facto CEO.
I mean, Elon's obviously the real CEO, but the de facto CEO of Twitter.
So there was, I think, some more stuff going on in the background there.
But yeah, they were doing that.
And, you know, Elon was banning journalists for reporting about the whereabouts
of his private jet based on publicly accessible information.
I think really stretching the definition of doxing to target journalists
who were doing some pretty critical reporting of his.
Acquisition at the time.
So again, I have no, there's no fault or no, I have no qualms, I guess, with my friends
in the media who have said we're never coming back as long as Elon's running it.
But it's interesting to see Nikita say, look, like you'll get traffic.
I mean, he posted like, this is the biggest arbitrage opportunity of your career for your
journalist to come back because we have the audience.
I think it's like half a billion plus people a month coming to the platform.
Who knows how many of those are bots?
But, you know, and, you know, time spent is at a record high.
I don't think that's true though.
You don't think it's true?
No, like they have vacated so much of the quote unquote newsiness, I feel like of this platform.
Like what I see most of the time, I'm very interested in news.
And yeah, most of the posts I see are still from the last couple of days, but it has really
become for better or worse, like TikTok for text or memes or what have you.
I mean, I don't know if it feels.
Like that for you, but like, I don't know, I feel like engagement is down when I post
about anything newsy, like it is very much just kind of visual opinion driven stuff,
similar to the other platforms.
It's just kind of incidentally, who's still there.
I feel like that's working.
And in a lot of ways, because the subject matter is a lot more personalized now, as
opposed to your follow graph, I think it's actually even harder to stand out.
Hmm.
That's interesting.
I mean, that also speaks to what Nikita said about.
The algorithm.
Maybe I just suck at posting.
No, no, no.
I think, I think, I think, uh, what they've done is they've replaced the traditional algorithm,
which had a bunch of classifiers and labels that someone like Elon could go down rank.
So, and so down rank this category of content or these accounts to this purely grok based,
which is like, uh, yeah, for better or worse, um, grok based, personalized LLM based algorithm
that is entirely training on your preferences and your interactions.
So maybe that's what you're telling.
Alex, you want to tell us.
Well, I am, but how many people are saying, I mean, I'm obsessed with the news more than
most people and like, it's, it's good these days, you know, like I start engaging with
more, like I started playing some old mega man games and I'm really enjoying them.
And now I'm seeing like really good mega man accounts, like doing niche memes and old
artwork from the old games.
Like, that's great.
All I'm saying is that they don't appear to be focusing, especially if they're not tipping
the scales.
On news.
Um, well, I don't think they have a lot of news on the platform.
That's the problem.
I mean, that's, that's why he was doing the interview is like, they need the posters to
come back and journalists were the posters and, uh, you know, some of us have stayed,
you know, and I, the reason I never left is because I think it's my job to be close to
my sources.
Uh, I named sources for a reason.
And the AI community in particular has never left X like to say that you're trying to cover
this industry.
I don't know if you understand what's going on and you're not on X and you're not interacting.
I don't, you're not, to me, you're not doing your job well.
Sure.
You can still break news and you can still, you know, you, you may not need it, but it
still has been tremendously, uh, advantageous to me from that perspective.
And it's the main reason I've stayed on, but yeah, I think that's why he did the interview.
It's like, there's not a lot of news.
It's kind of all over the place.
I mean, I feel like you go to, do you check blue sky or threads much?
Not really.
I think I see threads.
Via the crazy cross promotion module inside of my Instagram home feed.
Blue sky.
Uh, I get blue sky links from a friend or two, but that's it.
Um, by the way, a great headline.
I love X wants its haters back.
Did that just come to you?
That just came to me.
No LLM involved actually.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Um, I mean, I want it, I wanted a little bit of rage bait, you know, this was like a classic
blue sky rage bait story.
I would say the vast majority of my peers.
And tech media are very active on blue sky and not at all on X, maybe some on threads.
I think threads is actually trending in the direction of Reddit.
If you look at what they're doing with the community stuff, uh, the sports stuff that
they're leaning into, uh, Connor Hayes, the head of threads is also going to be in sources
this week, but he just did a podcast, uh, with a bunch of NBA people.
I think they're going more in that direction and for X, I mean, they really need to convince
people to leave.
which I don't know, I mean, Blue Sky is its own echo chamber, man.
It's like, yeah, you jump on there and it's like, you better, you can, you can imagine
immediately in your head, like, this is, this is what it takes to work on blue sky and to,
to be successful.
And it's a very particular POV on things.
It's like, you're very skeptical or you just downright, right.
Hate AI.
Um, you hate Elon, you love Mondami.
Like there's, it's just like, there's this Venn diagram of like all these things that
makes you on blue sky.
And like, that's, I wish we were all together again, I guess.
And Elon was, you know, he says he wants to make the town square and he has utterly failed
at that in the last few years.
Right.
It's the, it's the opposite.
And I think everyone is, is right to be very, very skeptical of, of that, uh, not happening,
I guess.
Um, well to close things out before we get to the interview, um, did he divulge any,
any juicy little funny Elon stories or habits?
No, he did not.
We're going to have to.
We're going to have to save that for a future.
You didn't ask.
I asked a little bit.
Uh, he said he meets with Elon multiple times a week and that Elon is spending most of his
time on X and X AI.
Is it still going to be the everything app?
They're launching X money, the payments thing that he said he was going to do when he bought
the company there.
I think they're launching it this month before, uh, for new years.
So you're going to be able to, to, to pay the bots this, uh, in crypto or whatever.
I think it'll be Fiat, but yeah, that's launching very soon.
Yeah.
It is interesting.
It's interesting to watch.
I mean, these platforms, the features as is long become obvious are no longer really the
differentiators, whether it's the feed or the DMS or the size of images or videos, it
seems like it really just kind of has become who's on here, you know?
Uh, and that may, I think, be fine for companies of a certain scale depending on their ambitions.
Um, but I'm hopeful, you know, that these different platforms can emerge for different
communities though.
I really do miss that moment of monoculture.
Where everybody on Twitter was live, live tweeting the Oscars or the Apple event or
whatever it was that there is no place for that these days.
Um, and that was a special moment.
I wonder though, I guess that was the idea with Twitter that didn't allow them to grow
to the size of that their investors wanted is that not enough people wanted that.
I think Twitter didn't grow for a lot of other more practical execution reasons, but that's
a whole nother conversation.
All right.
Should we kick it to Tarek?
Yeah, let's do it.
You think, you know, a browser, but Gemini and Chrome that's new.
It can help you with practically anything on the web, like restoring a vintage motorcycle
from a 50 page restoration block, or finally break down that long article you've had open
for weeks.
Ready to make anything online.
Makes sense.
There's no place like Chrome check responses, set up required compatibility and availability,
various.
It's 18 plus.
So you were scrolling on marketplace and there it was the bike you've been searching for.
You sent a message and it turned out the seller was super chatty, kind of funny and an avid
cyclist.
The thing about Facebook, you might find more than what you're looking for from a browse
to a bike ride this summer.
Find more.
Find more on Facebook.
Tarek, we were joking while we were waiting for you that we should have started a market
about what time you were going to join.
That's nice.
I don't know how specific the markets are getting these days.
Do people make them for such specific things?
No, nothing like that.
But there are certain things that people have interest in that could be about like a, you
know, an hour or two.
Yeah.
That's right.
Yeah.
Well, nothing about like someone who works at a company or anything like that.
And also the people at Kalshi can't trade.
So we, we, because we run a regular exchange, so you cannot actually trade.
Oh, really?
You have a no trading rule.
It's, it's also like the regs, the regulatory framework doesn't enable us to trade on one
exchange.
It's an interesting thing because, you know, it's hard to build a product when you can't
actually really use it.
It makes it a little bit harder.
So there's like that interesting dynamic.
Have you talked about that before?
How do you do that?
Yeah.
How do you do that?
How do you do that?
Yeah.
How do you, how do you build a product you can't use yourself?
I just have to be very close to the customers.
Like really, really be very, I mean, it's cliche, like all, all companies obviously talk a lot
about staying close to the customer, but I think this is especially true here where
you just have to really be at all times as close as possible to the customer.
And I think that's, I think that's a really good point.
harder uh so there's like that interesting dynamic have you talked about that before how do you do
that yeah how do you how do you build a product you can't use yourself uh you just have to be
very close to the customers like really really be very i mean it's cliche like all all companies
obviously talk a lot about staying close to the customer but i think this is especially true here
where you just have to really be uh at all times as close as possible to the customer um to um
basically figure out like what you need to build and how to make it better and what are the points
of friction but but there are like there are some industries where like you know the technologists
or the pro like you know the product builder cannot fully experience their own product you
You know, it could be like in hard tech or like if you're kind of machinery, like, right?
Like you're not sitting in the office and like operating some heavy machinery.
And so you also have to really kind of embed yourself with the customer.
But yeah, no, I think it's feasible, but it is a challenge.
Do we believe that Tim Cook is actually using the Vision Pro in his office or not is the real question.
I mean, that does strike me as like pretty remarkably tough, especially when things are moving so quickly.
And I do believe that having worked at Snap and the browser company, that founder does have a unique ability to make changes in the product when things don't feel right, whether it's with the way a screen flows or a notification or otherwise.
I've definitely come to believe over the years that dogfooding is a pretty critical lever.
I wonder if there's any way to say, hey, my friend, you're about to take a sabbatical for a little while.
You're going to gather some feedback, use the app for a while, come back.
But I guess that would still be biased, wouldn't it?
Yeah, but it also would work, you have to have like a six month post-Kaoshi period.
So if you leave, you have to wait for six months before you could trade.
But it is, I mean, there are ways to kind of like, you could still use the app without
trading, right?
So that could get you a lot of the, I mean, that could get you a lot of the flows, except
for maybe the core trading flow.
then we have you know we have like an internal like demo like no no real money like free money
version of the product but that's also different that that also has different dynamics so we get
close but not quite there yet same product no dopamine it's like i mean the whole point right
is like having skin in the game right changes the behavior of people right like like that's
the whole point it goes back to sort of the whole question about polls versus prediction markets or
like experts versus prediction markets like the whole difference is there's some skin in the game
here right if if you take out the the sort of monetary incentive or this idea of like you know
put your money where your mouth is then we default back to kind of a regular poll right people can
just say anything so that the whole kind of truth-seeking aspect sort of erodes you can bring
back the bias bring back subjectivity and so so the money component is a critical component to
kind of take you from the subjective to the objective rational plane. So it's a difference,
a big difference. I think if your employees were using it, they'd also be spending a lot more time
in the bathroom as well. As they were, maybe, yeah. They'd be distracted. I was reading recently
about how companies are deciding whether or not to ban prediction market trading for their
employees as well. So it's interesting to hear that Kalshi bans it. I actually was reading too
that Google built its own internal prediction market
and that this is becoming more common.
So yeah, what's your advice to companies weighing
whether they should allow their employees
to use your product?
I think that's okay.
I mean, look, the same rules apply.
So the rules that apply to the stock market
generally mostly, like basically the same rules
apply to prediction markets,
or at least regular prediction markets,
which is the case for Calci.
And so it's an important distinction to be drawn.
like if from the early days from the kind of day one it's like we're it's we're in financial services
um and we're offering a financial product and i think in in those in that industry i would say
like regulation is a very critical component or pillar of how you build things and so we define
principle which is regulatory first we're gonna do everything regulated uh up front and what
regulated means the thing at a high level is like you know figure out like customer protection like
make sure that people understand what they're what they're getting into and what they're doing
and number two is market integrity
or this idea of fairness.
Create rules that are fair
for the different participants.
It's right like if you're getting into a game
that it's not fair,
you don't want to participate in that
or whether it's like anything in life
and so you have to kind of create it
like the stock market,
a set of rules that like make it fair
and so like the stock market,
the way that we've regulated this,
we worked for four years
before we launched a single product
so working with the CFC
which is the federal regulator, to regulate this lack of financial market.
And so you have the same set of prohibitions.
So like, you know, like market manipulation is not allowed,
things like wash trading, spoofing, and then like this notion of insider trading
and what it means, like what is insider trading and how do you define it?
And so that is regulated like exactly like the stock market.
And so we have the same sort of set of protections.
We have systems that flag for these things.
And then if you flag somebody who had committed it, you know, it could go from a fine to like, if you committed
insider trading on a stock, it could be like a financial crime, like it could be criminal prosecution.
And so it's an interesting question.
are an employee of a tech company, and you know something about the quarterly earnings, like you
cannot buy options based on that knowledge. Right? And, and the way to draw the line is essentially
like you cannot use material non public information to trade, right? And what does that mean? So it's
basically you cannot use information that is not supposed to be public. That is like you are not
supposed to make that information public by trading, because actually trading with that
information is in some way one way of making it public. Like you can go make information public by
like saying it to the press or saying it to friends. But another way is actually trade on it,
because if you trade on it, you're moving the price in a certain direction. And so that's another way
to make it public. And the same rules apply to Kalshi. And, and so that applies to people at
the companies, government members of, for example, like Congress, if they have an impact or knowledge
on a specific like a bill or something that they are themselves doing. And it kind of, you know,
it's kind of like a case by case also applies to
sports.
I was just gonna ask, has anyone ever been fined or sent to the slammer then for something on Kalshi?
So a few things, because we've like, okay, why do we take this whole regulator approach,
we take this whole regular approach, because we look, we believe this market to be very large. And,
and you know, we believe that one of the ways to go like the only way to go mainstream really is to
kind of build it regulated, regulated rails, so that institutions, big partners can adopt it over
time. But then the second thing is that, you know, you want to build something with the right set of
safeguards, so that
you know, you mitigate and avoid sort of like the risks to happen any new technology, especially
financial technology technology comes with a certain set of risks. That's always true. Self
driving cars, Uber, Airbnb, all of it comes with risk and regulation, what it does is like, it is a
forcing function, because you have a regulator that has decades of experience that that I have seen
how things go wrong, whether it's, you know, in drugs or in financial markets or whatever, to
basically like, pressure test your systems. And you know, we've done four years of pressure testing,
before we got went live now, kind of since start to finish, we started in 2019. Now we're basically 2026.
It's been like seven years of pressure testing the system. So the systems work really well. Like it's
working as intended. And you see, you probably noticed, like, you don't really like there haven't
been kind of cases of like people doing bad things on cash, because it was very regulated, we asked
you for your KYC, all the Tracer reports of the government, like it's kind of a bad place to try
to commit fraud. There are other alternatives offshore unregulated, and it's easier way to do
it, right? Like, if you want to do something weird with crypto, you have to do it, you have to do it,
you probably won't go to Coinbase, you probably go to some offshore, you know, exchange that like
offers similar services, because there's no KYC, they don't know who you are, they don't report
things to the government. So that's, that's one. So I think in cash, those risks are very largely
mitigated because of a regulated nature. Two, there's something else that's interesting, which is
the rules for an exchange. So when an exchange, which is an SRO, a self regulated organization,
you have to have a bifurcation between the commercial business aspects and the market
surveillance regulations. So you have to have a bifurcation between the commercial business aspects
and the market surveillance regulatory functions. So the market surveillance regulatory functions
report to the CRO, who reports directly to the board. And a lot of the specific cases,
actually, I'm not privy to. So the Yeah, it's interesting, because then you because you don't
want to have impact on, you don't want to have like a conflict of interest, right? Like, for
example, if it's like a, a big customer that did something wrong, like the business may want to like
be like, oh, maybe you should, but the rules say, like, actually, there's an information wall
between those two. So the regulatory side can interface with the regulator, and the audit
committee is exposed to that. So, you know, that's interesting.
And, like, independently of the commercial side, so they have full autonomy.
Wow. So not only, not only do you not get to use the products, but you don't actually
fully know when people misuse the product, it sounds like.
Well, the relevant team, including exactly the chief regulatory officer know,
but the commercial side doesn't know. So and this, by the way, this is common,
for example, you know, how at like Goldman, so at banks, you know, how like the,
the trading side and the banking side cannot share information between each other. I guess the trading
side can share with the banking, but the banking cannot share with the, with the, with the trading.
And it's the same thing, I guess commercial can share with the regulatory, but there's some,
some set of information that the regulatory cannot share with the business.
Are these regulatory bodies equipped to investigate
potential insider trading on this scale as the number of things that you could bet on or trade
just dramatically multiplies? The answer is definitely, I mean,
like, look, the, the CFTC, it's interesting, people talk about the scale of prediction markets, but look,
I mean, this year, we, we, the prediction markets have grown massive, like, to be clear. So the,
right now, I mean, I think Socalci is doing something like $70, $80 billion of volume a year.
And the broader industry maybe is $150, $200 billion with millions of customers participating.
But then let's compare that to the commodities markets and the swaps markets that the CFTC
regulates. And actually, let me ask you, how much volume,
notional volume do you think goes through the Chicago Mercantile Exchange a year?
I was more interested, maybe, I mean, I don't know the number, but I think maybe the more
relevant number is, you know, volume per trader, per se. Like, I know that, you know,
It's still pretty small for, uh, CalSheet. It's tiny.
Right. And so that's what I'm saying. I realize it might be smaller, but I think the, the number of
potential retail investors or just everyday people who are getting involved has just got to be on a
very different scale, I would think. I mean, that number that I was going to mention is a quadrillion.
Haven't heard quadrillion on the podcast yet. We need an air horn or something.
Yeah. It's 1,000 trillion. So, so, so, you know, the, the CME does like $3 trillion of volume a day.
And it's a massive market. There's very large diversity of participants in the US and outside
of the US. Um, some of it is institutional. A lot of it is retail. Um, but, and, and then you have,
you know, the S&P futures, you have, uh, a bunch of different kind of products.
But it's a regulator that has kind of overseen like mass, mass amounts of data, like mass amounts
of transactions on a daily basis across the board. And yes, you could have a composition. And, and I
think it's not as kind of, kind of, we still have sort of a concentration of volume amongst the kind
of like prosumer traders or institutions. These, these things are not like, they're not like
uniform, right? It's not like you have a hundred traders that do equal amount of volumes. It's kind
of very tilted. And it's also existing in the traditional markets. So you have kind of a, kind
of a long tail distribution, uh, or like a skewed distribution. Um, but the important thing here is
like actually, and this is very interesting when people look to commit fraud, they don't do it for
like 10 bucks or $20, right? Like they usually, you know, they try to make money out of it,
right? Otherwise, why are you, why are you violating the law? And the, the fortunate
thing about that is that the larger the size, the easier it is to flag, the more unusual the pattern
is. You, you know, it's like, you know, when someone, for example, goes out,
like when you hear about the SEC investigate some insider trading, it's because usually some,
some trader at a bank bought a, a kind of an out of the money option two days before earnings,
but that option, they bought like millions of it, right? Or they bought like a large size. That
usually is actually pretty, it's, it's kind of a problem that's like a much easier one to solve.
Yeah. Not very sneaky, realistically.
It gets flagged. It gets flagged, and then you look at it, it's like, who are you? Who do you
know? How'd you get this information? And then you can escalate to investigations and the regulators.
So in this context, people are probably seeing headlines recently about,
there was this trader, I think the name was like alpha raccoon or something who netted over like
a million dollars by very accurately predicting Google's 2025 year in search rankings to the
extent that like this person probably worked inside Google, but that happened on poly market.
And you don't actually hear stories of this, or at least I haven't seen stories of something like
this on Kalshi. Maybe I just haven't seen it, but I imagine for you, you get lumped in with those
kinds of headlines and it's like, oh, prediction markets allow insider trading, blah, blah, blah.
Like why, why did that happen on poly market and not Kalshi?
It's the same as the kind of like the regulated versus unregulated model, right? Like it's,
and I always say this, it's like, you can take any financial market, like you can think the stock
market, right? Which a lot of us perceives regulated and there's the right set of rules, etc.
And if somebody offshore like opens up a stock market without KYC, without the sort of like
same level of protections, yes, things are going to happen on that marketplace, right? Like it's,
it's not like a, like the thing I always say is like, there are bad actors everywhere,
right? The bad actors are like, they'll always try to find outlets to, you know, do bad acts.
That's what they do. And, and so there's this key distinction between regulated and unregulated.
And I think generally with nascent technologies, people sort of like merge the two and like treat
them as similar. And you see, it's always with crypto, right? Like they were good actors in
crypto that were doing things regulated. And, you know, sometimes they had challenges with
the government, like Coinbase had all sorts of challenges with the government, but that was a
good actor. It was like trusted KYC, you know, what, you know, where your money sits and you
can trust us with it. And, and we report to the federal government and so on and so forth.
And then they were like, you know, offshore actors where you, you could put your money
and you have no idea where it's going, right? Like you have absolutely no guarantees
that that money could be going to somebody's pocket. It could be going
to whatever. And, but for new technologies, people, like if something goes wrong in the
unregulated piece, they can lump, like they can lump the entire sort of space in one.
As you said, I mean, it's totally right, Alex. Like I totally agree with this.
It's a matter of education. It's a matter to show that like, you know, look, there are actors that
are going to do things the right way. And then there are actors that, you know, may have started
to do things and maybe not so, so, so much the right way. And over time they kind of converge,
but the most important thing, and maybe this is kind of the thing that we're getting at in some
ways. Like,
if you want to commit a bad act, you're not doing a regulated exchange. We would
know the name of that person. We would investigate that transaction. We would
report it to the government and everybody could see a transparency, right? You would prefer to
doing it by paying somebody in some crypto and, you know, not traceable, like dark web thing,
right? And that's actually reinforces the importance of a regulated transparent model for
this. Because then all the activity is out there for everybody to see. And, you know, we can work
with regulators and we can put the right set of like sort of checks and balances and enforce them.
Yeah, you all are really big, but Polymarket is too. And it's actually amazing to me the amount
of mindshare Polymarket has in the tech community, especially considering they're not officially
launched yet in the US. I was just at the Dealbook Summit in New York where Andrew Russ Sorkin was
talking about Polymarket from the stage constantly. The All In guys talk about them. They're everywhere.
Shane is everywhere. I really want to know how you feel about that. I have to imagine Polymarket
being so prevalent in the mind of like the tech community specifically bothers you. But how do
you think about that?
And your rivalry with them right now?
I don't know if it bothers us as much. I mean, like, I would say a few things. Like the number
one metric we track is not really mindshare or like, you know, I don't know, like visits or
other. It's like actual number of users, volume, financial health of the company. And you have a
real business. And I think on that sort of from that perspective, we're much larger. And there's
a bunch of ways to kind of measure that. And, you know, you probably have seen the sort of charts
coming around and other. To us, that's kind of the most important thing. Like number of
users.
So, number of users, real volume, real kind of revenue, like financial metrics. It's interesting
because last year, if you were to kind of look at the mindshare of CalShear versus Polymarket, we
were probably kind of like five to 10% of the mindshare. There's ways to measure. You can look
at Google search, for example, like how many people know about a company versus the other. It
was a tough year because, you know, in 2024, in the early 2024, really kind of that similar
dynamic was happening. So we, again, stood firm by a principle, which is regulatory first. We
are not going to do anything that is sort of like outside of the bounds of the law. That's kind of
a principle we're never going to. You didn't want to be a shoot first, ask questions later tech
company? Just financial services, I don't think is the right thing to do, right? I really think
financial services, the long-term winners are like, you know, measure twice, cut once, do it
right. It's one thing when it's burrito taxis. It's another when it's financial services, huh?
It's very, very different, right? Because in financial services, when things go wrong,
they go wrong in a bad way. And so you really,
you need a regulator and you need a regulatory oversight. So it was hard. Last year was hard
because, you know, they were getting the mindshare because they launched the market. They just did
it. You know, there's a whole debate whether it was in the U.S. or not, but, you know, it was
obviously a lot of people were in the U.S. But like that, you know, they scaled because they
had the market and they had the offering. Obviously, they scaled much ahead of us. They basically went
ahead and before us. And that was a difficult period for the company because like that was,
I would say, the most difficult period because we were kind of like hamstrung, like being told no by
anybody. And, you know, we and then you had a competitor that's sort of like doing it, you know,
and you've seen it's kind of, I think Coinbase had their fair share of competitors that operate
that way. And that happened over and over. And it was tough because you just got to, you go to the
regulators, like you're blocking us, but you're not blocking them. Like, how is this fair, right?
Like, and that was, I think, the toughest part of the journey. But the beauty is like when we won
the lawsuit last year, so we sued the government over the election market, then we won that.
And we were right up on the, we were on the right side of the law. You know, the market share was
mindshare. Now, when we were looking at the metrics for this last quarter, like the fall,
we're actually something like 55% of the Google searches in the US, like we've actually overtaken
even in mindshare. And so, you know, for a while, we've been leaning on like the core business
metrics and the product and the team. But now we're also actually at least equivalent in terms
of the mindshare, we've gained a lot of territory there. So it's just a matter of time. I think at
the end of the day, everything will converge towards a better product, you know, and I feel
pretty good about our product. Do you think Polymarket is doing things the right way?
I mean, that's on them to comment. I think that like,
Oh, come on.
I mean, look, our view is like, we approached it differently. I think we approached it sort
of regulated in the US, do it right as a US company. And you know, they kind of did sort
of offshore and the VPN thing and all of that. That was kind of the historical thing. And,
and you know, I just mentioned, like, that was sort of like a
sort of difficulty for us, because it's like, we are carrying all the burden of legalizing the
space, which was so tough, right? Like we spent four years. And it was really like a
very, very difficult journey to make this happen. Because you know, you had the kind of battles with
the government, and they were kind of pushing us and they really wanted to sort of like this model
not to exist without a lot of like real basis. And then you had like a bit of a sort of dynamic
where the opponent or the competition like had no restriction whatsoever, right? It's a bit like
you're in a in a boxing ring, and then your hands are tied behind your back. And then you have to,
you have to kind of go box, right? Whereas your opponent like doesn't have their hand tied. They may even have
a knife, right? And, and you're just getting like, you know, you're just kind of in that ring. So that
was tough. That was tough. And there's no secret about it. And like, and you know, we had a history,
our history between the two companies, as you know, like,
Yeah, it's a very fierce rivalry, I would say you guys
It was a very fierce rivalry, because like, because of that dynamic, right? It's like,
you're sitting there and we're getting bloodied here. And like, you go to,
and people weren't realizing is like, guys, like, you know, and it's not like customers or others,
like give you props to try to do things right way. That's the tough part about doing things the right
way. It is hard.
Right? It's not the easy route. It's not like you do it. And then people are like, great job,
congrats, you did things the right way. Actually, no, no one really cares until it matters. Like,
no one cared about, you know, for example, like, FTX was sort of like the golden child for a while
up until it sort of blew up. And then everybody cared overnight, right? The and so, so that was
the hard part. And like, look, I mean, we made some mistakes as a company, there's some incidents
where you know, the we made some bad tweets about them, and they made some mistakes and made some
bad tweets about us. And there was a lot of this
sort of back and forth where like, we would go to press, they would go to press, and so on and so
forth. And we were just at the time, at least in 2024 is like, we will just go up to the press,
the radio is like, guys, do you not see this dynamic, like we are being blocked from doing
anything? And then they are not like, well, how is this fair? How is this happening? So that was,
I think, deeply frustrating. I think this year, well, one, we learned from our mistakes in the
past. But now we're also like a very different paradigm where like, we did actually win that
lawsuit and legalize the space, we did open up the space in a legitimate way.
And there's a real way for the space to exist in a regulated, safe, responsible way. Now,
it could become legitimate. And I think that changes the dynamic because, well, one that was
very advantageous to us, it was a huge kind of boost for us as a company, obviously, in the
results. But it was also beneficial for them, because now they have a path to come and do it
the right way and do it regulated and legal. And I think it seems like this is the path that we're
doing, they're trying to converge, they're pivoting towards our strategy. And I think that's
a good thing. Like, and I hope they stay committed to that. Because I think over time, both of us will
do this, like, as long as there's sort of fair and reasonable competition between the two of us,
I think this is going to be great for the both of us.
It can help you with practically anything on the web,
like restoring a vintage motorcycle from a 50 page restoration blog, or finally break down that long
article you've had open for weeks. Ready to make anything online,
make sense? Check responses, setup required, compatibility and
availability varies 18 plus. The thing about Facebook,
you can find more than what you're looking for. If you would have told yourself 10 years ago that you were, you would be suing the government and
be on South Park in 10 years, what do you think you would have said?
I mean, it's just like an absurd problem. You know, it's just, it's like, also,
how do you kind of relate those two, right? It's like, yeah, I mean, you're like, Is this a good
outcome, or the world's worst outcome? I think it's a pretty good outcome. I think that, like,
you know, the, well, I would just sort of dissect that for a sec. Like, I think the suing the
government and South Park, they're both interesting, and they talk to two different things. Like,
suing the government is interesting, because not many people do that, especially your own
regulators. But the beauty about the US is, like, you have that sort of system, right? Like,
the government has checks and balances, and that's an amazing thing about our system. It's like,
powers that may be have full autonomy and full power, they kind of self check and check each
other. We disagreed with the regulators assessment. These markets, the law was clearly saying they
were legal. And I always say this, I think the law applies to the industry, to participants and
people, but it also applies to the government. Sometimes this is kind of missed, right? The
government is not the law, that is the law. And the law is something that we all have to apply,
including the government. And we disagree with that decision. And I think we were bold enough,
it was a very difficult decision. I think it's a very difficult decision. And I think it's a very
difficult decision. And I think it's a very
I think it's just a statement that we built something that has gone mainstream.
like I think that like people care about and I think that's a you know that's um I think that's
it's been a wild ride to get there how do you think about calci as a part of everyday life
it seems like everywhere you turn there are billboards instagram ads even on the apple
sports app they've got betting lines and I know you guys do a lot of advertising that uh certainly
I'm seeing a lot of the advertising about about sports betting on nfl and this and that how does
how does it feel to have this kind of a part of daily life I think on the one hand it is very fun
on the other I think you know I have seen some ads that talk about creating a side hustle or
passive income whether it's from you guys or others uh how does it feel to be a be a part of
that that reshaping of kind of how people interact uh with the financial markets I'll the way I'll
answer this question is I'll sort of go back to kind of the core of how like kind of why we started
the company so I spent time in financial markets like at Goldman
and at Citadel at Goldman the thing that struck me is sort of the large institutions
what the I was there in 2016. there were two big events in 2016 brexit
and then um the US election so the first Trump election all the kind of big guys what they were
focused on is essentially you know I want to get exposure to Brexit or hedge against it and then I
got to get exposure to Trump or hedge against that and then we would create these financial bundles
and all of that and there were three issues like one it was a pro we gave them the wrong products
like the traditional financial markets don't get you the exact sort of yes no is strong gonna win
exposure that they were looking for so one of the big things we sold is the the S and P if they wanted
to go long Trump so people were right about Trump and then they lost money so it's horrible you know
the second thing is there wasn't an open fair market for people to price this question it was
just like the bank deciding and it would charge crazy fees it was it was exorbitant and the third
that like hurt me the most is like a lot of people have views on this like and I also a lot of people
are impacted by Brexit it's like this notion that like you are only impacted by Brexit if you're big
enough to get a seat at the Goldman Sachs table like was a bit weird to me it was like kind of
like you know but this is where the idea was like you have a financial market to price companies
commodities like what if you built one to price like simple questions about the future and if
you did something like this like the beauty of this is like areas of expertise like everyone
is an expert on something like areas of of knowledge and expertise and passion
lie much in a much broader set than just Wall Street there's a lot more people out there
outside of Wall Street that have views and have knowledge about politics I have knowledge about
the economy they read the news every day and they love it and they love interacting with the news
uh it could be the culture it could be sports it could be any of these sort of categories
but right now it's kind of this this you know um the set of instruments is very Wall Street
specific like an average person is not going to look at an interest rate swap and be like I'm
going to participate in that it's just you know too complicated very unrelatable and I think the
thing that's changed and that's that's great I mean there's for example like um there's this
account on Twitter um it's like only grounded 10 or something like that you know this person
basically has made seventy thousand dollars uh trading on culture culture markets so how
successful movies are going to be uh what Taylor Swift is going to release or not release and uh
they paid off their student loans
with that and it's just kind of like their favorite company like they they love the company
so much because they're like I have spent like hours and days and weeks and months get it learning
about this and up until now it was kind of like it was like a fun side thing now I can like actually
you know actually exercise my skills and it could become a hobby and I could sort of try to make
money off of it um and I see this very similar it's kind of like uber's value proposition with
these types of Marketplace new
story kind of creators like uber was sort of like you have a lot of free time how about you
you ride a little bit and make some money I think in our case like you have a lot of knowledge
sometimes very niche weird knowledge like maybe even your family doesn't even want to hear about
it at Thanksgiving but how about you kind of try to make some money off of that and and from the
beginning it's like if you can build a financial market in a regulated safe way like where you put
the right set of customer protection and you let people kind of openly and transparently trade
against each other that could be very interesting things because you can have this sort of like
social crowdsourced let's figure out the truth together let's figure out the price the same way
that markets figure out the price of them when you talk about expert knowledge I know there's
this idea you know from Warren Buffett and others that when it comes to the stock market nobody
knows anything you know that isn't already priced in do you feel like that's different maybe could
you call it like a long tail of topics or is it you feel like that Dynamics different if you're
making that proposition to people that's a great question I actually think so you know it's
interesting like I I think that um because like let's think about it in simple terms right like
the the if if you go to stock market and try to buy an option on Tesla like how could you know
more than like the market makers right I mean I actually worked at like at some of these like
how could you right like it's kind of rigged there it's like there's asymmetric information
the large institutions Wall Street has more information about where options and stocks are
going to move than the average person it's it's kind of a truth right and no matter what you do
you can do all the research in the world on the stock market you can do all the research in the
world on the stock you're not going to have the vast data sets and pools of data that like the
big hedge funds have so they will always have an advantage over you and to me it's that imbalance
of advantage that make it sort of like it's very hard to actually gain an edge if you put in like
if you put effort into the stock market on calcium is different because like there's a team of traders
for example um on the weather that like scrapes satellite data and they create correlation patterns
and and they have meteorologists in the team Etc and they figure out like you know all these sort
of like sophisticated data science models to predict the weather next day and they are making
money of it they're pretty successful and the beauty of it is like I don't think the hedge funds
have any more information than they do right like if you could call that like creating the
fundamentals if you were or like doing the work of understanding the fundamentals the fundamentals
that's yeah that's where the truth side comes in I have studied Timothy chalamet's
eyes more than anyone and therefore I know that he is skd right that's like that's what you're saying
is like there's there's people is there a calcium for that about things that's got to be a prediction
market right chalamet and skd do you know about this I don't know what is it there's like a rapper
who is in disguise and people think it might be Timothy shell oh I don't know that's interesting
people like claim to know his eyes because you know and say that it's him these markets reward people to go
out and do research and then bring it into the open market right it's it's a and over time we
get holistically so think about for example the okay whether tariffs are net good or not bad for
society or whether there's going to be a recession this year or not right like one way to do this is
like you go and do this Bloomberg economist survey and you ask a bunch of you know experts
hey what do you think and then they give an answer and that's our forecast right that's historically
been this is what we believe to be true um but it doesn't work that well if you compare that to the
calci economic forecast over the last few years we have been much much more accurate it's just much
better kind of gauge of what's going to happen and the reason is because it's a very different
mechanism which is now I'm giving an incentive I'm rewarding people to actually go out and do
research and then come and trade on it bring it to to the market and if you give that think of it
that incentive at scale it's holistically making us smarter about for example the economy it's making
us smarter about COVID and whether it's going to come back but maybe this whole COVID episode of
whether hey COVID is done COVID is not done if they were listening to the markets we were saying
Omicron is going to come back there's an Omicron wave and it was going to come back because some
traders were doing research and they spent a copious amount of times you know they're not
necessarily by the way like doctors or like people that you would imagine to be the COVID experts the
people that maybe love the topics and spend so much time in quarantine reading about it
and then they brought that information to market which is very useful and if we had
listened to the markets maybe we would have put up like kept the
mask on for a little bit longer and we might have avoided the second second wave before we
let you go Tarek um you recently made a comment that went kind of viral I think you got a lot
of heat for it because people rightfully have concerns about uh the gamblification of society
where you said you were uh yeah trademark um you said you want to financialize everything
what did you actually mean by that do you do you really mean that
why did you scare my grandma with that comment interesting I think that yeah I saw that I
mean it was taken out of context and people sort of like you know um took in all sorts of directions
but but really what it means is this notion of if you believe that markets work what they do is they
discover prices they're a very good mechanism for discovering um fundamentals I think as you said it
in a great way I fundamentals behind something and so and then uncovering as much truth as possible
behind that thing and so what we're saying is like sure applying that to companies is very important
applying that to commodities or currencies is very important but what if we applied it to some
of the most important pressing questions about our future right like could we applied it to a much
broader set of things and like look from first principles like we live in a world where the the
ratio of noise to signal has gone up a lot misinformation is everywhere polarization
is kind of an all-time high people say different things about everything and you you don't know
what to like you go to Twitter if you go to my Twitter feed versus yours we might see literally
two entirely different versions of the world to us like this is kind of a bit of an antidote
it's like how about we applied some of the things that we discussed like this mechanism
for truth this incentive to be truthful to be unbiased to be objective to a lot of
questions, right? Is there going to be an earthquake in California? Where is the hurricane
is going to hit in Florida? COVID is going to be a recession. These questions that do actually
impact people on their day to day. But today, there's just like, it's like social media where
like the incentive is engagement, whereas prediction market, the incentive is truth.
And so that's really what I meant by that. But I think that that clip was taken out of context,
out of a broader, kind of a broader conversation, like kind of a broader explanation that I was
giving. Do you guys have a mission or vision or document for your own team to like steer people
toward whatever type of truths you think are important? Or is it just kind of going to be
driven by engagement, culture, excitement? Because I feel like that's potentially a pretty big
question for you guys. And in what type of role you want to play in the world?
That's a great question. So yes, the answer is yes, definitely. And I think that
the way that I sort of describe it is like,
you have to have a balance. And you know, there are certain things that for example,
may be more engaging, but less useful from a truth seeking perspective. But that help kind of like
the things that are like less engaging, but more truth seeking from a kind of forecast perspective,
right? So and you have to balance out between those two. It's a bit like,
and the example is like, you can look at a lot of marketplaces, right? Like,
for example, maybe where Ubers are most needed are like in urban areas. But that's where it's
harder to get riders and they're less needed in like, sorry, by rural areas, but it's mostly in
urban areas. But you still have to build a critical picture. And I think that's a really good point.
And I think it's a little bit similar here, like you have to get enough of a critical mass in a
certain places to basically get, for example, I, you know, for example, personally, I'm always
interested in a more longer term forecast, the things that are sort of like, will AI overtake
when we get when the McRib is coming back this year? What is McRib? Is it the burger?
Good for you. Good for you. Well, who exactly is making the who exactly is making these calls
about what goes live on the site?
The second point I was gonna say, so a lot of it comes from our team that like are figuring out
what's trending on Twitter, and like, what's double people's mind, like what's in the news.
But the other thing, it's like, this is the other thing, like, look, I believe in markets, right?
Like, I'm a believer in markets. And like, it's like, look at what customers want, and like what
they're interested in what they're asking about, and like, have them suggest markets. The one thing
the one cover is like, that doesn't mean you just do everything, anything. I mean, we again,
we're regulated, everything goes to a regulated pipeline. And there's a number of things that we
don't touch, like war types of assassination, violence, things that could create a bad,
bad incentive. We never touch those. One, because it would be illegal. And two, even if it wasn't,
like, I think those would not necessarily, even though there could be interest from the forecast,
like, for example, if you have a war market, I think it could create a perverse incentive,
it could create a bad incentive. And we basically shy away and do not touch those.
So I think you have to have a, like, you have to have a balance. And I think,
I think we've gotten fairly good at that balance.
All right, Tarek, well, we'll let you go research the McRib and SKD. And yeah,
we appreciate it.
Appreciate you, you being on the show.
Thanks so much, guys. Appreciate you having me.
Take care, man.
Thanks to Tarek for coming on the show.
We're a new show. So please follow, like, subscribe everywhere you get podcasts. You
can also find us in lovely high definition video on AccessPod on YouTube.
If you like this episode, please leave a five star review or thumbs up and share it with a friend.
It helps a lot.
You can find me at Hamburger on Twitter and at Meaning.Company.
You can find my newsletter at sources.news.
Access is part of the Vox Media Podcast Network, and the show is produced by Hooked Creators.
See you guys next time.
Au revoir.
Bye-bye.
Booking.com is the easiest way from a day surrounded by noise
to a stay.
Surrounded by nature.
That's nice.
Go on, book it.
It's easy.
Booking.com.
Booking.
Yeah.
Fall is the perfect time to refresh and reorganize your space.
At the Home Depot, find power tools and tool sets starting at $50 to help tackle DIY projects,
home updates, and more.
Whether you're drilling brackets to support new shows,
shelving, or sharpening your hedge trimmer blade with an angle grinder,
the Home Depot has the tools you need to check projects off your list.
Shop Labor Day Savings at the Home Depot and gear up for fall projects
with the right tools to keep your projects moving.
Podcast Summary
Key Points:
Calci, a prediction market platform, advocates for financializing everything by enabling bets on real-world events, emphasizing market-driven price discovery.
The company is in a fierce rivalry with Polymarket, with Calci winning a key legal battle over election markets, establishing a regulated, legitimate path for prediction markets in the U.S.
Calci operates under strict regulatory principles, banning insider trading and enforcing transparency, which differs from Polymarket’s offshore, unregulated model.
Employees are prohibited from trading on Calci to prevent conflicts of interest, reflecting a commitment to market integrity and investor protection.
Prediction markets are growing rapidly, with Calci overtaking Polymarket in mindshare despite earlier challenges, and both platforms now facing convergence toward regulated, transparent models.
The rise of storytelling in tech is highlighted as a key trend, where founders and creators are increasingly valued for authenticity and direct communication.
Platforms like X are reevaluating their role in media, with senior leaders like Nikita Beer promoting journalist return to foster news credibility and community trust.
Financialization of complex issues—like sports outcomes or political events—through prediction markets is seen as a powerful tool for transparency, pricing, and democratic engagement.
Summary:
The conversation explores the rise of prediction markets, centered on Calci’s strategic push to financialize real-world events through transparent, regulated markets. Calci, in a pivotal legal win, successfully challenged government restrictions on election betting, establishing itself as a leader in regulated prediction markets. This positions it against Polymarket, which operates in less regulated, offshore spaces, creating a sharp competitive dynamic.
Calci emphasizes regulatory compliance, banning insider trading and employee trading to maintain fairness and trust. Despite early challenges in mindshare, Calci has gained significant traction, now matching or exceeding Polymarket in public awareness. The discussion also touches on broader tech trends—like storytelling as a core tool for founders—and platform evolution, such as X’s efforts to attract journalists by improving content integrity and transparency.
These developments signal a shift where financial markets are expanding into everyday decision-making, from sports to politics, with prediction markets offering deeper insight through collective, market-driven pricing. The conversation underscores that while unregulated markets may grow quickly, regulated, transparent models—like Calci’s—are essential for long-term trust, legitimacy, and public adoption.
FAQs
It means applying market mechanisms—like pricing and betting—to a wide range of real-world events and decisions, such as elections or sports outcomes, to create objective, data-driven insights instead of relying on subjective opinions.
Because prediction markets require participants to put money on outcomes, creating a financial incentive to act on accurate information. This 'skin in the game' reduces bias and drives toward more truthful, rational outcomes.
Calci follows strict regulatory rules similar to financial markets, banning insider trading and enforcing rules against market manipulation. Employees are prohibited from trading on non-public information, and the system flags suspicious activity for review.
Calci operates in a fully regulated, U.S.-aligned financial market with strong regulatory oversight, while Polymarket launched earlier with less regulation and used offshore methods, leading to a competitive and sometimes contentious rivalry.
To maintain market integrity, prevent insider trading, and ensure fairness. Employees would be exposed to conflicts of interest, and their use could compromise the accuracy and objectivity of the market data.
Through years of regulatory compliance, KYC (Know Your Customer) processes, market surveillance, and a clear separation between commercial operations and regulatory functions to prevent conflicts of interest.
Chat with AI
Loading...
Pro features
Go deeper with this episode
Unlock creator-grade tools that turn any transcript into show notes and subtitle files.