Crypto Won. So Where Did the Money Go? | Colin Butler

Alex: Hello everybody and welcome to the Curiosity Code podcast. My guest today is Colin Butler. From 2022 to 2025 he was global head of institutional capital at Polygon Labs, where his team ran every major institutional launch on the chain. Most recently he was EVP of capital markets at Mega Matrix and he's now leaving crypto altogether to build in AI at a company currently in stealth. I wanted him on because he told me something on our first call that I have not been able to put down, that crypto won and the money went to everybody it came along to replace.

Alex: So Colin, I'd like to start with exactly that. So crypto found exactly one product market fit: stablecoins and it plateaued. Take me through that properly. What actually won?

Colin: Well, first off, Alex, thank you so much for having me on the show. It's a pleasure to be here. I have a lot of nuanced answers, so that's maybe an incorrect statement that there was one product market fit in crypto, which is stablecoins. Actually, great product market fit were perps were prediction markets and stablecoins. I would, I would argue right now, while they had the first PMF are a little bit stagnant versus the others taking off.

Colin: And then we cannot have a show like this without talking about RWAs and tokenization. So this is going to be for some people, a bad, bad show because there's challenges that the industry faced that none of us saw. And so now I guess I get the honor of going back through my last four years of history and telling everybody where I was wildly wrong and where a lot of kind of the early dreamers of crypto were wrong and what didn't work. If you watch any of my engagements over the past four years, any podcasts or content, it was generally wildly bullish. It was like 7 to 10 trillion dollars in stablecoins.

Colin: It was this technology will rewire the global financial system. And the good part is that I still believe a lot of those things. And crypto has won. It's wildly won. The problem is it didn't win for the vast majority of participants in crypto.

Colin: I still think it's a great adventure. And the value creation was extreme. The loss of value was also extreme. It was probably one of the biggest crucibles of experiment and success and failure in corporate history. To answer your question, where did it win?

Colin: The people that started creating the technology were, I think, idealists and cypherpunks. And they had a view that there could be value created for the people at the expense of the intermediaries that were taking value and things like the financial system. It was a technology that could make everybody more aligned, like align all the incentives. You no longer have Facebook capturing the majority of the value created by its users. The idea was that you could create a version of Facebook on chain or meta on chain and reward the users in the tokens.

Colin: So it aligns the users of the network with the creators of the network and a lot of other beautiful, beautiful kind of utopian ideas. And the challenge is very few of them worked. And I believe in them. I still believe in a lot of them. But when we, I shouldn't even say we like the early people that worked hard on this tech in like 2016, 2017, and I was a late comer.

Colin: I was 2022. A lot of what they had set out to do actually worked. It's just that they didn't get paid for it. And so I will tell you where I think who got paid and who didn't and what worked and what didn't. What didn't work was gaming.

Colin: There was a lot of things, I think, in DeFi where people thought it would make a lot of money for investors, and it didn't. There was certainly the art and NFTs. And what really worked was the rewiring of the global financial system in a very beneficial way. And after my next statement, I'm going to pause because I know, you know, we talked about, you have a framework for this as well. But what I, what I want to say is that value didn't accrue to the infrastructure layer.

Colin: Where I was at. My big mistake at Polygon was believing that it would. And so I said, guys, we have to focus on this technology for finance. A lot of what I see us doing at Polygon is like using a Ferrari for grocery runs. You had one of the world's most powerful technologies and you're using it to trade JPEGs on the Internet like pictures of smoking monkeys.

Colin: And I was not against that because I thought it was cool culturally, but it wasn't a revenue driver in my view. But the reality is what my view was, and I fought really hard for this view, also was not a revenue driver at the infrastructure layer, at the protocol level, at the layer ones and layer twos. The challenge. So Yep. Sorry, go ahead, please.

Alex: protocol level, infrastructure level, people that are actually building this, I assume they're not the ones who actually benefited from the successful use case, which are stablecoin as you mentioned, like rewiring financial infrastructure, global payments and stuff, but who actually benefited from it? Who got paid? Maybe you can name certain companies and major players.

Colin: Yeah, they're very public, but I think it would probably take a practitioner to understand who benefited. In a nutshell, who benefits is the distribution layer. So if you have the infrastructure layer here and the app layer here, which is like Securitize or Kaio or the tokenization engines, and then you have the distribution layer, that would be like Robinhood or JP Morgan or BlackRock. The vast majority of value capture happens at that level. And it took us as an industry years to figure that out.

Colin: We looked at a total addressable market of like 16 trillion in tokenized assets on chain by 2030. And I think maybe those numbers could still be accurate assuming like a certain hockey stick in exponential growth. But who captured that value was were not the people that created those pipes. And so that, that again, was my dramatically incorrect thinking. We looked at those total addressable markets and we said, let's go after that market.

Colin: We're building blockchain tech. Blockchain tech is going to dominate everything. And I still agree with that. It's just value accrual. Didn't happen at either of the layers that I had been working on.

Colin: So very little value accrual at the infra level. Think about a transaction fee of significantly sub penny. It depends on the chain. But if you do 100,000 transactions a second at .002, it just doesn't add up to revenue in a meaningful sense. In a sense that would make an infrastructure company worth a billion or $10 billion.

Colin: So that model is incorrect. If you go to the app layer where you're a tokenization engine like Securitize, you and I have shot the numbers back and forth as to what that looks like. And that model, I'm not going to say it's failed or failing, but it's very far from what the early creators of those models thought they would do. Securitize would be the best example of who's winning. One of the reasons why they're winning is because BlackRock really chose them as a partner with the idea that the world is going towards tokenization.

Colin: It clearly is. Nasdaq, NYSE stocks on chain, everything coming on chain, that that's definitely happening. But it turns out that it was hard to build a business model at the, at the app layer, at the Securitize layer. Now they let's say they have 5 billion in tokenized assets. If you draw that down to the bottom line in terms of what type of a profit they can make, the model needs work.

Colin: There's a lot that they still need to figure out. So the crazy part is despite the fact that Securitize won, right, There's a lot of tokenization engines out there and Securitize won, they're number one in the space by far. They went through seven or eight really, really tough years of figuring it out and iterating and getting regulatory approval and probably like near death experiences. And I just want to congratulate Carlos and Jamie, the co-founders of Securitize because they stuck through it and they went all the way to an IPO. And man, those guys deserve a lot of accolades for what they did because they really did a lot of groundbreaking work and they've succeeded in helping get this product institutionally and enterprise ready.

Colin: But there's still work to be done where the value clearly accrete is to places like Robinhood. It allows Robinhood 24/7 trading on chain that creates a lot more flow, it creates a lot more AUM and assets within their ecosystem and that's where the value lies because they make money on those assets. There's a lot of different ways that they can make money on those assets. It will be something similar for JP Morgan and traditional finance. And so while the crypto industry pushed really hard and raised a lot of capital, it turns out that, that as an industry is shrinking and that this technology is becoming fintech that accrues value to the traditional players.

Alex: Right, and we'll get to that. I actually want to, you know, talk a bit more about Securitize's case. I think it's interesting to observe it from outside at least. And so talking about numbers, last quarter their transaction volume rose 147% to 5.3 billion. But their revenue fell by 5% and costs went up 56% and they are suffering net loss, 21.7 million.

Alex: So what's interesting for me is to understand whether it's a good representation of what's happening with the whole layer or it's just, you know, shiny object on the surface and it's not representation.

Colin: It's a good representation of the whole layer. They would be probably the a positive example if we're talking about tokenization and the app layer. The others will have it worse. Securitize is going to start to benefit from economies of scale. So where they are, I think is a misrepresentation of their future.

Colin: You can't extrapolate that as a broken business model because Amazon lost money for a decade. And as Securitize assets scale, they will very likely have a profitable business model. But the majority of the value that accrues there will be at distributors like BlackRock which benefit from the margins that they make on the products that they run through Securitize. So even if Securitize was losing money, BlackRock and they're like has a massive benefit to even subsidize something like that as a loss leader because it enables them to put their products on chain and provide a lot of value to a much broader constituent base and customer base. And I can go into specifics if you'd like.

Alex: Yeah, yeah, we'll get to more details. Take me through. Why the value lands on the distributor rather than the chain. Is that something crypto got wrong or is just what always happens to infrastructure? I remember your great example in our intro call.

Alex: You said, who at JP Morgan works on TCP/IP, right? So I'm trying to understand like is it just how things usually evolve or it's a crypto specific case.

Colin: I'm going to make a guess and I'm going to say it's probably pretty frequent, but I hate to speak in absolutes. I don't know if it's always like that. My opinion is that for crypto it's like that. There's something a friend of mine recently said that made a lot of sense. He said the people that build the pipes don't choose where to lay the pipes.

Colin: What that meant to me, if you take a very specific example like JP Morgan is you have infra layer like Polygon or Monad or Stellar or anyone else Solana building the pipes. But JP Morgan chooses where to lay them. And where they're laid doesn't necessarily feed revenue back into the ecosystems that created them. The challenge with the model at the infra layer was that it's gas fee based. So if they want to monetize what they built.

Colin: And by the way, one of the challenges is a lot of it's open source, right. So you know, Wall Street says yeah, we love this technology, thank you. And then the crypto guys think and they go, oh my God, well how are we going to monetize this? Let's get them to pay for it. And then the, the Wall Street guys look at the box and they're like, but it says right here on the box, it's free.

Colin: So we're Wall Street, we understand trading, your number is zero. And it's not exactly like that, but it's probably not too far off. It's definitely not the millions and millions of dollars that crypto thought they could accrue in value from Wall Street. So JP Morgan will also make money on the balances, they'll make money on adjacent products. Maybe.

Colin: Let me, let me give a hard example as a very easy example for crypto people to understand. And crypto trading and markets people. There's a crypto derivatives market of $300 billion and 30 billion of that or 1/10 of that would represent the market for collateral. And so right now much of that collateral is getting zero yield. So that's $30 billion.

Colin: That's not gaining a yield. And if you plug in, instead of zero yield collateral, either stablecoins or depending on how you define them, maybe a yield bearing synthetic dollar, what crypto created was a much better source of, of collateral. Like it's now a yield bearing source of collateral. And you could think of tokenized money market funds as something similar. So BlackRock's BUIDL, at the risk free rate of, call it 4% can now substitute the 0% yielding $30 billion collateral market.

Colin: And that's just a really quick use case. BlackRock will benefit from that because they take a spread on what they're providing and a management fee for their money market fund. The ecosystem will benefit from that because now it makes it more economical or economically viable for hedge funds to put up this type of capital. It changes the way that they can trade. It probably increases velocity of money.

Colin: So there's a lot of good things that happen from that. Who won't benefit from that is Solana. If it's done on Solana, as one example, the infra layer, because it's like, okay, say there's 10 million transactions a year done on that for that collateral market to happen at 0.001 in terms of gas fees, there's very little revenue generated at the infra layer. But BlackRock wins and OKX and Binance win because they have greater velocity and more trading volume. Now to go really big, you can extrapolate that collateral market to $39 trillion globally in the financial system.

Colin: And that's the market we're looking to disrupt, that's the big game. But go back to who wins in that market and it will likely be places like DTCC, which is the settlement system for every stock trade in the US they settle. I think the number, the headline number is $4,000,000,000,000 a year in settlement. It's gigantic. So my view at Polygon when I was running institutional capital was that if we're a meaningful part of that value will accrue to us if we settle even a fraction of that on our chain.

Colin: But the reality is that wasn't true. So the technology has completely won. The crypto guys and the visionaries were correct that this is a groundbreaking world changing technology. It's just the winners were different than we thought

Alex: You know what I keep thinking about is like infrastructure layer. There are so many people involved in there who are making careers and doing work, what will happen to them if it's economically broken, how would that impact the manpower and people who are working there?

Colin: The business is going to be and here's part of the bad news for people that work in the industry. The business is going to be less highly compensated going forward because you are no longer at the cutting edge of innovation. You're increasingly creating a commodity product that goes into the banks and there is an IT guy that is just working on kind of like the TCP/IP level where nobody talks about anymore. It's just given that this is how this is best practices for modern finance and the very flashy crypto guys that were creating their technology are gone or they've moved on. So I would say the industry as we thought about it, it's just becoming more like fintech where there's now jobs and banking but they're no longer very limited skill set, high value job set amongst a very small subset of the, of the population or the crypto industry.

Colin: They now become more commoditized and it's just a layer that like the excitement has really gone out in my view. I mean there's still people at the big banks that are really excited, right because it's very disruptive for their model. But these are, these are probably more infrastructure, lower paid banking jobs, not flashy. And you're definitely going into the office five days a week. I mean my guess is one of the reasons you run a podcast is you want freedom and independence.

Colin: And a lot of the early crypto people prize that over anything as well, myself included. And they said we'd never go back to finance. Well, that's finance bought the tech and that's where the growth in the industry is now. There are things that are really working and this is where the crypto people that are still left are moving to stay relevant. And again those are perps, prediction markets.

Colin: There's areas of stablecoins, but that's becoming increasingly challenged. And yes, RWAs and tokenization absolutely a theme. But going forward, if you are to answer your question specifically, if you're a founder and a builder, you need to really look at two things. You need to look at your moat and you need to look at your business model and where you derive revenue. All the blockchains are reevaluating their business model right now.

Colin: And I think Polygon is one example of somebody who's doing a really good job. They're becoming vertically integrated to the point where they capture value throughout the stack, they build the infra, but they also have the apps and they also capture the distribution. And that's a pivot that I think is going to work over time if you can execute it successfully. But every model is going to have to look like something like that.

Alex: Speaking of things that are, you know, dead, quote unquote dead and crypto, initially I approached you to do the episode on digital asset treasuries because that was your last job, but you told me flatly that they are dead. Can you explain the machine to me first and then tell me what broke?

Colin: Yeah, I always have to walk myself back because I hate speaking absolutes like this is black or this is white or this is 0 or this is 10. The original vision for digital asset treasuries was one by which you can accumulate value additional value for the customer in terms of number of tokens per share via financial engineering, which means you can sell when things are at a premium. And let's talk about MicroStrategy is the original digital asset treasury you can sell when mNAV is high, when people are paying a multiple for your stock and you could buy back. You sell stock and you buy back token when the mNAV is below 1 or at some negative multiple. And therefore you can over time provide more tokens per share to the buyer of that instrument than if you held this spot.

Colin: Just to make it very clear, if you hold Bitcoin, MicroStrategy over time could very likely give you 1.1 Bitcoin and hopefully more depending on how they operate the public publicly traded aspect of the business.

Alex: Correction from Colin after recording: when mNAV is below 1, a digital asset treasury sells tokens and buys back its own stock.

Colin: If you go down the stack, you go to like Ethereum Digital Asset Treasuries and Ethena Digital Asset Treasuries and so on and so forth. Binance digital asset Treasuries. There's a model there that you could create that in theory could provide a lot of value for shareholders. And part of that model at a high level is people buy the stock, you accumulate tokens and you can use those tokens to enhance the ecosystem of the underlying. Call it, let's just use Binance as an example.

Colin: Enhance the Binance ecosystem, put some of your tokens into DeFi. What does that do? It creates a positively reinforcing flywheel for the Binance ecosystem, more transactions done on the chain, more value created, enhancing the value of the token and also creating a yield for the shareholders of the digital asset treasury, a yield with which they can use to cover their operating expenses and pay the people that are creating that value. And it's a beautiful self reinforcing upward spiral if it works like that. And so at the beginning of summer in 2025, there was a lot of hopium, there was a lot of people that thought that that could work.

Colin: And it probably does. It actually does work in my view, in a positive market, in a bull market. And everyone would point this out, even the investors that bought into this idea. The whole system happens in reverse. It's a bear market where it's a negatively reinforcing spiral where the digital asset treasury is trading below NAV and you're selling stock to, sorry, you're buying stock to sell token, which puts downward pressure on the token and therefore the stock becomes worth less.

Colin: And the cycle repeats until the digital asset treasury or DAT is essentially unwound. And that's what, that's what the first big test of that idea happened in late summer 2025 when those trades started unwinding. And I can't say that they're dead because I believe that there's a model that can be found that works well for those companies and those investors. But in the near term it became very, very challenged because a lot of the digital asset treasuries didn't get to scale to execute it successfully and therefore their costs were higher than their revenues. And that, as we know, is not a business model that is long term effective.

Colin: So the DATs right now are about as challenged as they've probably ever been. Actually, maybe three months ago was probably the worst. And I don't know what that business looks like, the business model looks like and who survives and what eventually becomes successful. But right now, if somebody from the outside were to make a blanket statement that seems obvious, that business model died, MicroStrategy is a clear outlier and maybe SharpLink might be another. But the rest, you know, people are going to, people are really wondering right now whether or not that's going to survive.

Colin: Now my view is they get better, they develop a business model that works. And certainly as a crypto bull market comes along, that theme revives. But right now it's TBD.

Alex: All right. Let's move on to stablecoins a bit. I had a guest here on the pod, Parag Monteiro, he's global head of stablecoin payments in the bank and he mentioned that stablecoins were the first product market fit for for tokenization. Well so first implies for me that more are coming and based on what I'm hearing from you, it seems like that's the only one I'd like to see where is the truth, which of you could be right and what might I be missing in two years, if it were him?

Colin: I don't think it's the only PMF as we discussed in crypto. I think it will still have massive product market fit. The early product market fit addressed things like cross border payments and payments and remittances where prior to crypto you could pay 10% of what you were trying to send cross border or probably on average I think it was more like 3%. And with crypto you pay less than a penny for me to send money to you from the US to wherever you are in the world. So crypto and stablecoins are clearly a superior product than what existed before.

Colin: And that's one of the reasons why the market cap for Stablecoins went from 0 to 300 billion. And there is probably six or seven fantastic use cases that would be similar. That would be arguments for even further growth from here. Like I have a model that, that I used at Mega Matrix that was given to me to be fair, like it was worked on by the, the big brains, the giga brains at Mega Matrix. It would say something like 7 to 10 trillion dollars in stablecoin market cap in the next 5 to 10 years.

Colin: So U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is going to say it's a $3 trillion market or a 10x from here in three to four years. And I tend to align with that. I tend to align because it is a far superior solution for again cross border payments and remittances for emerging market savings and dollarization. If you think about a country with high inflation rate like 10%, that population can save in dollars at the US inflation rate and have much more stability.

Colin: It's a fantastic solution. Money market fund substitution, RWA tokenization settlement where you're settling the cash leg like JP Morgan and all the big banks are going to run into this. These are all really good uses that add up to Scott Bessent's $3 trillion number and the much bigger numbers over time. You can think in general, the way that I think about it is in general it could easily disrupt 10% of each large global market. So if we go back to the global collateral market at 39 trillion, eventually it's a participant in 10% of that market as a better form of collateral.

Colin: So stablecoins long term, yes, but the reality is they've been at $300 billion for six to nine months and everybody should always check my numbers. But that's roughly what I what I think. And so why have they plateaued when we have this big vision for stablecoins? I think that there's probably a couple reasons that I could point to. One, the crypto market is challenged.

Colin: So the more DeFi trades and crypto speculation, the greater use for stablecoins. So that's one reason. Another reason that I heard recently was the infrastructure isn't keeping up. And when I say the infrastructure, it means the on and off ramps are still very clunky. It's the, the ability for you and I to easily create stablecoin wallets and transact using these vehicles.

Colin: People should be a lot faster in doing that than they are right now. And that's one of the things that the Polygon team is really looking to solve, is making that very easy. But they have to bring that to more users to make it a globally viable product that, that has a high impact. So there's, there's, there's a bottleneck that got hit. And so the, the builders in the space right now that at times you're looking at kind of hockey stick adoption that definitely leveled off.

Colin: And so it's, it's harder to build in that space. There's more competition, there's questions around, you know, do we really see that exponential growth? My view is that they still do, but any investor could look at the chart and say, well, we don't know. And the truth is, we don't know. So those markets.

Colin: And I just outlined all the negatives. Really hard to build in RWAs and tokenization unless you're in a bank or in a place like Nasdaq or DTCC or NYSE or traditional finance. And it's hard to build in stablecoins because there's a proliferation of them. Now back to value accrual. Who won?

Colin: Circle, massive winner. Tether. But now there's stablecoins that are essentially public goods, like meant to accrue the value that those are capturing to the people that are minting the stablecoins. Places like STBL. And there's probably a handful of others that are going to make a solid attempt at doing that.

Colin: So my view, if you're in the industry and you hadn't thought about it already, we solved a lot of problems in crypto that Wall Street adopted. That's much harder. Now there's another layer of problems that we can solve to help complete that loop. And I think actually what will solve those is AI. And that probably will transition.

Colin: In the introduction you gave to me, the fact that I was transitioning into AI. I am. It's not that I don't believe in crypto anymore. I believe crypto is massively winning. But I believe that there's problems that I can solve that crypto itself can't solve.

Colin: The on chain leg cannot solve. It's the off chain leg at the fund admin level that we can solve with AI. And over the last four to six months, that's really where my mind started expanding and focusing on in terms of value that I can actually provide and real world problems that I can solve using my experience in crypto.

Alex: Interesting. That's actually how I wanted to wrap up this episode and talk more about AI and about your journey because I find it quite fascinating in a way that you spend so much time in the industry and now you are leaving and you're going to build in AI rather than take a position in the thing that you say actually winning this whole game of infrastructure and distribution, why not staying or AI doesn't mean that you are leaving financial services. It's still kind of overlap.

Colin: Yeah, it's a great question. I do believe that one AI has a virtually unlimited total addressable market. Now I'm starting to get back to my bold statements and there's a lot of nuances there, but I don't think we even understand as a species the full potential of AI. But my view is that as new technologies come online because of AI, we're going to find new business models and new use cases and we will have that Cambrian explosion of innovation that happened in crypto in 2021. And my guess is because there's even more real world applications for AI, in my view, that that will grow and grow and grow for decades.

Colin: 5, 10, 15, 20 years of innovation that is going to lead to a very interesting world for all of us, hopefully positive.

Alex: It's actually a great analogy comparing crypto and AI, and I'm curious, what does AI have right now that crypto had in 2021 and what does it have that crypto never had?

Colin: Let me see if I could unpack that. I'll give it a shot. One intersection of crypto and AI is going to be something like agentic payments. Now, crypto solved the payment leg. It's got smart contracts that could be utilized by an AI agent to make transactions on behalf of an end user.

Colin: Crypto solve the payment part of it. And so crypto has already gone from 0 to 1 and possibly 0 to 10. Now, as somebody that likes that is just really interested and fascinated by the forefront of innovation, like doing things that nobody's actually tried before, I want to be in the space that is now the agentic payment side of it, where how do we figure out how to make agentic payments efficient, effective, safe, build an entire ecosystem around that. That's something where we can work in partnership with crypto to do. But the next leg of that is now in the hands of the people innovating in AI.

Colin: And that's just one example of many that I think are going to come down the pipeline. There's a lot of talk about enterprise harnesses in AI. What that means is installation of LLMs at a bank. So you get this massive problem solving machine that iterates and changes workflows. But there's a lot of challenges that come with enterprise adoption and a lot of them are safety and risk.

Colin: And right now those are unsolved issues. Governance issues like how do you govern an LLM that could go out to the Internet and come back with a prompt injection that makes it corrupted. And once you have a corrupted agent, compromised agent, what do you do? And nobody's really come up with a good solution for that. So there's probably a million problems like that.

Colin: There's reasons why we can't adopt this miracle technology at the scale that we want. And those are problems for which I think some of the really bright crypto people that have spent the last five or ten years on crypto can help the world address. And so as crypto goes from call it like 10 to 100, the banks take it at a scale where the early innovators, where it was almost illegal, made it 0 to 1. And then the really smart people that were professionalizing the industry took it from 1 to 10. And now the people that say, okay, this is now the piping that we need to use for the global financial system in highly regulated industries are taking it from them.

Colin: I think that there is a shift for those people that really love the innovation portion, like trying new things, being in a wildly risk on industry, and having the pros and cons and benefits and downsides of all of that creative destruction and transition into, I would say the transition into AI is a natural extension of that. And so I think that's where a lot of the excitement. If you built the things that JP Morgan is now taking, then you might be a candidate for the people that look to that next iteration and say, okay, what's next? And what else can we bring to the world that we think is wildly disruptive and have an impact? And for me, the answer was AI.

Colin: It doesn't mean that I don't want to stay within, you know, keep, keep a foot in crypto and still work on challenges that I still see in that industry. But I now think AI is capable of helping solve some of the problems that we, that we found in crypto.

Alex: Love it. Colin, thanks a lot for joining us. It's been a great conversation.

Colin: Thanks, Alex. Yeah, it's been a lot of fun. I really appreciate you having me on.

Alex: And by the way, in upcoming episodes we're gonna have a few guests to cover exactly things that Colin just spoke about AI governance, including and thanks for listening till the very end. And don't forget to hit the like button and subscribe to the channel at YouTube and leave your feedback and review at podcast platforms and see you in the next episodes. Bye Bye.