Share on social media:

Episode 1218 of Bitcoin And . . . is LIVE!

Topics for today: 

• JPMorgan Launches War on Bitcoin
• Polymarket Will Return to U.S.
• Just What is a "CME Gap"?
• Airsoft Grenade 'Crypto' Heist

Circle P:

 
Oshi
 Artisan pecan butter, date bars and chocolates
 Website: https://www.oshigood.us/products
nostr Profile: https://primal.net/p/nprofile1qqswp94gnm4epqsgjkndl4lnd8krzdj5u4mzuppdtxksdymkty63g7gdurlfc
 

Today's Articles:

 
https://bitcoinnews.com/markets/jpmorgan-backlash-strategys-bitcoin/

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/bitcoin-for-corporations/msci-singles-out-bitcoin-treasury-undercuts-benchmark-neutrality

https://www.coindesk.com/business/2025/11/25/polymarket-secures-cftc-approval-for-regulated-u-s-return

https://cointelegraph.com/explained/what-bitcoin-cme-gaps-are-and-how-they-influence-price-movements

https://atlas21.com/bitcoin-mining-profitability-declines-amid-record-hashrate-and-falling-price/

https://www.theblock.co/post/380354/kraken-krak-cashback-debit-card-salary-deposits-high-yield-vaults

https://decrypt.co/349954/russian-man-detonates-airsoft-grenades-in-botched-crypto-heist

Get You're Free Comfrey Owner's Manual Here:
https://www.bitcoinandshow.com/the-comfrey-owners-manual-is-here/

Find the Bitcoin And Podcast on every podcast app here:
https://episodes.fm/1438789088

Find me on nostr
npub1vwymuey3u7mf860ndrkw3r7dz30s0srg6tqmhtjzg7umtm6rn5eq2qzugd (npub)
6389be6491e7b693e9f368ece88fcd145f07c068d2c1bbae4247b9b5ef439d32 (Hex)

Twitter:
https://twitter.com/DavidB84567

StackerNews:
stacker.news/NunyaBidness

Podcasting 2.0:
fountain.fm/show/eK5XaSb3UaLRavU3lYrI

Apple Podcasts:
tinyurl.com/unm35bjh

Mastodon:
https://noauthority.social/@NunyaBidness

Support Bitcoin And . . . on Patreon:
patreon.com/BitcoinAndPodcast

Find Lightning Network Channel partners here:
https://t.me/+bj-7w_ePsANlOGEx (Nodestrich)
https://t.me/plebnet (Plebnet)

Music by:
Flutey Funk Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

[00:00:02] David Bennett:

It is 10:20AM   Pacific Standard Time. It is the November   2025,   and this is episode twelve eighteen of Bitcoin. And what the hell is MSCI   anyway?   That's gonna be the major theme of the first part of today's show.   We are gonna cover   the whole boycott issue that's going on with JPMorgan, what MSCI really is,   why it's an issue for   for Michael Sandler's strategy.   And then we are gonna get off off of that, and we're gonna run over, and we're gonna talk about Polymarket. We've got some news on Polymarket. Then in the second part of the show,   what the hell is a CME gap?  

What is it? What people are always talking about these gaps, especially when it comes to, oh my god. It's the Bitcoin gap.   It's high time we kind of get some kind of primer on what the hell a CME gap is because people continuously talk about it, so we might as well know what the hell it is.   Bitcoin mining got a little bit of a report here. We got some profitability   declines.   Kraken is selling crack.   That should be a lot of fun, but not not as much fun   as a Russian guy   who uses airsoft grenades   to try to rob   crypto.  

I didn't even know Airsoft made a grenade, but, hey, let's let's start back at the front where we need to be.   Bitcoin news, NEMA is writing this one. Boycott   JP Morgan   strategy and MSCI index.   What the hell's going on?   That yeah. Exactly. That's my question. So let's let's take a deep dive into this MSCI   business   boycotts,   not listing strategy.   What the hell does it all mean? Because I kinda think it's a little bit I think it's a little connected.   So a major dispute has grown between the Bitcoin community and traditional banking after JPM Morgan   or, well, JPMorgan warned   that strategy could be removed   from major stock indexes,   and that's that's the meat and potatoes of what's going on here.  

This warning upset many Bitcoin supporters who see it as another attempt by big financial institutions to limit the growth of the scarce digital asset.   In a recent research,   JPMorgan   said that   MSCI,   a company that manages major market indices,   may remove strategy and other companies that hold large amounts of Bitcoin.   If that happens,   many investment funds that follow these index indexes   may be forced   forced   to sell the stock.   This could cause billions of dollars in automatic selling and hurt strategy share price even more. Many Bitcoin supporters reacted quickly and angrily. Fred Krueger,   coauthor   of The Big Bitcoin Book and The Staunch Bitcoin Advocate, highlighted the event adding, quote,   the enemy has a name.  

It's the banking system.   Real estate investor and Bitcoin advocate Grant Cardone   said he, quote, pulled $20,000,000   from Chase   and is suing them for credit card malfeasance.   Another well known BTC supporter, Max Keiser, encouraged people to crash JPMorgan and buy strategy in BTC   online   calls for or rather,   online calls to boycott JPMorgan   began spreading fast.   So many Bitcoin supporters have long believed   that big banks criticize Bitcoin in public while quietly building their own blockchain systems in the background.   This has created   distress that helped fuel the latest backlash.  

They also believe that banks are using the idea of blockchain to create their own centralized versions of digital assets,   which defeats the entire purpose of Bitcoin,   its decentralization   and resistance   to manipulation   and censorship.   Strategy's executive chairman, Michael Saylor,   has made several public statements defending the company. He said that strategy should not be seen as just a company that owns Bitcoin. He explained, quote, strategy and and I've we've got through this one before.   Strategy is not a fund, not a trust, and not a holding company.   We're a publicly traded operating company with a $500,000,000   software business and a unique treasury strategy that uses Bitcoin as productive capital, end quote.  

Then Saylor stressed that strategy raises capital,   builds financial products, and is actively creating new Bitcoin backed financial tools, something he says traditional funds do not do.   Saylor highlighted that no passive fund   or holding company can match what strategy has achieved.   Even though Saylor is confident in the company's future, Saylor has been facing strong market pressure. The stock price has dropped more sharp more sharply than Bitcoin, and this has made investors rather nervous.   Strategy's business model   works best when its stock trades at a higher value than the Bitcoin that it owns because   that allows the company to raise money more easily without hurting existing shareholders.  

This metric   comparing the value of the company's shares to its Bitcoin holdings is called MNAV.   As the stock price falls closer to the value of its Bitcoin holdings and MNAV approaches the number one,   that becomes more difficult to do.   Despite the recent market drop, strategy's massive Bitcoin investment is still profitable.   The company holds more than 649,000   BTC at an average cost of 74,000   per coin.   Even with the price pullback, the position remains in profit.   However,   analysts warn   that if MSCI   removes   strategy from major indices,   it could force large funds to sell the stock, and that could trigger even more selling and push BTC   and strategy stock price lower   as well.  

While some investors are worried, many in the Bitcoin community are using the situation to reinforce   their long term belief in Bitcoin.   The movement,   driven by hashtag boycott JPM   and boycott JPMorgan   hashtags on x,   has continued to grow   as many users encourage people to move money away from traditional banks. And in the meantime,   Michael Saylor also made his position clear posting,   quote, I won't back down.   Okay.   So that's that's sort of the gist of the the strategy part   of MSCI.   So I think it's a good chance for us to figure   out why why do we care?  

What is MSCI?   Has anybody ever heard of MSCI   really before today?   And the answer is probably no.   Unless you're a professional investor or in big finance or something. If you're just like a a general pleb on the street, you're probably like me going,   what the hell is MSCI? Where did this come from? Why is it important now? Well, it turns out that JPMorgan   is attached to MSCI   because MSCI   is   Morgan Stanley   Capital International.   It is a financial services company that provides investment tools, including a suite of well known global stock indexes, that's what we've been talking about,   data analytics, and, of course, ESG   Research. These indexes,   such as   MSCI World   and MSCI   Emerging Market Indexes, are widely,   widely,   widely used   as benchmarks by investors to measure and track the performance of different global markets.  

MSCI   also offers tools for portfolio analysis and sustainability solutions for investors, including pension funds, asset managers,   and banks.   So there's three major indexes   that MSCI   uses, and they're best known for the equity and fixed income indexes,   which are used by fund managers to benchmark investment performance.   So the three main examples of this is MSCI   World Index covering large and mid cap companies   across 23   developed markets.   Then there's MSCI   All Country World Index   including both developed and emerging market countries.   And then there's MSCI   Emerging Markets Index   tracking the performance of stocks in 25 fast growing emerging market countries.  

That's what MSCI is. It's part of JPMorgan.   It was the I mean,   Morgan Stanley used to stand alone   long, long, long, long time ago. They got absorbed, I guess, into j   JPMorgan.   You know, I don't know exactly how that works, except that one thing that is I'm sure of is that JPMorgan   essentially is,   in essence,   MSCI.   So it's JPMorgan calling the shots here.   At at the very end of the day, it's it's JPMorgan   calling the shots, and they want to remove   strategy   and other Bitcoin treasury companies   from these indexes   altogether.  

Let's   dive into this a little bit more with this one written by Nick Ward out of Bitcoin magazine entitled   Short Sided Shift   at MSCI   Singles Out Bitcoin Treasury Companies and Undercuts Benchmark   Neutrality.   MSCI is considering a new rule   that would remove companies   from its global investment market indexes   if 50% or more of their assets are held in digital assets such as Bitcoin.   The proposal appears simple, but the implications are far reaching.   It would affect companies like Strategy   and Eric and Donald Trump Junior's American Bitcoin Corporation and dozens of others across global markets whose business models are fully legitimate,   fully regulated, and fully aligned with long standing corporate treasury practices.  

The purpose of this document is to explain what MSCI is proposing,   why the concerns raised around Bitcoin treasury companies are overstated,   and why excluding these firms would undermine benchmark neutrality, reduce representativeness,   and introduce more instability,   not less, into the indexing system.   So   number one,   what MSCI   is actually proposing.   MSCI   launched a consultation   to determine whether companies whose primary activity involves Bitcoin or other digital asset treasury management   should be excluded from its flagship equity indices if   their digital asset holdings exceed   50 of total assets.  

The proposed implementation date is February   2026,   so very soon.   The proposal would sweep in a broad set of companies,   strategy,   American Bitcoin Corporation,   and all miners' infrastructure firms and diversified operating companies that use Bitcoin as a long term inflation hedge or capital reserve.   These companies are all publicly traded   operating entities   with audited financials, real products, real customers, and established governance.   None are Bitcoin ETFs.   Their only distinction is a treasury strategy that includes a liquid   globally traded asset.  

Number two,   the JPMorgan   warning and the reality behind it.   JPMorgan   analysts recently warned that strategy could face up to $2,800,000,000   in passive outflows   if MSCI,   which JPMorgan   owns,   let's just call it like it is,   they own it,   if MSCI   removes it from its indices   and up to 8,800,000,000.0   if other index providers follow.   Their analysis correctly identifies the mechanical nature of passive outflows, but it misses the real context.   Strategy has traded more than $1,000,000,000,000   worth of volume this year.   The catastrophic, and that's in quotes, $2,800,000,000   scenario represents   less than one average trading day,   12%   of a typical week,   3% of a typical month, and point 26%   of a year to date trading flow.  

In liquidity terms,   it's immaterial.   The narrative of a liquidity crisis does not match market structure reality. The larger issue is not the outflow itself.   It's the precedent   that index exclusion would set.   If benchmark providers begin removing companies because of the composition of their treasury assets, the definition of what qualifies   as an eligible company becomes political   and not financial.   Number three,   a contradiction on MSCI's   own balance sheet.   MSCI's   policy position also conflicts with the composition of MSCI's   very own assets.  

MSCI   reports   roughly $5,300,000,000   in total assets.   More than 70%   of that, about 3,700,000,000.0,   is goodwill and intangible   assets.   These are nonliquid,   nonmarketable accounting entities or rather entries that cannot be sold or market or marked to market. They are not verifiable in the same way that digital assets are. Bitcoin, by contrast, trades globally twenty four seven,   has transparent price discovery, is fully auditable and mark to market,   is more liquid than nearly any corporate treasury asset outside of sovereign cash.   The proposal would penalize companies for holding an asset that is far more liquid,   far more transparent,   and objectively priced   than the intangibles   that dominates   MSCI's   very own balance sheet.  

Number four,   how the proposal violates benchmark principles.   MSCI is a global standard setter.   Its benchmarks are used by trillions of dollars in capital allocation.   These indices are governed by widely accepted principles, neutrality, representativeness,   and stability.   The proposed digital asset threshold   contradicts   all three of those.   Benchmarks   must avoid arbitrary discrimination among lawful business strategies. Companies are not removed for holding   large cash positions,   gold reserves,   foreign exchange reserves, commodities, real estate, or receivables that exceed 50% of assets.   Digital assets are the only treasury assets singled out for exclusion.  

Bitcoin is legal, regulated, and widely held by institutions worldwide.   Indices are meant to reflect investable markets, not curate them.   Bitcoin treasury strategies are increasingly used by corporations of all sizes   as a long term capital preservation tool.   Removing these companies reduce the accuracy and completeness of MSCI's   indices, giving investors a distorted view   of the corporate landscape.   The 50% threshold creates a binary cliff effect.   Bitcoin routinely moves 10 to 20% in normal trading.   A company could fall in and out of an index eligibility multiple times a year due simply   to price action forcing   unnecessary turnover,   additional tracking errors,   higher fund implementation   cost.  

Index providers typically avoid rules that amplify volatility.   This rule   would actually introduce it.   Number five,   the market impact of exclusion.   Forced selling. If MSCI proceeds, passive index funds would need to sell holdings in affected companies, yet the real world impact is marginal because strategy and ABTC   are highly liquid. That's that American Bitcoin,   trading company from from the Trump people, ABTC.   Flow represents a tiny fraction of normal trading volume.   Active managers   are free to continue holding or increasing exposure.   Then we have access to capital.  

Analysts warn that exclusion can signal risk, but markets adapt quickly as long as a company is liquid,   transparent,   able to raise capital, and able to communicate its treasury policy.   It remains investable.   Index exclusion   is an inconvenience,   not   a structural impairment.   If MSCI embeds asset based exclusion rules, it sets a template for removing companies based on their savings   decisions   rather than their, you know, business fundamentals.   That is a path toward politicizing   global benchmarks.   Number six,   the global competitiveness   problem.  

Bitcoin treasury strategies are expanding internationally.   Meta Planet in Japan, Aethnio in Germany, Capital b in Europe,   multiple mining and infrastructure firms in Latin America, and then you've got in North America, strategy, ABTC,   miners,   energy Bitcoin hybrids.   If MSCI   excludes these companies disproportionately,   US and Western companies are placed at a competitive disadvantage   relative to jurisdictions that embrace digital capital.   Indices   are meant to reflect   markets,   not pick national winners and losers.   Number seven, MSCI   already knows that exclusion   creates   distortion.  

MSCI's recent handling of Meta Planet's public offering shows it understands the risks of reverse turnover.   To avoid risk or rather index churn, MSCI   chose not to implement the event at the time of offering.   This acknowledgment underscores a broader truth.   Rigid rules can destabilize   indices.   A digital asset threshold creates   similar fragility on a much larger scale.   Eight,   better alternatives   exist.   MSCI can achieve transparency and analytical clarity without excluding lawful operating companies.   Enhanced disclosure.   You could require standardized reporting of digital asset holdings and public filings.  

This gives investors clarity without altering index compositions.   Classification   or subsector labels.   You could add a category such as digital asset treasury integrated   to help investors differentiate   business models.   Then there's liquidity and governance screens.   If concerns are about liquidity, governance, or volatility,   MSCI should use the criteria   it already applies uniformly across sectors,   none of which require exclusion.   Nine,   why the proposal should be withdrawn.   The proposal does not solve any real problem. It creates   several.  

It reduces   representativeness   of global indices.   It violates neutrality by discriminating   discriminating   against a specific treasury asset.   It introduces   instability through a binary threshold tied to an asset with normal volatility,   it creates unnecessary   turnover for passive funds,   it damages   global competitiveness,   sets a precedent   for politicized   index   construction.   Companies should not be penalized for saving money or for choosing   a long term treasury asset that is more liquid, more transparent,   and more objectively priced than most corporate intangibles.   Indexes must reflect markets as they are, not as gatekeepers prefer them to be.  

MSCI should withdraw the proposal and maintain the neutrality that has made its benchmarks trusted   across global capital markets.   Okay. That's the end of that article.   Before we move on to other things,   please remember   that yesterday, I told you   about Jack Mallers,   the CEO of Strike, having his personal accounts   basically obliterated   by JPMorgan.   He no longer is able to do business with JPMorgan   at the personal level.   MSCI   is JPMorgan.   Do the math.   This is an attack.   This is an attack spearheaded by JPMorgan.   JPMorgan   has more tools in their toolbox to do more damage to anything than probably   most other banks,   maybe not as bad as HSBC   or or or Deutsche Bank or something like that. But these guys,   they all run-in the same circles. JPMorgan   looks to be doing a complete about face on their position   on Bitcoin because for the last few months, they've kind of been   they've been kind of signaling that they're okay.  

Maybe we should back off. Maybe we should look at this. Maybe we maybe we should let our investors   invest in this.   But now   this MSCI business,   and then I especially when I couple it to the Jack Mallers situation,   all I see   is an attack.   This is not prompted by something that's necessary   like this last article says.   Where where where where where is where did it end this hold on for a second.   Where did it say?   Yeah. The proposal does not solve a real problem.   It creates several. How would you like like, let let's say it this way.   You have Bitcoin on your balance sheet, but it only represents   on the day that the MSCI rule. Let's say they vote on it and they say yes.  

If you have 50% or more   Bitcoin on your balance sheet, you are no longer in any of the MSCI   index indexes,   and many other indexes might follow. And companies that are that are using the MSCI to balance their balance sheets or their what their   their own treasuries   might start selling stuff like, you know, any Bitcoin they have on their balance sheet, plus any strategy, plus any Bitcoin ETF, and it just   it goes that way. But let's say that you are MSCI listed,   and you have 25   let's okay. Let's say 35% of your treasury is represented by Bitcoin.   Well, you you're good.  

You're totally fine.   Until we see a run up in Bitcoin, which we see all the time.   And all of a sudden, one day, you wake up   and you, by the MSCI rules,   suddenly need to take action. You need to get on the phone. You need to call all your lawyers and say   that you you're gonna be delisted.   What do you do? So it just it would cause a sell off of the Bitcoins so that you could become in compliance   with the MSCI   rules or whatever we want to call them, the the standards.   And then the very next day,   Bitcoin price drops again. And now you're at 25%   of your treasury being represented by Bitcoin.  

This is ridiculous.   This makes this actually   makes no sense at all for MSCI to do, and it makes no sense at all for anybody who uses MSCI   to continue using those indices   as anything that represents   even possible truth in the market.   So why is it being done?   JPMorgan   is using MSCI   as a blunt force   instrument   to beat Bitcoin to death.   That's that's what they're trying to do.   It it's almost a a last gasp.   This will continue.   This gets worse.   Everybody who does business with JPMorgan   should actually pull out and boycott JPMorgan.   Sorry. I'm sorry if you don't like that, but it's just the way that we're gonna have to operate here,   in the future and beyond.  

[email protected],   you can get yourself some hollow butter.   Oh, hollow butter is so good. He doesn't have any of the coffee,   hollow butter, but he does has have his regular hollow butter. It is made from ground pecans, maple sugar,   sea salt flakes, cinnamon, and black pepper. And that cinnamon and black pepper gives it just that god. It just gives it that edge to where you can use it on all kinds of neat stuff. You can use it in cooking. You can use it just on simply on toast like my wife likes it. Or you can use it on cooked steak. That was the one that really blew my mind when somebody sent a picture on Nostr   showing a perfectly   perfectly   cooked steak. I mean, it would have beautiful   crust on it. Oh my god. It looked luscious   With a big old dollop of oshi   huddle butter right on top. Now   can't taste it through Noster, but the dude swears up and down that it just it set everything on fire. He just just absolutely loved it. So go get yourself some Huddle butter   at oshigood.us.  

That's oshigood.us.   When you do, please use the coupon code Bitcoin and   so that Oshi understands that I made a sale for him here on Circle p. It's where I bring plebs with goods and services just like you to plebs just like   you who want to buy those goods and services. But you will be buying into Bitcoin because if you're not selling into Bitcoin,   you're not in the circle p. That's oshigood.us.   Use coupon code Bitcoin and   let's move on over to Polymarket   because   there's news.   Polymarket   has secured   CFTC   approval   for regulated   United States return.  

Oliver Knight is writing this one from CoinDesk.   Polymarket received an amended order of designation   from the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission or CFTC clearing the way for the prediction market platform platform   to operate as a fully regulated United States platform. Polymarket is   one.   They're coming back. The approval granted Monday and announced on Tuesday allows Polymarket to offer   intermediated   access. Wow. That's an interesting word to use. In The United States, meaning bettors,   you mean degenerate gamblers, will be able to participate through futures commission merchants and traditional brokerage channels.   The designation brings Polymarket under the full regulatory framework applied to federally supervised exchanges, including   enhanced surveillance, market supervision standards, clearing procedures, and part 16   reporting obligations, quote,   people rely on Polymarket because we provide clarity.  

Where there is confusion,   founder and CEO Shane Kopplin said in a press release, adding that the decision reflects growing regulatory acceptance of prediction markets   as a mature   financial product. Dude,   gambling is not a mature financial product.   I'm I'm sorry. It just it just is or isn't. Whatever. The company said last month   that it expected to open its doors in The United States in November after access was shut off to US citizens   in 2022.   Let's get back to this intermediated,   let's see where exactly was it? Yeah. PolyMarkets to offer intermediated   access in The United States.  

So I presume that means that you can't just go to polymarket.com   and and place your degenerate bet,   that you'll have to actually go through an intermediary   to be able to do that. So what does that mean? Well, that means that it's gonna be a that's a huge friction point to people who just want to immediately go degenerately gamble away all of their money.   That's what that means. So   at least   at least there's a stopgap measure to you know? That way, you you get a second a second chance not to destroy your life through degenerate gambling. There's a there's a stop gap measure that makes you think, do I really wanna do this?   You know? Instead of just being able to go to polymarket.com   and just throw down, you know, $10,000   on, I don't know, who's gonna eat a hot dog at the baseball game. No. Seriously, shit like that actually happens.  

Hey. Let's run the numbers.   CNBC   futures and commodities and energy has taken it on the chin in a big, big way, and there's a huge reason for that.   West Texas crude oil futures fell more than 2.5%   to $57.20   a barrel on Tuesday,   which is the lowest price in five weeks   as reports suggested that Ukraine   has agreed   to terms of a revised peace deal aimed at ending the war with Russia.   Zelensky   said talks with The US are continuing while Russia's position remains unclear.   It's unclear.   So did they negotiate a peace deal or did they not?   Negotiations in Geneva and parallel US Russia meetings in Abu Dhabi reflect intense diplomacy   even as overnight   air strikes highlight ongoing tensions.  

So Russia's still bombing the living crap out of Ukraine, yet   oil   tanks   because it's been suggested   that Ukraine has agreed to a peace deal.   Why would you   agree to a peace deal when you're still being bombed?   None of this makes sense, but it really racked   energy.   Murbaughn crude is down 2.14%.   Brent Norsee is down one seven five.   West Texas Intermediate right now is down 1.82%.   Natural gas, not even acting as a hedge today. It is down 4.62%.   Gasoline down 2 and a half to a buck   84 a gallon. Wow. I haven't seen prices that low in a long time.   However, metals are doing very well today.  

Palladium is only one in the red, down point 15%.   Gold is up, 1%. Platinum is up point seven. Silver is up 1%.   Copper is up 1% as well. Ag is fully mixed today, mostly in the green, though.   Biggest loser is rough rice, down 1.6%.   Biggest winner of the day is coffee up one and a third. And then we have live cattle, which is down slightly 0.06%.   Lean hogs down a third. Feeder cattle up point 77%.   Meanwhile,   S and P is up point seven, Nasdaq is up a quarter, Dow is up one and a quarter, and the S and P Mini is up one and two thirds points.   Looking at a price of 87,450   or no. $460   for Bitcoin. That is a $1,700,000,000,000   market cap. You can get 21.1   ounces of shiny metal rocks with our one Bitcoin of which there are 19,953,379.29   of   Average fees per block are low, 0.02   BTC taken in fees on a per block basis.  

It looks to be about thirty,   thirty two blocks carrying 66,000   unconfirmed transactions waiting to clear at high priority rates of three sats per v byte. Low priority gets you in at one.   Hash rate is still in Zeta Hash territory, but slightly lower, 1.04   Zeta Hash's   per second   at   this time. From Rich Dad Poor Dad, Kaz Pieland with 1,600   sets says boost.   Jason High with two fifty says Kiyosaki is very rich   and old.   His wife left him a few years ago, and he has no kids.   If I was in his shoes, I would start using my wealth to enjoy life and for charity.   That's a good point. Nick underscore dose. No. It's not Nick underscore dose. It's just Nick dose.  

A 100 and 9 sats says cheers.   Thank you, sir. With a thousand sats says Kiyosaki is right,   sort of.   He turned his savings into an investment. Thank you, sir. No. Thank you. Pies with one twenty one says thank you, sir.   No. Thank you. And that is the weather report.   Welcome to part two of the news that you can use. What the hell is a Bitcoin CME gap? Well, we're about to find out with Marcel Dear   out of Cointelegraph.   If you ever wondered what Bitcoin CME gaps are and how they influence price movements, well, here you go.   What are   Bitcoin   CME gaps?  

The Chicago Mercantile Exchange,   the CME,   gap appears when the price of Bitcoin changes between Friday's closing price   and Monday's opening price   on the CME Bitcoin futures market.   Price movements over the weekend when no CME trading takes place   creates a disconnect on the chart. These gaps often draw attention because they tend to be filled   once the market reopens.   Let's look at an example.   If Bitcoin closes at a $109,880   on the CME on Friday evening   and the price rallies over the weekend,   the market might reopen on Monday at a 110,380.   That is a $500   gap.  

No trading occurs during this period, And on financial charts, it shows up as a literal blank space.   CME gaps   fall into two categories,   a gap up when Bitcoin opens higher on Monday than it closed on Friday, and that signals buying pressure over the weekend.   And then there's the gap down   where BTC opens lower than Friday's close, indicating that weekend selling was stronger.   Okay.   That's the the quick and dirty.   So why do they matter?   The first point is that CME Bitcoin futures are a major channel for institutional investors, hedge funds, pension funds, and other traditional financial participants.   The CME   allows them to gain exposure to Bitcoin in a regulated environment, which is different   from the conditions on unregulated   crypto exchanges.  

This is because the CME   operates under Commodity Futures Trading Commission oversight   and provides legal clarity for large institutions.   Since CME Bitcoin futures are cash settled,   investors do not need to handle BTC directly, which removes concern about custody,   private   keys, security, etcetera, etcetera. In addition,   the CME is a long established derivatives platform that deals   in far more than just crypto. Institutions   are already familiar with its infrastructure, and they benefit   from the deep liquidity that helps them execute large orders efficiently.   With such large amounts of capital involved, CME gaps can create both opportunities and risks for experienced market participants. These gaps   can offer context   about how the market has behaved and how traders interpret short term price dynamics.  

Bitcoin tends to fill these gaps relatively quickly, and this can lead to several knock on effects, like   price corrections occurring as liquidity returning   when the CME market reopens.   Then we have CME gaps can act as strong support or resistance levels, helping traders identify potential breakout areas or bounce zones.   If BTC   does not fill the gap quickly,   it may suggest that momentum is strong in the opposite direction.   When the price moves away from the gap instead of towards it, it is worth monitoring   closely closely.  

Here's another example.   On 11/18/2025,   Bitcoin filled an anticipated   92,000   CME gap.   Analysts noted that once the gap was filled, the intermediate downside for BTC appeared limited in the short term.   This happens because the gap was filled almost immediately after the market opened suggesting a potential support zone   following a week of downward selling pressure.   While near instant gap fills   can offer more clarity for traders, this type of quick reaction does not always occur.   For example, on 07/25/2025,   the CME BTC futures market reopened with a notable $1,770   gap.  

In this case, the gap did not fill for more than sixteen   hours.   This type of delay is rare and raises concerns   about market structure and efficiency. For traders, it introduced psychological pressures   and increased uncertainty   around buying decisions for both institutional and retail participants.   In simple terms,   this disconnect adds another layer of risk   because it makes Bitcoin's   short term volatility   harder to anticipate.   So   if CME,   BTC futures gaps provide additional market   context,   they can inform how traders approach their analysis or decision making. To do this,   the first step is identifying   the gap.  

This involves checking CME Bitcoin futures charts to locate any weekend price disconnects.   When using this information, traders often look for clues, like when the current BTC price is above a gap, some traders will watch for signs of a possible move downward.   When the price is below a gap, traders may monitor for signs of a possible move upward.   These are general observations rather than guaranteed outcomes. They involve risk, and price behavior can vary depending on broader market conditions.   Risk management is important in any trading approach, and many traders use position sizing and stop loss methods as part of their overall strategy.   Then there's a oh, just a couple of additional considerations here, gap sizing.  

Larger gaps   can result in wider price ranges which some traders consider important when assessing market behavior   there's volume confirmation   large gaps often   require strong trading volume to support the move and reduce the chance of a reversal.   Then we have market context.   In a ranging market, the probability of a gap fill is typically higher. In stronger trending markets, gaps may take longer to resolve.   So   there you go. That this this   article from Cointelegraph   actually answered quite a few questions for myself about   what the hell people are talking about when they talk about a CME gap   and the filling of that gap and why I even care.  

If you wanna go back over that, please remember all the URLs for all the stories are in the show notes.   This one is the one in the second part of the show, it'll be cointelegraph.com   forward slash explained,   forward / what Bitcoin CME gaps are, yada yada yada yada. Just click on that, and you can read it for yourself and get a real good feel on exactly what a CME gap is   in case you didn't get it the first time around. And if you didn't, no worries, man.   It takes me forever to figure this stuff out.   And that includes Bitcoin mining, where profitability has declined amid record hash rate and a falling   asset price from atlas21.com.  

According to a recent report from the miner Mag, the Bitcoin mining sector is going through a phase of economic   difficulty   marked by increasing intense competition   on the network and unfavorable market conditions,   miners are facing a complex situation.   While the network hash rate, the indicator that measures the total compute power dedicated to securing the network, reached an all time high   of 1.16   Zeta hashes per second in October,   the price of Bitcoin fell towards   81,000   in November.   Hash price, which represents miner's revenue per unit   of compute power, has fallen below $36   per hash,   placing it below the median   of $45   per petahash.  

Well,   I think there's a I think there's something wrong here.   It should be $36   per petahash,   placing it below the median   of $45   per petahash,   recorded by publicly listing mining companies. This decline is pushing several operators close to breakeven levels, putting the economic sustainability   of their operations at risk.   The report also highlights that the payback period for mining equipment is extended beyond twelve hundred days. Wow. That's a lot of time for return on investment.   While financing   costs continue to rise across the sector,   the deterioration   in conditions comes after a relatively stable third quarter during which hash price   averaged around $55   per petahash   supported by a Bitcoin price near 110,000.  

The increase in network competition and the drop in Bitcoin price in early November   has brought mining profitability to the lowest levels   ever recorded.   I I kinda doubt that, but whatever.   The financial challenges has been accompanied by increased debt among miners driven mainly by a wave of near zero coupon convertible bonds,   which were issued in the last quarter. All the chickens are coming home to roost, aren't they? Although miners are accelerating their transition towards artificial intelligence and HPC   or high performance compute,   revenues from these services remain too limited   to offset the sharp decline in mining related income according to the analysis. So miners under pressure,   at one point, I I expect to see under,   you know, sub Zeta hash hash rate on the on the network. But, man, I've been waiting for that for two weeks now, and it still hasn't occurred. So   we'll have to find out. But meanwhile, crack and push is crack.  

No. Seriously. They're calling it crack, k r a k k r a k. Kraken pushes crack as a bank alternative   with new cashback debit cards, salary deposits, and high yield vaults.   If you wanna piss off JPMorgan   even more, this is definitely the way to do it. By the way, this is out of the block dot c o written by James Hunt.   Kraken has begun a phased rollout of a cashback debit card, salary deposit, and expanded wealth tools for crack   as it looks to turn its new money app into an alternative to traditional bank accounts and neobanks   framing the upgrades as a way for customers to, quote, leave their bank behind and go all in on crypto while still accessing everyday payments   and savings.  

Kraken first launched Kraken in June,   aiming to compete with Venmo and PayPal by offering free local and international payments. In a statement on Tuesday,   the firm claimed that the crack app has since been downloaded more than 450,000   times in over 130   countries,   And already lets users send over 400 cash and crypto assets to more than 160   countries   with yield opportunities of up to 3.6%   on eligible assets.   Again, not making JPMorgan   and MSCI   happy. In a separate press briefing, Kraken executives said that the goal now   is to move beyond a starter feature set and turn crack into the money app you use by default combining spending,   sending, and saving in a single borderless   multi asset product.  

Quote, banking still isn't great.   What is money is changing.   Folks want more. They want access to yield. They want control and transparency. They want fully reserved   assets, and they want   rewards for how they store and spend   value,   says Kraken global head of consumer,   Mark Greenberg.   So, yeah,   it's gonna be interesting to see   how JPMorgan and the rest of the banking sector react to this one because Kraken is is   a large   exchange.   In fact, Kraken was around at the time of Mt. Gox. They were itty bitty in comparison, but Kraken's been around for a very, very, very, very, very long time.   And it looks like they've got, an increasing customer base, and this is exactly what JPMorgan   and, honestly, the rest of the banking lobby doesn't wanna see.  

They don't want   crypto companies and Bitcoin companies to be able to offer yield.   They don't want x. They don't want y. They don't want z. They don't want Kraken and Bitfinex and anybody else to be able to do a damn thing that even looks like what they do.   And this, again, I think, is feeding into JPMorgan's   last gasp   using the one tool in the shed   that has any potential left to do any damage at all, and that's that MSCI   business we talked about at the front of the show.   But let's talk about something fun.   A Russian man detonates   airsoft grenades in a botched crypto heist.  

Okay. Let's go, visbya v, probe to crypt.co.   A 21 year old Russian man has been arrested after reportedly storming a Saint Petersburg based crypto   exchange   armed with weapons to rob the platform.   I don't think he understands how this works. According to a local media report, the 21 year old man reportedly entered the exchange office   located   in an apartment hotel   on Kirk   I can't pronounce it. Kirkshawna Street on Saturday   and detonated   two   airsoft grenades   and then set off a smoke bomb before ordering staff to transfer all the available crypto to his wallet.   Experts   who inspected the blast remnants said that the suspect had used   airsoft   imitation grenades, which create commotion   without any real destructive force. Yeah. That's airsoft for you.  

Patrol police and security detained the suspect, seized two airsoft grenades, and now regional authorities are weighing preventative   measures as he faces serious robbery charges, the report says.   The botched heist comes amid a troubling global trend of violent attacks targeting crypto holders known as wrench attacks.   Quote, we expect it to get worse through 2026   unless privacy tools and global law enforcement coordination   scale fast, said David Richards, CEO   of Blockchain   Unmasked.   Recent attacks have turned deadly.   Earlier this month, convicted Russian crypto scammer Roman Novak and his wife Anna were murdered in The U A   UAE   after men posing as investors demanded access to his crypto wallets, and they go through a couple of other stories that we've we've talked about on on   on several occasions.  

But the whole thought of a 21 year old kid   walking into a crypto exchange   housed in a hotel apartment   and demanding   that they, I don't know,   turn over all their crypto   and then detonates   airsoft grenades and sets off a smoke bomb. I it's almost like   Benny Hill,   you know, like or or Keystone Cops. It's like it's just become absolutely   ridiculous. But that's that's where we are on this day at 11:11AM,   the eleventh day of no or the '20   '25,   the twenty fifth day of you know, it's so   Thanksgiving is right around the corner, y'all. It's right around the corner.   Whatever you do,   don't   don't try to rob an exchange with an airsoft grenade. I'm I'm still trying to wrap my head around this.  

I it makes me wonder.   Did he know that they were airsoft grenades, or did he buy them   and had thought they were real grenades?   And somebody basically was just laughing all the way to the bank because they sold him a couple of airsoft grenades. Who knows?   I honestly don't care. This is this is in Russia, and I I don't need to know.   But,   yeah. So getting back last words about the MSCI thing,   it is an attack. It is coordinated, and it is being spearheaded by JPM.   Who else gets into this? I don't know. We'll, as usual, we'll have to wait and see. But make no mistake,   JPM   is this I think this is the last   the last breath they have in a decent,   scalable   attack.  

And,   honestly, it's   it can do some damage. It it can definitely do some real damage.   It'll be short term only.   Short term to medium term, depending on whatever your time scales in your own mind happen to be. But long term,   you know what happens?   Another block gets mined.   Transactions   get   they get passed through the Bitcoin network.   People trade their Bitcoin for goods and services or   whatever they want. And it doesn't matter what JPM   does   or what tool in the shed that they use. It's not gonna stop Bitcoin, and I will see you on the other side.   This has been Bitcoin, and and I am your host, David Bennett. I hope you enjoyed today's episode and hope to see you again real soon.  

Have a great day.