PRICKLY BEAR

It's Friday, August 27th, 2026, Episode 299, I'm Patrick Suresna, and I'm Kevin Muir. This week it's a no interview show, so it's just me and Patrick, dig in, kick back and let's hear what the charts are telling our resident technical analyst. And unlike you, I'm gonna crack open a beer and keep a longstanding tradition, so Danny, what Portuguese beer am I drinking here? So you are drinking, I'm gonna have to read it off my phone, but this is the prickly pair. It's a 6% fruit beer, and they use the locally, it's called prickly pair, or for your case. You know, I literally bought it because I misread, I saw prickly bear, and I was like, that's perfect, and it's like, oh, damn it, it's prickly bear, I'm very unprovoked, anyway. It's prickly bear, you got a prickly bear. Okay, give us a disclaimer, buddy. Nothing in this podcast should be viewed as investment advice listeners should consult an investment professional before making any decisions regarding topics mentioned in the show. Side effects of too much huddle may include the best scent twist disorder, the dollar debatement dysfunction, and the Jackson Hole performance anxiety. Those are some nasty side effects. All right, let's jump into all right, Patrick. Lots going on in the markets, even though they're quiet, what do you got for us? Well, I don't know if you want to say they're quiet, there's some interesting stuff. They're quiet in terms of the volume, buddy, and that's the one thing that people should be aware of is that, yes, there's some interesting things happening, but the actual volumes are quiet. So, let's dive into first, let's rewind, because I think the most interesting thing that happened was the bond intervention by Besent the other week. And that was after we recorded the last episode. So there's lots to cover here in terms of what happened. But when we did our last episode, a 30-year yield, afterwards started ripping north of 530, and it wasn't, by the way, the interesting part, it wasn't just the actual US 30-year yield, but right across the world, we were basically seeing at the time the European 30-year yield was ripping to 375, we saw the England bonds basically ripping up to 585, to a higher high. We saw a rising Japanese 30-year yield that was pressing 415, looking like it was going to take a shot above its main highs. So there was a general strike against long-dated government bonds that was really emergent. And suddenly we had the FOMC meeting minutes, which were coming out that the Fed is more less staying the course, and then came the Treasury announcement, and there's a little, is it fair to say we'll call it an Operation Twist, but not a Fed-driven one, a Treasury-driven twist, they're basically exactly what it is, but it was definitely an attempt at a twist, attempt at a twist. But basically, I think that the size itself was not that significant. What I actually think was most relevant was the fact that the Treasury blinked, right? The Treasury blinked in that they basically did not like where yields were, and they felt that they needed to step in. And I feel that the response was not about the dollar size, because we saw ridiculous moves in gold. We'll talk about a huge move in Bitcoin, all sorts of assets started to move, and it's not just because of this little buying, but rather this idea that we now know where the administration does not like the yield, and very likely to attempt numerous times to defend this area if it's beaten. And I think that it sends a message to the market that this is the kind of place where they're worried. How would you interpret it differently? No, I think that that was the problem, is that it didn't make it look like the Treasury or the administration was worried about rates. You highlighted the beginning that it wasn't just a U.S. rate story, but it was across the world. I can't, like, everyone seems to be losing their shit about how badly bonds are trading, and I'm like, if you stop and think about it in the grand scheme of things, it's not that big a deal. Like, they haven't backed up that much, and I wrote a piece about this, and I'll just kind of give you a little synopsis. But when you have a gd, a nominal GDP of six and a half percent with the government deficit of six percent, and with the AI CapEx build out, basically being the largest CapEx build out, we've seen since the railroads of 91850. And then to top it all off, the geopolitical situation, the Trump has at the very least changed the other countries' willingness to run deficits for whatever reason. So we have a situation where it's not just the U.S. that's willing to run a large deficit. Now all countries are either willing or have to run large deficits. So when we stop and think about it, like, everyone is issuing bonds, right? It's a huge supply. We have record corporate, record government, and record non-US government. So the fact that bonds are rising in yield and declining in price is not to be, it's not a surprise. Not only that, Patrick, it's really not that big a deal. Like, we go look at the 30-year term premium. And for those who don't know, term premium is in essence the amount that the market is demanding in excess of what the market expects the Fed funds to average over the life of a bond. So if you're nervous about the situation, you'll say, "I think that the Fed funds are going to be 3% over the next 30 years, but I'm going to demand five because I think that there's a chance that there's something really bad happens or whatever inflation gets out of control." So you demand, so that's a 200 basis point term premium. And if you look at that term premium, yes, it is increased over the last year or two, or it's actually been increasing for the last five years. But it's not like it's some obscene level. It's very much just in the middle of the range of the past, you know, 30, 40, 50 years. So one of the things that's happening is we're just getting our return to normal of interest rates. And we should be asking ourselves, like, why are we so freaked out about that? And I would content the reason that we're so freaked out about that is because the U.S. government has never had this much debt. And it's increasingly going to make it so the government shouldn't be spending this amount. But to your point, that when you're faced with a market signal that is telling you that you're spending too much, you have a choice of either cutting back on spending or trying to suppress the market signal. And one of the things, and you rightfully point out is the volumes of this buyback liquidity buyback are actually tiny. He increased it. There's seven buybacks between now and when he what his target, which ironically was or maybe not ironically or maybe strategically was actually around the midterms. So there's seven buybacks of $2 billion that he's made four billions. So it's $28 billion. It's tiny in terms of the market. Like they're going to issue $300 billion or something 30 years. So they're going to buy back 28 of it. I appreciate I appreciate you talking tiniiness, but to me, when you look at the way, for instance, gold and Bitcoin, other things moved, then actually, as tiny of a bond intervention as this was, it's the signal that emerged from it actually had some really big impacts. I'm not going to disagree with you, Patrick. I was just saying, you're correct to say it's tiny, but you're also correct to say the market got nervous about it. Right. Right. That's the important part. They took it as a potential of basically the government monetizing the net. Now listen, I don't know if you want me to explain how this potentially could turn into monetization because it is a complicated affair. that has many steps, but on its own, it's actually not that big a deal, but it's not that hard to envision how this would, in essence, become QE. So I would imagine that, you know, Worsh was sympathetic to what Besent did, but, you know, like when the two of them get together for breakfast once a week and talk markets, you know, I could imagine, like, Besent saying to Worsh, like, we need to do something, we can't let yields rock at higher, and he says, listen, my hands are tied. It's a committee of 12 people. He's got their concern about inflation. We're not going to be doing any big operation, but you could do this. Like, I'm pretty sure Worsh and some degree or another gave a blessing and was completely aware that this was happening. And the question in my mind is, with Worsh knowing, like, I'm making assumption, but I'm assuming, do you feel that, I mean, correct in saying that Worsh would have known that this was happening? He 100% knew. Now, I was going to say, you're correct about the latter part of your assertion, but you also said, I think he would be approving of it. I'm not as sure as you are that he would approve of this. And I, I, I, that's actually critical because, yeah, that's critical because I feel there's two paths, either a, you know, Worsh basically says, listen, you're going to have to do the lifting at the treasury side until market conditions weaken enough for me, for us at the Fed, to start some sort of balance sheet expansion where we can intervene. But we simply in this market condition can't justify doing it. So this is in your hands until you keep assuming that that Worsh is on the same side as that. Well, no, no. I said, there's two paths. I said, there's one that he's on the same page. Okay. Yeah. And the other is, look, we're fine with it where everything is. If you guys don't like it, you guys are on your own and you have to see what you guys can do. I, I won't lie, I am actually more in the camp that of the first scenario in my opinion, but that's just an opinion and I have no inside information. I think given that Stanley Druckenmiller came out and wrote that op ed and that in the past Stanley Druckenmiller and Kevin Worsh have written op eds together, it is probably I would be more in the camp that in private, Worsh was telling Scott to not do it. And that ultimately he did it and then Druckenmiller says, well, the idiot's not listening to you in private. I'm going to, I'm going to tell him in public. And that's how I interpret this as having gone down. And to me, I think if you actually wanted to get rates lower, the easiest way would be for the Fed to be really hawkish. Like, that is, that is on the long bond. Yes. Yeah. The lower the Fed comes out and we saw that with the the Worsh came in, he made his first FOMC speech and he was hawkish and it surprised everyone because they all thought he was going to be a shell for Trump. And the long end went down. If that is what you're trying to accomplish, if you want to lower long term borrowing rates, the way to do it is to actually prove your inflation, you know, targeting, create a spin in another way, just that we're heading toward a recession because they tie over a tight and cause economic congestion. Well, of course, that is a part of the reason that the long bond does that. But at the same time, the long bond investors, Worsh nightmare, is a Federal Reserve that is basically giving the green light to inflation. So they say we're comfortable with it. So okay. This is interesting. Say, first of all, I just have here on the screen right now going into September 16th, we're literally just a couple of weeks away from the next Fed meeting and they're right now pricing in a 66% chance that they leaves rates unchanged, which is two out of three odds is being baked into Fed funds futures that he doesn't move, which makes it an incredibly political decision to move in October right before the elections, like literally a week before the elections. And even here, they're pricing in a 50% chance that he doesn't move in October either. So right now, this idea of at least the market's pricing is not pricing in a Worsh being hawkish. Now here we are to Jackson Hole. And Jackson Hole is kind of a once a year country club of all the global central bankers getting in. They talk a much bigger picture. So we're not going to hear about the latest PCE price index print and stuff like this. We're going to talk about the direction global monetary policy of the Western world is moving at these events. And I'm very curious whether in that bigger picture conversation when we hear him speaking, by the way, we're recording before his speech. So we don't know what he's saying tomorrow. But it'll be interesting whether he can maintain the hawkishness or whether somehow whatever he says is interpreted far more dovishly than expected more like I don't expect him to do a flip, but you know, they're going to be looking for tone. They're going to be looking for, you know, is he really serious about what he said in his first meeting or is the general direction implying that he may not even move at all? And like, what's your opinion on this? What's happening to happen tomorrow? So I think there's a lot of people talking about how important this meeting is and I'm going to call bullshit. I don't think this is a big deal at all in terms of sorry, this depends what he says. It's like I'm going to take the other side of that too. I don't think he can say anything anymore. The market won't believe him. So what is he going to do? He's going to come out and be hawkish. He already came out and was hawkish. He had his chance. It's going to come out and be dovish. The reality is it's a committee is not going to change anything. I don't think he can do anything. He is, he had his, that's why I thought it was so important that the last meeting, he do it because this meeting, now he can't from politics like he can't, sorry, not him. The FOMC, it's going to be increasingly difficult for them to raise rates this meeting or the next one. Now, I don't even know if they should raise rates. But if you were going to do it, if you were going to be hawkish, the last meeting, 100 percent. And now he's gone, he's thrown, you know, he's talked a big game about being, you know, not willing to stand up, sorry, not willing to accept 61 months or whatever it was of fed, of inflation being above target. But the question that was almost, you know, was continually asked in different forms was, you say that you're not willing to accept inflation above target yet. Here we are with 60 months of it being above target and you didn't raise rates, right? Like it made no sense. You can't say you're not willing to accept inflation above target and then accept inflation above target. And so my point is, even if it now comes out and tries to pretend he's hawkish, the market is not going to believe him. So I have a question for you. Yeah. I have a question for him. Where's the threshold? So everyone talks about the dual mandate of the fed, right? You know, basically jobs and inflation. But I've argued many times that actually the main mandate of the fed is financial stability. And when the markets become financially unstable, that overrides both of those two other mandates. They are basically there to make sure that there is in financial failures, that there is the lender of last resort, that they are basically there to stabilize shit. The question I have for you is what is a really painful number that we would have to see on the bond yields, on the long bonds, in order for the central bankers, the FOMC to realize inflation is sticky, and it's high, and jobs are weak, but they're okay. But with yields running and funding stresses around everything going to where they are, when What is it that they say? say, no, we have to stabilize financial conditions in the bond markets where they have to override their other mandates. What's that threshold? Okay. The problem is that you're mixing different parts of the bond market. And so of course, repel markets. Right. And so you're, you're spot on correct that above all else, the, the, the, the federal reserve wants a properly functioning bond market. And a lot of people talk about how the FOMC has a, as a S&P putt. I disagree. It's actually, it's, it's, it's a bond putt. And, but it's not a bond putt in the way that we're thinking about bond puts right now in terms of yields on treasuries. It's a, it's a bond putt in terms of liquidity. And it's, but it's also a bond putt in terms of corporate, corporates that are able to issue and things like that. So if we go rewind back to the 2018 period, when Powell did his, we're a long way from neutral error. What happened in the wake of that was that the corporate bond market seized up. And they couldn't issue anymore. And so it just, it immediately dried up. So corporations that had to roll debt were having trouble rolling debt. And yes, stock market went down as well. The stock market was going down because all of a sudden the corporate bond market was in trouble. And that is ultimately why Powell panicked. People thought it was because of the S&P. The S&P was actually just a side effect of the actual underlying problem, which was the problems in the funding of the, of the corporate bond market or in the overnight rate as well. So you're correct there. But the trouble about this right now is we aren't getting that like that's not what's happening here. We're not getting the markets running into trouble because of the situation that there's something underlying in the financial system. We're getting the bond market backing up because there's too many bonds because they're issuing too many. It's not that they, so they're going down, but that is a funding problem. But it's, but, but it's, but the reason that the market is backing up is because that is the way, the market's way of encouraging less borrowing to happen. Right? Like in the one time, so in 2018, we ran out of bids. Okay. That's why that's why they had to intervene. We ran out of bids in the bond market. In this case, there's too many offers and they're overwhelming the bids. There's too many offers. That's what happens. What happens when it's because one of them is because the market is going to actually, the economy in the market is going to be into trouble. The other one is because the economy in the market is doing so well. So they're not, it's not a small nuance. It's actually, it's, it's really important that it's be different. But as liquidity dries up because like for instance, okay. Anthropic is going to roll in in a month with, with an IPO, they're going to sneak in, you know, whatever like, you know, a hundred, whatever, what is it? What is the IPO estimate? I don't know. It's like these numbers. Yeah, I'm getting whatever, like somewhat huge amount. What happens is they're just everyone's grabbing at liquidity that's in the system. And they're, they're sucking it out with all of these issuances. There's a point where all these AI buildouts that are issuing ridiculous amounts of bonds. You're saying that that's because the market is so hot, but that still needs somebody to come up with the money. And the thing is is that I guess it will mean that the AI will have to find funding at much higher rates inevitably. And that's already happening. Patrick, like, that's why they're, they are increasingly having to fund at higher and higher rates. This is how markets work. You have more supply. Prices go down. And the people that take that risk get paid more. And, and, and, and, and this is the problem that Druck and Miller highlighted in his op-ed is that we are trying to suppress the signal. And, and not only that, I would argue we're trying to suppress the signal at the first tiny little bit of, of, of a price dislocation. I wouldn't even call it a price dislocation. This is just the market doing what the market should do. You issue more prices go down. And all you need is like economy to slow the issue less prices will go back up. So, yeah, I guess I'm on a different page there. And I, and, and I think that the reason that the bond gold market is got nervous about it is because they recognized that this was absolutely ridiculous that they were already panicking. And that is really what we should be asking ourselves. Why are they panicking at, you know, these levels? So, so it's interesting. I want to just pivot here to the COT signal heat map and let's just show that the 30-year bond is at the zero percentile right across the board in terms of positioning. And, and basically, when you look at it from a contract perspective, so again, the COT reports, the commitment of trader reports that we're looking at, legacy, which is how our large speculators positioned in the markets in their representing managed money hedge funds and systematic trading strategies and so on. What's what's particularly interesting is that prior to this announcement, the positioning in the 30-year bond, let's say just by gross short positioning, was 420,000 contracts short, which was only a clips by a brief period in late 2024 where they were more short temporarily at that moment. But when you look at a five-year look back, we were basically coming in here. There was a very large amount of large specs and managed money hedge funds that were basically short to this market. The interesting part is, okay, you're saying, well, market, this, so it is, it was a trade that isn't surprising anyone. There was a very large amount of people that see, like yourselves, that basically see what what's going on. And they have been actually leaning in on the short side. And the interesting question I have about this is like in the same manner from which all the oil bulls got caught during the straight-or-her-mose event going in May into June and got squeezed. Question is, is the fact that from that everyone was so consensus on this being a here and now problem, is what we're very interesting is that tomorrow Friday's court report is going to be the first data that we're going to see is how many of these short sellers actually were forced to cover from that this pivot, from this little besent move. And, and the question also then becomes, what happens if it creates a little bit of a squeeze? And is there room for this to be squeezed irrespective of the fundamental view that you have there? It's super interesting, the timing of this move, because there was some pretty extreme positioning going into this announcement at the time when yields were literally breaking to decade highs. And so we are literally at this moment going to see and really the yields have been backing off. Like when you look at this 30-year treasure yield and you actually look, let's just look at the ZB which is the long bond. Like if this thing breaks this 50-day moving average and starts to go, there is a lot of short sellers, a lot of systematic traders, a lot of things that may be forced to come in just from a liquidity perspective, it was zero to do with fundamentals. It would be very interesting to see whether there was an attempt to actually you know, catch traders off guard knowing that they will provide the necessary buying if they were able to trigger a short squeeze. Why I think Besson knew that and was trying to do that, was trying to orchestrate that. Well, I mean, they certainly achieved it with oil if it was done. Yeah, I think that this is a problem. They're sitting around managing stuff for the for the next month or two instead of thinking about what should be done for the next year or two or the next decade or two. And if they just focus on doing what's right, the market will go where it's going to go and and give the proper thing. And this is this is this is why I think gold got so freaked out. Well, we'll we'll get to gold. Yeah, but I just think that like you're sitting there and we're talking about okay, great. From a game theory perspective, there's this great short out there and he was trying to squeeze that. So, These are the games that we play amongst ourselves in terms of traders and it's really important. It's not the game. The Treasury Secretary should be playing. The Treasury Secretary should be thinking about the long term, kind of stable issuance of bonds for America. What Trump knew exactly what he was doing when he put a hedge fund manager in the Treasury. Okay, I'm not arguing that. I'm just telling you why the gold market is looking at this and giving a vote of confidence or a vote of disconf, you know, like unapproval vote because the reality is that this is games that traders play. This is not games that the Treasury Secretary should be playing, fair enough. So let's look on the knock on effects. So let's talk about what was the media response in asset markets and actually the first thing which we don't have to spend too much time was the dollar did respond with a further breakdown and what was relevant about the US dollar breakdown was up until the breakdown move, the dollar appeared on the surface to being just in what was technically a traditional retracement. Markets naturally move in ebb and flow, two steps forward, one step back, two steps forward, like Fibonacci retracement, all of these different things are just natural primary move, secondary corrections, these things happen. And so the dollar made a major bull breakout and it's been retracing. But this bond intervention caused the dollar to break down in a way that did enough technical damage to neutralize the bull breakout. Now, that doesn't make it bearish but we were in a 15 month trade range in the dollar and arguably we are now back in the trade range. And the dollar is not bullying and the vulnerability now is that the dollar may head to the bottom end of its trade range and stay in this trapped zone for even months to come, maybe the rest of the year that we're going to spend in this kind of a range. So as that dollar broke down, you have rates moving, dollar weakening so that to basically disqualify a new US dollar bull trend and obviously the response was gold and Bitcoin, right? And the response was almost immediate. The gold was basically in a six, seven week basing formation, consolidating quietly in a tight range, completely inactive, if you brought a doctor in with some hospital equipment, it would say the patient is dead from inactivity, it was inactive but a match was struck and that litifier that basically launched gold and it's actually amazing how fast the sentiment on gold pivoted so decisively bullish off of what was such, like you were saying, arguably nothing burger move on bonds, it came off of its highs but bonds didn't really move. And the dollar while it weakened, it wasn't a monster move by any means, like so the major top line assets didn't do anything too crazy but the bulls on gold sniffed out that something just changed and in this six month, you know, 25% correction in gold that we've seen, it looks now like a decisive reversal of trend. But it's amazing. I know you talked to different circles and a different thing but to me, it's pretty amazing how many people and my kind of people that I'm exposed to immediately got like 100% bullseye, like instantaneously and everyone super stoked about this bull in gold. Yeah. And listen, I think that that is what happened and I'm just letting you finish here and then I'll give you some, no, no, it's okay. So let me jump in. So first of all, let's start with the with the dollar and I know that a lot of people, you know, I had a little macro tours meet up and everyone's always asking about the currency whisper. He's a he's a fan favorite. So one of the things is the rule about the currency whisper is that I can't ask him his position. He asked to tell me his position. And after the best sent announcement, I got like basically an email that said game on and that was he's a he's a US dollar bear. And to him, this was a very clear signal that the treasury was playing with fire and that this was the signal that you should be selling US dollars. And I look at gold. And I think now that we see what drunken millers response was with the op ed, it's probably safe to say that he bought a F ton of it that immediately on the announcement Patrick, if you're sitting there and you're worried about the treasury playing games and suppressing rates, then what is your response? You sell treasuries and you buy gold. And I suspect that I look, I don't know. I don't talk to drunken miller, but I suspect that that Greenwich crowd that was their response. And that is why it was so violent in terms of the upside. They were voting with their dollars about Scott Besson's latest move. And China buying certainly has the other thing is though. I, I, you know, I love Dennis Garmin. He is a long one of my childhood heroes. And he always says like in a bull market, you can have three positions long, extra long and flat. I contend that we're in a secular gold bull market. And, and to me, I know everyone was laughing at me when I was like it broke that 50 day downtrend. And I was like, I got to get long again. And everyone's like, Oh, my God, I'm surprised. You know, the positive response to gold. I'm not surprised to the positive response to gold. It's in a bull market. It's going to continue to be in a bull market for a long time. Because they're just needed. It just needed a catalyst. Exactly. And that is what came. And it didn't matter. You know, everyone always says what's going to be the catalyst. You know, you don't really know what the catalyst is in advance. All you know is the direction of the surprise. And I thought that the direction of the surprise was going to be that way. So to me, this isn't as actually surprising as everyone's making it out to be. And you know, the funny, the funny part about that is that like a lot of people obsessed like they have to figure this out before it happens. But often the best traders are willing to always loud the first part of it to be missed. And just rather wait till the catalyst emerges. The trend is established. And they now know that's a famous saying like Stanley Druckermiller would always say like, I'd rather getting in at the second inning of the game. You know, the game has started, you know, and rather than getting in and not knowing, right? And so it's kind of like this idea where, where, you know, you can obsess like, oh, gold's going to go up. Well, why obsess? Like, so what? You missed the first couple hundred bucks. And if the things turn bullish, it's going a couple thousand. You know, you don't need to have got the exact bottom and been, you know, and get it to the day because you knew what was going to happen. Sometimes it's more than enough just to know it's going to happen and wait. And then when it signals you going, this is pretty much what happened. But what's interesting, if I can just continue in the precious metals theme, this is overall silver is catching up, but lagging. And you're seeing some activity in platinum and platinum, they've all generally turned up. But really, they haven't started bulling you. Like this very much was gold making a move. And as the tide rose, the other precious metals got some tailwind from behind. But what I'm waiting for as real confirmation is, is when these other precious metals suddenly get hot, then you know, we're in another bull market where they're going to run everything. And that's when the real big money is going to be made of precious metals. And maybe that's not going to happen to like the fourth quarter like sometime, right? Yeah. Who knows? I don't know. I just, to me, my underlying reason to own gold is that ever since 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine and then the West zero, there are reserve balances that the reality is that other countries are going to look at that and say that they have to diversify into stuff. And they're mainly going to diversify into gold. So that is going to always be what leads to me. And I know that there's all these things about silver and, you know, I actually like platinum. But at the same time, the thing that's going to go and lead and which did for a long time, Patrick, for a long, long time gold lead compared to everything else. And it was it was this function where gold was going up alone. And it wasn't even like the gold miners didn't even go up with gold for a while. Because the reality is central banks by gold, they don't buy gold miners. Absolutely. We're back to that. Well, no, gold miners have been ripping, buddy. Yeah, I agree. But let's talk about the asset that shall not be named, because the response in the crypto space was incredibly explosive. Like, I don't know whether feels far more like a short squeeze than a rush to buy. Like the velocity of from which it went up indiscriminately has hallmark signs of what a short squeeze typically has. Maybe there was some heavy shorting in there. But the fact that it turned so decisively, it destroyed every metric of the bear trend. Like this, even though I don't see the asymmetry of starting to buy at 80,000, it's clearly, you can't say it's bearish anymore. Like it's this is this is a market that now we could see a scenario where all of these kind of crypto and gold assets may continue to be one of the better performing areas for the remainder of the year. And it'll be interesting to see. I always love to measure the quality of a bull market by seeing how things behave during pullbacks and corrections in them. Deep corrections tend to demonstrate that it's not being well defended. If you have pullbacks and buy on dip traders immediately defended and reclaim previous prices and you're seeing price action demonstrating positive flow, then that just kind of reinforces the strength and the potential further follow through that they can have. And so I'm very curious as we go into Labor Day and into early parts of September, will we see this type of price action emerge here where it continues to show that accumulation and bulls are very aggressive and that they just don't allow corrections to have any meat on the bone. It's going to be the puzzle to solve on what I'm as a technician going to be studying very, very closely in the way that the behavior comes out in the next couple of weeks. Okay, let's go on to something else because I had nothing to say about crypto. Okay, so well, let's talk in video then. Okay, S&P 500, here we are, we can't we have to talk markets in general here. So my position was purely that Nvidia offered only an event that is kind of like Jackson Hole could be an event, but probably not. Overall, there's a lack of event risk and that could keep the market rather boring throughout the summer, it's already low volumes. And I thought that Nvidia really had the potential that if there was some sort of disappointment that they could have hammered the semiconductor space, which could have been a huge drag on on the markets. And while and it did not like Nvidia came in very strong, and you know, it's interesting because obviously the whole semiconductor space here, I'm going to put the SMH has been hugely dragged down. I mean, it's when they had their blow off top, the Caspi has obviously gone through a huge correction of what was the hottest market in there. And Nvidia offered potentially something that could put the nails in the coffin, right? Like they could have turned, but essentially what happened was they came out and in essentially, you know, blew away guidance. They were basically going, I think everyone was estimating something like 44% growth next year and they and they came in like a 70% and said it was only supply constraints that prevented it from being higher, like just insane statement. And the part that really kind of take away from that was essentially, they pushed forward the cyclical question, right, which is essentially did the cycle turn. Everyone wants to know whether the capex cycle, spending cycle has run its course. And it would inevitably be, you know, a statement from Nvidia or something like it that would have sent that and they didn't give that at all, which basically gives investors permission to to basically create a longer runway for this entire semiconductor cycle and and take away almost the most immediate downside risk. And so my thought was, well, this should have led to a very strong response. And while this response on Nvidia, you know, just put it up, was decisive. Like I mean, after testing its 50 day moving average, this gap higher is already clearing its one-month high and is giving a shot at its 52 week highs, right? Like we have a shot here that Nvidia is going to make a run for 242.50 on the upside, maybe even a six trillion dollar handle. Like we'll see what what the market cap will be after a bull run here. But for me, I would have thought that because they said this, this should have created a much stronger response in all of the other semiconductors and all the secondary and third tier beneficiaries of the AI cycle lasting longer going farther. And to be honest, outside of Nvidia's really impressive move, it looks pretty darn weak out there in terms of the response outside of Nvidia. Now, the SMH is up to over just over 2%, but it's trading at its 50 day moving average. I know memes are the AMD's, MUs and Intel's and so on. You know, blasting out of the gate like this is going. And the hyperscalers did tick all. Like the, like let's just kind of go through this thing. Apple is flat on the day. Amazon, I'm just going in alphabetical order down on the day. You take meta. It's down on the day. You take Microsoft and it's up on the day. That's a winner. Like Google is down on the day, right? Like these are hyperscalers. These are this is all part of the game. These mag 7s are a very important component of taking the S&P to 8,000 if there was going to be continuation. They're huge index components. And here you got a mag 7 and Nvidia say no, shit's going to be great. Things are going to go for a couple more years. And there's very little response. Yeah. In what I would think would be distinct response of like just the way gold breaking out on thing. Like there should have been something that where they just had the tide rise and all the boats are rising with the tide rising. And that is at least not evident in the first day after their announcement. And like my thought is like, well, shit, if Nvidia putting this kind of an announcement out isn't making these stocks go up. What the freak has to happen for them to go up? All I can think of when it's like as you're giving this story is that everyone's already long. And it doesn't matter what the story is if everyone already owns it. You need new buyers. And if you don't get new buyers, there's nothing you can do. And if everyone already owns it and it's already too long, there's no new buyers. Right. And so, so to me, you know, I asked like this looks like a flagging formation for a bull breakout on the S&P. The NASDAQ looks like a flagging formation bull breakout candle for a continuation pattern. There is an opportunity for these markets to have a good September. Like there are at least there isn't anything to take this down that has emerged. You know, there's always something kind of come out of left field and surprise the market. But isn't this moment? There is no catalyst for that. And so the path of the least resistance is that these markets can in the foreseeable short-term impulse of the swing trade all had higher. But how the hell does the S&P clear its previous high and go to 8,000? Unless the mags say sevens are rockin' rolling with it. Like Nvidia can't do all the work by itself. And right now, there just isn't the response yet. And it may come in the next few weeks, but that's definitely the thing to watch, whether or not the rest of the tech sector, the AI story kind of sphere, whether these stocks take flow. And if they don't, if let's say we're back after Labor Day, couple weeks in, and these stocks have all just grinded and done nothing while Nvidia goes to 240 plus, I'm gonna start getting nervous. Because if they can't, if they can't make a move under this condition, there's a problem. And that problem will manifest at some point. So I'm giving the bulls the benefit of the doubt. I'm actually not going to actually fight this. I'm gonna let this happen. But the way this emerges and plays out in the next two weeks is going to reveal a lot. Because if this kind of shit can't make the market make a next level move up, then that means semiconductor top is already in. It means that the mag sevens are gonna struggle making new highs and the tops may be in over there. And then really what will hold this market up going into the midterms. We're gonna be like October and November, things are gonna get spicy into the next earning cycle. Things can really, a fourth quarter, and especially you've talked about it quite a bit is that there's could be election surprise. There could be markets that get a little bit shocked by what transpires wrapped around those elections before and after. There's all sorts of things going wrong. And you need a really healthy bull market to be able to withstand that kind of volatility. A market that's behaving heavy and toppy and distributive will fall under its own weight very easily if a bad news event is presented to it. And the more vulnerable the market stays in the next few weeks. The more I'm going to get concerned going into the fourth quarter. - So Patrick, this is like the perfect response for me. And the reason it's the perfect response is because you're nervous about the market. You think it's behaving badly, but you're gonna give it some time to think out and you're not shorting it like me. So therefore I might be right 'cause if we both shorted it, then it wouldn't work. So it wouldn't work. - So good luck. - Thank you, buddy. - Good luck, I appreciate it. - You're what you're a pal. - Well listen, I might go cheer for you in just one day's flip flop. - Yeah, well as long as you don't do it publicly, we're okay, right? Like if you go do it on the side with your members, that's fine, those work. It's when we come out publicly on the show and we're both confident enough that we're saying publicly there. That's the real problem. - Absolutely, absolutely. But what's amazing to me, let's quickly pivot on the S. So first of all, S&P, this flagging formation does leave the window open for S&P to go 8,000. But I doubt it's gonna hit 8,000 without mag seven participation. So we need to see the Googles and Amazon's apples all give a minimum for a double top retest on their charts. So you just go retest previous highs. If we see something like that, that could give us an 8,000 print on the S&P, but it's not evident yet. Let's see if that manifests. But the one interesting thing to me is the 14 handle on the VIX. Now, I totally get it. Why in early August, we'd have a 14 handle. Why? Because it's 30 day volatility. And when you're looking forward 30 days into the low volume dead summer period, then that makes sense. But here we are, we're 30 days forward, we're actually got an FOMC, quadwitching op-ex, and we're gonna be moving much closer to the elections, all of these things, all utilities at its year low. Yeah. Like, as of this moment, the demand for ensuring this market risk is surprisingly not in demand. 'Cause obviously the VIX is reflexive. And so the moment there's reach for any hedging, then the VIX will rebalance to kind of reflect the flows. And the way I'm interpreting this is that nobody's worried. Nobody's worried, completely agree in Patrick. You highlighting the fact that it's a 30 day VIX. I remember there's the three month VIX. Right here. The three month VIX at the 17 handle. And more importantly, look at it collapse. I know. Look at that. That's got the election in there. That's insane. Don't say anything. Buy your straw hats in the winter. Anyway, this is, and the fact that it is, I guess it collapsed on video, because Nvidia was that important to determining whether or not there was immediate short-term risk. Correct. And so this is reflecting the fact that the semis did not just shit the bed with a huge Nvidia miss. Everything's great. Stocks are cheap, man. Oh, yeah, absolutely. Stocks are cheap. So let's tour some commodities and then we'll slow it up. I start wrapping things up. So we talked about gold. What's interesting is copper. It's toying around with 52-week highs. Now, the interesting part is when we look at different commodities, at different stages of the cycle, there's two commodities that are literally at polar opposites of investor position. Now, copper, I'm just going to use COT signal to look at-- COT signal.com. It's free folks. Go check it out. Thank you for the plug, buddy. But it's completely awesome to just check these things out. But look, we're at the 99th percentile of large speculators. And we was 100th percentile recently. So just coming off there of investor positioning. An interesting part is that the short sellers were almost inactive. The short contract has been almost flat, which basically is that the entire rise in positioning continues to be large speculators buying, which is very much what you look for when you're trying to determine whether there is decisive crowding. And whether a trade is crowded. And to me, if we get to 100th percentile from a short squeeze, but the longs are not buying, then that's not crowded. That's just shorts being forced out. But this with copper is not short sellers being squeezed. It's decisive longs by. And it's almost at a five-year high in terms of positioning, which is that it's consensus that copper is bullish. Now, that does-- it's not as a contrarian. You don't fade this just because it's a thing. The analogy that I use for caught analysis is there is a strip, a nightclub strip, with five different nightclubs. And one of them is crowded shoulder to shoulder with a great party. The only trouble comes when there's a fire and everyone's trying to run for an exit. But if you're looking for a good party, you're not going to the empty nightclubs. You're going to the club with the party. In the end, a crowding can be a sign that there's a fundamental reason this is happening. And if the trend keeps rewarding those investors for being along, it can persist for very long periods of time. And so you don't automatically fade a bullish positioning. So copper-- One second. One second. I'm at that empty nightclub, trying to tell everyone that it's actually better than they think. And then the moment they come, the couple of people come over and go, hey, this isn't bad. I go, whoa, whoa, whoa, this is getting busy. I got to leave. [LAUGHTER] It's like, I don't like-- Oh, let's give me some space. But so far, copper bulls have been rewarded. And it'll be very interesting to see whether copper can clear a 52-week high. It measures out to the 7/7 and a quarter level on the upside. There's lots of room for copper to still working. But it is an example of something that's already consensus. It is consensus. There's solid fundamentals. There's genuine shortages, inventory things. There's real reasons to be bullish copper. And everyone sees it. And everyone's positioned for it. And what's interesting is that copper stock finally join the party. I'm just going to pick on Freeport McMorrin, but we were in a like a five six-month trade range sideways, and you just see that Freeport broke to that 52-week high, and the party to probably 85-90 is underway. And so copper is still bullish, but I'm not in any way actually bearish copper yet. But what I do say is everyone that is smart should be planning an Irish exit. Right? Like, like, you don't, you know, you got the way we love Irish friends. That is not the derogatory in the least in a eye for one. As a trader, you want the skill of having an Irish exit. This is a great thing. I respect the Irish exit. Yeah, absolutely. Just like, you know, everyone's long, everyone's having a party. It's like, where did Kevin go? He's gone. He's gone. It's like, I'm in the first aisle. See you later. But you should be planning a way out because it is very crowded. But right now it's working and likely to go higher. But what is super interesting is the exact reciprocal of that has got to be the natural gas markets. And natural gas is at the zero percentile. And an interesting part is that this is literally with a huge aggressive building of short positioning, where we are literally seeing growth shorts at five-year highs in terms of the amount of short contracts. And as a percentage of open interest, it's not as low as it was in 2023 because as a price goes lower, you get more contracts. So as a percentage of open interest, it's not as extreme. But this is a hated market. No, but everyone is short, just like Treasury bonds. And no one wants to touch it with a 10-foot pole. And this is going to be interesting as well. That doesn't guarantee a huge term. But I want to focus in on winter gas. I'm going to hone in on the January contract here because that's where the peak of the term structure is. So while the current summer gas is down at 3 B.T.U., this is around four bucks. Can I just interrupt for a second before we move to winter gas? Because I don't think you should throw out the fact that maybe we're going to get some action in the summer. And I wanted to highlight the fact that you know how they pick names for storms. Like the first one this year was Arthur. Then it was Bertha. And then it was Christo Ball. I don't even know what that name is. You know what this one that just formed the Diaz? You don't know. Dolly. Dolly. It's Dolly. And I don't know, she's such a behind nice person. So maybe it won't be something that causes, you know, disruption in the markets. But it's kind of big cannons, buddy. I can't believe it could get violent. I can't believe it. It's there. Okay. But anyway, they don't mean they interrupt. I just wanted to highlight that the summer action is is by far still open. And so the point here is it's been a bleed out. And it's still a viciously ugly trend. But the interesting part is that this natural gas has an infamous nickname. I'm going to let you go ahead and say what it is. The Widowmaker. Are you talking about that? Absolutely. Yeah. And so the question is, is with this huge amount of short interest that's sitting there? Are we about to witness the Widowmaker maintain his reputation in the markets? And are we going to see a something event that forces a proper squeezing of of traders in these positions? So you're so you're recommending Patrick, we go like all in short copper long would not cast that what you're recommending. Absolutely not. And there's the Widowmaker, the dual Widowmaker. Okay. Do you know what I'm going to do? I'm going to make a like a return profile of like a hundred percent levered on both sides long copper short, that gas when we'll see how she does. Sorry, the other way, right? Let's short copper, long that gas. We'll see how she does. You should make any TF. No. The Patrick, because the Patrick, Thorezna Widowmaker, my ideas right now are implicit. But that would become evidence explicitly that you shouldn't listen to me. Well, people could short it. Like that's the nice thing. Absolutely. If you think that it'll become like the dreamer, it'll be like the dreamer of fun. I personally think that you're you're not giving this trade enough credit. And that the Pat, the Pat Thorezna ETF might actually work and that we should be now. Listen, we're all obviously kidding. Do not go. What I would actually argue is that while copper can be volatile to the downside, if the trade worked, it really would be all the lifting from that gas ripping higher. Just from a capable volatility, you know, like in a percentage, just from an implied perspective, I think that like that gas can double. And not like the winter gas, maybe not like winter gas. So then well, let's let's voladjust it and let's do five. Let's do five times as much copper short just to add some spice to it. We won't voladjust the net gas down. We'll vulnerable with the bearish, but I'm not really bearish. I know, but it doesn't matter. Everyone's bullish. We got to go. We got to do it, buddy. All right. So that's it. It's all right. Listen, just just do it. I say two to one is fine. You don't need to go find two to one. Okay. There we go. We've heard it. So you so build it. Build it and we'll track it. Okay. We'll do it. Like we'll come back it. We'll come back at Christmas and we'll see how it turn how it did. Christmas. It's going to be like a winter by like, you know, next next thing. So we're going to get the dolly storm that comes in and crushes it. And that gas is going to be like limit up for for a week. There you go. So let's let's talk about uranium for a moment. Okay. And it's interesting is like the metals and mining everything turned up all at the same time when gold broke out. But what's interesting is uranium was virtually dead. Like, like, imagine this being the patient at a hospital with the heart pulse a monitor on it. Like if flat line for five months, literally stayed within a few dollar range and literally bored everyone to death. Like, with complete inactivity. And finally, physical uranium, the U 308 started moving. And it's a very clean breakout. And you can actually see when you look at let's say the sprop physical, which is an easier cleaner chart to look at. But, you know, we were going through a very difficult nine month correction that mirrored gold's decline. And I don't know why uranium should mirror gold's decline. But the parabolic blowoff happened within days of gold's peak. And the correction lasted almost the exact same length. And, you know, in some ways or another, like, let's see, on a percentage wise, yeah, look at that. Gold was down 25% of uranium was down 27%. They peaked at the same time. They corrected in almost the exact same way. And they broke out at the same time. What the hell are central bankers buying the yellow cake? I don't know. I think it's the fact that anyone that likes uranium likes gold. It's all the same crew. Like, if you go look at them, it's probably the same crew. You're right. Like, you know, it's probably the same crew. And they all got excited at the same time. But there's no denying that uranium moved at the same time and broke out here. And so one of the interesting puzzles to solve here is did a new uranium bull market get underway. If gold's going to be bullish, did uranium just turn bullish? It certainly technically has all the same story from the price action, almost tick for tick. And so the question is, will this correlation persist? Or is this one of these correlations that will ultimately break and the two will diverge and march the beat of their own drums and the thing. But right now, there's no denying uranium's up and running and moving at the same time's gold. One second, sorry. I was getting hit up by an old guest that I have to talk to on the show. What else you got going? You keep going. I got to just respond while we're doing it. No worries. Well, when we got to talk about the breakout in the Greens, right? Remember, we were on the last episode. We were talking about that retracement and how bullish this pullback was setting up. And what a response to last two weeks. Just an epic bull breakout. Look at the wheat. Make that a punch to 75760 on the upside, corn, what the heck happened here, like just an absolutely stunning bowl breakout, and soya bean breaking to 52-week highs, like we have very distinctly seen the food story breakout. It is working, it's a decisive breakout, egg stocks are slowly starting to wake up, but a few names like, for instance, you know, when you look at mosaic's bear market seems to have potentially turned, nutrient made a breakout to the upside and is starting to turn, trepid podash is breaking out out of its things, so you know what, a lot of these kind of beaten up and forgotten commodity stocks have genuinely turned. I like it, I'm hopeful that that's going to be a surprise bowl market, I know it's terrible to be hoping for that because the reality is that it makes everyone's dinner more expensive, and it's almost like it's the worst thing that we could afford now, but the reality is Patrick, when you look and even with those moves, you step back and think about this in the grand scheme of things, it's barely moved. Well, I'm going to put on a wheat on a monthly chart, and just put in context that like if this was the breakout and wheat on a large macro scale, I mean, it could still run 30-40% higher from here in the next year or two, like there, if this is a legit new breakout, and so you're absolutely right, like for me, the tactical opportunity buy is not here. Here you have two week rip like this, you've got to buy a dip, not a rip, and so I'm not in any way, in fact, I did some profit taking on a bunch of our wheat positions, we were doing some income writing and other things like this on it, so we just took all of that shit off the books. We got to give you a t-shirt that says you've got to buy a dip, not a rip. That's a good line, I like it. Well, there's asymmetry in dips, not in rips, but on the back, sorry, but that on the back, there's asymmetry in rips, not dip, or whatever you just said. Done, t-shirt is being done, and listen, any listener that wants one, just let us know. Yeah, and the thing is, I have a request though, what's that? It'd be a cut off one, and we would get to see you in. And given that you've embraced the European lifestyle, I'm expecting speedos while you do it, so that is the look we're looking for, the t-shirt, the speedos, the whole nine yards. You're looking good, buddy. You'll be able to pull it off. It'll be good. It's good. You've ever seen those two guys that do electronic music, that just spin records, and they sit around with their cigarettes, and they, I don't know where they're from. Absolutely. I'm going to grab a pack of smokes, a side dish, and the t-shirt, and the speedo, and spin some records. And I'll just get a little stash. A little stash. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Those guys are awesome, by the way. Did you see that there was the Euro? They had people, there was a new contest for potential, what, what should be on the Euro. And there was one with those two guys, I don't know their names, it's someone to help me out and tell me their names in the comments or whatever. Love those guys, they're awesome. I would love, you know what? We generally don't get off topic guests, but if those guys want to come on the show and talk to us about what their investments are, 100%. Is there anything else in terms of seriousness to why do I forget to talk about? Oh gosh, what chart did you forget to argue? You did the dollar, you did the bonds, you did most of the commodity, you didn't do crude oil. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. All right. Crude oil. You know what it is? It's all you do is talk about crude oil on that other show. Yeah. Obviously. So you're just like, I don't want to talk about crude oil. So by the way, what are time spreads doing? And what's the inventories? So let's, let's talk crude oil here for a moment. And what's interesting, obviously the collapse back in May and June, did one of the most spectacular wash outs of crude oil traders. And we talked about it in the last episode when we look at a contract positioning, but there was a substantial build in short contracts in crude oil to the magnitude that they went from like 170,000 to 230,000 contracts, grows short, like they were building short cells into it. And more importantly, the longs got squeezed out, you know, close to 400,000 contracts, gross, long and literally 25% of the contracts were forced to close out during that collapse in there. So there was a serious pivot in positioning. What's interesting is that we've never seen either of the sides get shaken out from where they're stabilized. The shorts are still short and the longs never came back. And the funny thing is, is that the crude oil markets continue to be very tight. Inevitably, they're going to let more oil through the straight and there's all these going to different things happening. I heard two hundred chips last night. Sorry. Did you? Yeah. That's a lot of chips. You know, and I got it inside from the White House. So I don't even know if you're joking or not, but anyway, but the point being that irrespective, there is a very tight market. And even if they're meeting some of the most immediate demand to prevent they're being a huge spike. The one thing I want to highlight is that it's very, very unlikely that the sustainable fair value of oil belongs down under $70 for the foreseeable intermedia period. And we're at a higher shelf of oil price, which is probably $80 to $90 oil staying up here in these kind of market conditions is probably the upper shelf, like the where oil should probably be in the for the rest of the year. And so what's interesting is that they're really with so many people short and so few longs being rebuilt. When we started to sell off, not only back in August, but again, here at the end of August, there's no one to shake out. And so the selloffs are not following through on the downside and that's a great way of putting a Patrick. There's no one to shake out because nobody's long. No one's long. Well, there's longs. But no one really is. Like, there isn't. Yeah. It isn't thing. And and so while I don't know whether I want to be in that camp that it's imminent that we're going to 100, what I feel increasingly confident in saying is that we're not going lower. Like that, like that, this, this is the place, this is the upper shelf. This is now where fair value is for oil. And even if there is attempts by powers, I beat around the world to suppress oil from going higher, I don't think that they really want oil down at 70 or 60. They just don't want oil at 150 going to 200. And so I think it's very realistic that, you know, we bounce around in the 80 to 90 range without liars that we go to 100 if the conditions warrant it. But I feel like it's asymmetric here because I don't see oil going back to 70 or 60. And so here, it's a great income writing vehicle. High implied probably definable downside risk or manageable downside risk, let's just say. And you know, you can harvest premium, you can do all sorts of, I think you can lean on the fact that stable. But what is particularly noteworthy is energy stocks structurally stay quite bullish. Which is this higher shelf means that all of these companies are being reprised for more sustainable profits on a longer term basis because we're not going back to, you know, unprofitable levels of shale and all this other stuff that goes into the calculus. And so I actually would say you have to be super bullish energy stocks and be more neutral oil itself, where, where, like oil is going to be up here and sticking around, but energy stocks, they could have another 30% run this year. Like, I think you have to play from the equity side from your lips to God's ears. I love it. Well, we agree, which means it's not going to work. Yeah, that's true. But I've held that forever. I mean, holy, like I've been trying not to look at my energy stocks, I love them. And I kept hearing you talk about this top shelf stuff, like, isn't that what you, like, I'm not a big boozer like you, isn't that what you talk about? about like the good Scott you get the top shelf stuff. Yeah, yeah, just a higher shelf. I meant to say a top shelf. Just a higher shelf. It is the market handle after we're not top shelf. We're not top shelf in this one. All right, Kevin, let's, let's give it a wrap. That's, that's, that was a good go. Okay, thanks for tuning in folks. Where can we find out more about you and your top shelf analysis? Well, thank you. You can find me at bigpicturetrading.com, but definitely want to keep pushing people like check out the COTS signal. We, you know, dot com. We built it for free. There's no strings attached. There's no like hit shit, hit behind paywalls. It's just information that we wanted to share. And you know, I've felt that COT reports were very intimidating because no one simplified it. Everyone made these COT reports. This thing that you have to decrypt. And so nine out of 10 people would see it and walk away. The whole goal was to make the information palatable and so people can more easily draw conclusions as to what's happening in the market. So take advantage of it. Check it out. And, Kevin, where can they find you, buddy? Oh, they can go to the macro tours.com. Listen, bear market bull market. We're just happy to spend some time together on this crazy ride. And that's stick around for the after show. Here comes Danny. But by the way, just announced with everyone like we are. Wow, what the hell happened, Danny? You know what he looks like for those who don't look at them. People are listening. But you know that episode of a sign thought when Kramer is beside the Katie Rogers Roasters and his entire apartment turns red, that's basically what Danny's experiencing. Kitty Rogers Roasters is coming next door and just Google that episode. And that's all you need to know when you're thinking of what's going on at Danny's place. Sorry, guys. No worries. But listen, I just wanted to let our listeners know that the next couple episodes are going to have to be, we'll be more unique because we have pack schedules and things are less available for all of us. But the rest is sure that the huddle will be huddling all winter long. We're just, at least I'm on a bit of a vacation in the next little bit. So we'll see how it all goes. There will be a show in a couple of weeks, but it'll be an interview only. We have a great guest and I'm looking forward to it. So we will get that. And then I will be away for the next one. And the question is is Patrick Lazy and just doesn't make sure there'll be something. There's going to be something. Okay, there'll be something. But anyways, let's do this beer, buddy. Yeah, what's that? Yeah, the prickly pear. It's great. I thought it was the prickly bear, but much better. You know, it, look, that was warm. No, you know what? No, I'm not going to pretend. I'm not going to pretend. Okay, what is it? I'm just going to give it a mid. I'm going to give it a 6.2. It wasn't horrible, but I know. If you're like that guy that's on the internet, calling Scarlett Johansson a mid. Let's face it. Oh, I'm shopping all the time. What? Okay. Also, Kevin, the people you are referring to, these guys, they're called, oh, there we go. I don't even need to wait. You know them. What's their names? My mind to enterprises and they have a song called Negroni Love. They actually, they hold the Negroni and the, and the, and the cigarette. I think they're both Italian. Yeah, they're awesome. So this is some of them. Yeah. Yeah. It's all me LinkedIn. I think Pat could pull that off. Yeah, I think I can 100% pull that out. He's got to get the staff with his feet on it. Yeah. And like the 1980 style, bad clothes looks like they're in my vice. That could be Kevin. We'll get you a week. Yeah, for sure. I'll wear a wig. I'm not proud. I got the bod. Are you talking about the guy with the stash? Because actually, that's my also got the same bod as him. So actually, I'm just gonna, I should grow the stash, get the glasses and just put on the things, the shorts. It's the, the shorts and stuff that, and they're high. And then the other guy, he likes the acid wash jeans. Anyways, they're just awesome. Love these guys. Great. Yeah, it's a good song. Negroni Love. Check it out. Okay, they're going to love it. I'm looking it up right now. And listen, open invitation if they want to come and talk to about their portfolios. All right. All right. Is there anything else? I guess that's it. I don't have anything to say. You guys have anything to say? Got any big plans? Yeah, no, I'm gonna head out to Costa Brava again. I'm in Spain. I love it there. So I'm gonna go and spend a week there right before Labor Day and chill out on the beach and the coast. It's a little hidden gem. It's the, it's the Spanish version of the French Riviera. So it's super cool. That's good. And Danny, how about you like, once you get away from the Kenny Rodgers, he's going to surf camp. He is going to surf. Maybe. Oh, wow. I'm going to camp. That's good. Where are you going? Is like, there's a legacy. Oh, well, there you go. I should join you. We should like learn how to surf. But I did, I did recently go to Nazare and I did recently check it out. It's pretty awesome. I would recommend anybody going there just to stand on the lighthouse and see this, to see the waves pounding. Yeah, it's, it's pretty not. Well, you know what I did. So there's another famous wave. And I can't remember the name of it. It's in Maui and it's, it's known as Jaws, but there's another world. But to get to it, it's like, it's probably half an hour of like driving your car on like back road Maui roads. And like along the way, there's like burnt out cars. And you literally feel like, and I was there with my kids in my wife like driving. And then we were going to get like, you know, like mug because it just feels like it's another world because it's just so missed it. But then you get there and you're like, holy shit, like it wasn't even going off. And you were like, oh my God, that's scary. I can't imagine what it's like. And getting in is just crazy. Like even to get there, then they have to get totally in. It's, it's a huge production. So yeah, how do I say it? Nazare, Nazare, Nazare, Nazare. That at least seems to be like, you can go watch it nicely without having to risk your life to get in. But yeah, it's very like, it's a whole spectacle. You can really stand up and see everything. It's a very, very cool city to go and visit. Oh, I got it. It's like, because there's another one in Hawaii called Hukipa. And that's much more civilized. So you can go watch it and stuff like that. But that's not the real big place, the real big places. Yeah. Okay. Well, yeah. So listen, you do well at your camp. You know, one time at surf camp, one time at the band camp. Yeah, that's it. Yeah. I'm jealous. It's going to be a lot of fun. I'm sure. Yeah. Chili, thank you. Everyone have a great, you know, last little bit of the summer. And I'll see you in a few episodes. Patrick, I'll see you in two. Absolutely. Okay, everyone. Take care. Thanks everyone. Be safe. Bye bye.