In short: The rally was a bet on legislation: the expected passage of the Clarity Act "explains, I believe, the rally in cryptocurrencies and in the stock price of Circle, the stable coin company." This week "senators blocked the bill… This is a major blow for the crypto industry and it is unclear where the industry goes from here." Consistent with his Sep 14 "Circle doesn't make any sense to me."
Circle issues a "stablecoin," a digital token meant to always be worth one dollar. Its stock rose along with the rest of crypto on hopes that Congress would pass the Clarity Act, a law setting clear rules for digital assets.
This week the Senate blocked the bill. Eisman calls that a major blow and says it's unclear where the industry goes next. His point is that much of Circle's rally was a bet on a law that has now stalled.
7:25And a few weeks ago, it looked like the Clarity Act was going to pass. And that explains, I believe, the rally in cryptocurrencies and in the stock price of Circle, the stable coin company. However, this week, senators blocked the bill with Democrats citing concerns over ethics provisions and with a few Republicans joining in opposition as well.
In short: Cited as evidence stablecoins are being pulled into the centre of the US financial system: "Circle was given a US charter bank standing," alongside GENIUS Act licensing for stablecoin issuers by January 2027. No view on the stock.
13:51This is the same thing as gold. It's now being moved into the center of the United States financial system. They're clearly integrating stablecoins. Circle was given a US charter bank standing. — And you see the GENIUS Act; the Treasury is implementing new policies through which you have until January 2027 to be licensed as a stablecoin issuer.
In short: Flament's first fintech job: "Circle which is today the issuer of USDC." The Colin–Flament collaboration began there in 2018. Stablecoins are "the actual first large scale convincing valuable use case for crypto," but no view is given on the company.
Circle issues USDC, a stablecoin: a digital token always worth one US dollar, backed by dollars and short-term government debt that Circle holds. Flament worked there early in her fintech career, and it is where she and Colin first met in 2018.
The company itself only comes up as her background. The idea behind it drives their whole project, though. Stablecoins are what finally convinced Colin that crypto had "a large scale convincing valuable use case," and nearly all of them are in dollars. That spreads the dollar's reach and leaves the euro out. No view on Circle's stock is offered, so it is Neutral.
0:39— Yeah, sure. So by background, I'm a computer engineer. I guess that's how I would define myself. And I've been working in technology, more precisely in financial technology for the last 10 years or so. My first work in financial technology was actually for Circle which is today the issuer of USDC and then I led the digital new bank and actually Nicolas, that's when I was at Circle that we met so it was in 2018 so that's how far our work together goes back. So we met in 2018, then I was the CEO of a digital neobank
In short: First name offered when asked for a short "you really like" ("Yeah, but it doesn't work"): "Circle doesn't make any sense to me." — "Zero." "And yet the stock has rallied enormously… The crypto legislation nonsense." Fintech — "our neck of the woods." Position not explicitly stated.
Circle issues USDC, a digital token meant to always be worth one dollar. The partners say its stock price "doesn't make any sense" and that it rallied on new crypto laws rather than on the business. It is the kind of financial company they like to bet against, but they admit these short bets haven't been working.
33:19We're just doing it with significantly less capital than we used to. — So, is there anything short-wise you really like these days — that you're willing to share? — Yeah, but it doesn't work. So, let's start [laughter] let's start with a few caveats. I listening to your podcast, I think, circle doesn't make any sense to me.
In short: Held in the newsletter: "USD Coin… We own that company in the newsletter, the Tucker Letter. We have a portfolio there and we own that company." It is "the second biggest stablecoin," and he wants "the biggest stablecoin we can get," not "some microcap stablecoin pink sheet stock." These are companies "becoming more valuable every single quarter."
Circle issues USDC, a "stablecoin": a digital token that is always worth one US dollar and moves between accounts and apps almost instantly. When you buy $100,000 of USDC, Circle keeps your $100,000 and invests it, mostly in very short-term US government debt (Treasury bills). Circle keeps the interest. You get the token.
Tucker's newsletter owns the stock. The bet is that stablecoins stop being a crypto-trading tool and become ordinary money plumbing, growing from about $400 billion today to "many, many trillions." Two features make that lucrative for the issuer. People almost never redeem ("you never ask for your money back"). And the new GENIUS Act rules require issuers to hold short-dated T-bills, so a bigger float means more interest income without more work.
His selection rule is to own the biggest, best-connected operator ("the second biggest stablecoin," with a seat at the table with the Treasury Secretary), not a tiny pink-sheet company that renamed itself into the theme. The risk he does not dwell on is competition. Banks are building their own coin (OpenUSD), and the Treasury "wants many of these things."
2:50know what's going to happen with Tether. I mean, they're going to try to raise money. All these things are going on. It's fine. USD Coin, you can buy the... We own that company in the newsletter, the Tucker Letter. We have a portfolio there and we own that company. It's very interesting what's been happening there.
In short: "Not all upstarts are created equal." IPO'd Jun 4 2025 at $30, hit $240 by Jun 20, "today at 71." Nearly all its business is store-of-value in crypto; to truly succeed "it has to break into the payment space," and investors who paid $240 assumed that would be easy — "in my view, those investors could not be more wrong." Any inroads "will occur by teaming up with Visa and Mastercard, not by fighting them. Fighting them is a hopeless cause." At an $18B cap, "I don't think it has the financial strength to play this game for too long. If I was a CEO, I would try to sell the company."
Circle issues stablecoins — digital tokens pegged to the dollar. Its stock went public at $30, ran to $240 in sixteen days, and now trades around $71. Eisman explains both moves with one observation: today almost all of Circle's business is people parking value in crypto, but the price at $240 assumed it would easily conquer payments, which is a far bigger prize.
That assumption, he thinks, "could not be more wrong," because payments means going through Visa and Mastercard — a network no challenger has ever replicated. His constructive version: any real progress "will occur by teaming up with Visa and Mastercard, not by fighting them. Fighting them is a hopeless cause."
And with an $18 billion market value against those two, he doubts Circle can even fund a long fight: "if I was a CEO, I would try to sell the company." The general rule underneath: pick the hill where the incumbent is asleep, not the one where it is armed and awake.
22:16But not all upstarts are created equal. Take Circle, the stable coin company. The company went public last summer on June 4, 2025 at $30, and it quickly climbed to 240 on June 20th, same month. Today at 71. Why the massive up and why the massive down? Circle provides stable coins as a store of value and for payments. Today, almost all of its business is in the form of a store of value in the crypto digital world.
In short: Eisman: "I think Circle should sell." The prize is the payment system — "that's the golden goose" — and the incumbents are awake this time: "when Netflix got started, all the entertainment companies acted like idiots and let them grow like crazy… Visa and Mastercard are not dumb," and have already launched a consortium stablecoin. "I think Circle needs to sell to somebody who's got bigger pockets… breaking into the payment system is brutal… God bless Circle if they can, but I just think it's going to be very difficult." Worthington is more constructive near-term: dollarization wallets, cheap cross-border remittance, and a 24/7 settlement layer for weekend trading are buildable without winning payments, and Circle has launched its own chain — "we're in this grand experimentation phase right now. It's very early."
Circle issues USDC, a stablecoin — a digital token that always equals one dollar because Circle holds real dollars and Treasury bills behind it. It earns interest on those reserves. The much bigger prize it is chasing is to become a way people actually pay for things, bypassing the card networks.
Eisman thinks it should sell itself now, and his reasoning is a lesson in why the same disruption plays out differently twice. Netflix succeeded partly because the incumbent entertainment companies "acted like idiots and let them grow like crazy" before waking up. The card networks are not that: "Visa and Mastercard are not dumb… they're among the smartest," and they have already responded by launching a consortium stablecoin — Schorr counts 140 participating financial institutions — while the big banks separately build interoperable tokenised deposits of their own. "I think Circle needs to sell to somebody who's got bigger pockets."
The scale point is the one to remember: "Visa connects billions of consumers with hundreds of millions of businesses. It's hard to recreate that. Very hard." A payment network is worth nothing until both sides of every transaction already accept it, which is why new entrants almost never break in.
Worthington's counter is that Circle doesn't need to win payments to be a business. There are three nearer uses: a dollar people in unstable-currency countries hold in a phone wallet (a market Tether already dominates), cheap cross-border transfers, and — the most interesting — a settlement layer for round-the-clock trading, since markets are creeping toward 24/7 while the traditional back office cannot settle on weekends. He also notes stablecoins let merchants unbundle the card networks' interchange fees, which pay for services some merchants don't want.
40:55I'm curious what you think because I think Circle should sell. That's and let me tell you why. Right now Circle's business is all in Bitcoin and stuff like that. But then what they're trying to do is really break into the payment system. That's the golden goose. And the problem is, when Netflix got started, all the entertainment companies acted like idiots and let them grow like crazy and all of a sudden they all woke up one day and they said, "Oh my god, we lost our business to Netflix."
In short: Arc hits the P&L. Q2 revenue and reserve income +7% Y/Y to $701M (a $12M miss) with GAAP EPS $0.18 ($0.02 beat). The model's weakness showed plainly: reserve income grew just 5% because a 25% increase in average USDC circulation was mostly offset by a 66 bp decline in reserve yields to 3.5% — Circle's revenue is a bet on rates as much as on adoption. USDC circulation ended at $73.3B (+19% Y/Y) but down from $77B in Q1 as crypto markets slowed, though on-chain transaction volume grew 151% to $14.8 trillion. The story was Arc: Circle roughly doubled FY26 Other Revenue guidance to $310–$330M (from $150–$170M), "primarily reflecting Arc token sales and milestones" — diversification away from interest income, "although Arc-related revenue is not yet the same thing as a recurring software revenue stream." Circle received final OCC approval for its national trust bank in July, putting institutional custody under direct federal oversight, with Arc's public mainnet scheduled for September 16; the through-cycle 40% USDC circulation CAGR target was maintained. A disclosed author holding.
In short: Deiya, in passing (auto-caption "circles"), as the market's own verdict on the stablecoin story: "I know Circle's come down significantly as a result of this narrative fading." His view is that stablecoins are overwhelmingly a crypto-trading instrument — outside a few broken banking systems in Africa, "there's absolutely zero cases of people actually using stable coins like they're using fiat" — so they are not yet a threat to Wise or Remitly.
1:07:40It just isn't happening at all. There was a lot of fear of it. I know circles come down significantly as a result of this narrative fading, but yeah, it's just not a thing. — One thing. — Yeah. — Yeah. That's funny. Any other views on other payment stocks? Interesting.
In short: "Sold off hugely after banks came together to build their own stablecoin. Almost all of Circle's revenue is just interest they earn on their stablecoin reserves, so it's not a very defensible business model. We were short that last year — I wish we had kept that short on." Reports Wednesday pre-market.
Circle issues a stablecoin — a digital token pegged to the dollar — and essentially all of its revenue comes from the interest it earns on the cash backing those tokens. That is not a business with a moat: anyone holding customer deposits can do it.
Which is exactly what happened. A consortium of banks announced they are building their own stablecoin, and Circle's shares fell sharply. Singh was short the stock last year and closed it: "I wish we had kept that short on."
Full passage: premium transcript (PDF).
In short: Crashed 14% to $65.39 (from $235 a year ago) on OpenUSD — a zero-fee dollar-stablecoin utility backed by a 140-corp consortium (Visa/Mastercard/Amex/Stripe/Block and, critically, Circle's own partner Coinbase) that returns reserve yield to partners. An existential, structural (not macro) threat to Circle's USDC yield-capture model.
Circle issues USDC, a "stablecoin" (a digital dollar), and makes money by pocketing the interest earned on the real dollars backing it. That business model just got attacked: a consortium of 140 giants — Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Stripe, Block, and even Circle's own partner Coinbase — launched OpenUSD, a rival stablecoin with zero fees that hands the interest back to partners instead of keeping it. The stock crashed 14% (and is down from $235 a year ago to $66). Singh's point is that this is a structural, permanent threat to how Circle makes money — not a passing dip — with Coinbase defecting the most damaging blow.
Full passage: premium transcript (PDF).
In short: Renick's options color: a bullish call frenzy on the National Trust bank approval — options volume 4× the 30-day average, ~200k contracts, 78% calls (top-five all expire today, 59–80 low-probability strikes) — but the biggest single trade was bearish (selling Aug-21 85 calls to fund $500k of 55-strike puts). Stock +5% on the day yet still −70% over the past year.
In short: Down 17.5% on June 30 when a consortium of Stripe, Visa, Mastercard, Coinbase and BlackRock unveiled a rival stablecoin and ecosystem. Circle is the #2 stablecoin creator (Tether is #1); having Visa and Mastercard against it "cannot be overstated" as a competitive threat.
Circle issues stablecoins — digital tokens pegged to the dollar that are meant to move money around faster and cheaper than the traditional card and bank rails. It's the second-biggest stablecoin issuer, behind private Tether.
The stock fell 17.5% in a day because a powerful group of companies — Stripe, Visa, Mastercard, Coinbase and BlackRock — teamed up to launch their own competing stablecoin and payment system. Eisman's point is that having Visa and Mastercard on the other side "cannot be overstated": those two effectively are the payment rails Circle was trying to break into, so a rival backed by them is a serious threat rather than a startup Circle can out-run.
2:51On Tuesday, June 30th, there was some very negative news for Circle, the stable coin company that went public last June. Circle creates stable coins, a financial product that is trying to make inroads into the traditional payment systems. Circle is the second largest creator of stable coins. Tether is the largest.
Nothing matches this filter.
Verbatim excerpts from the public transcripts (auto-pulled at each mention's timestamp, lightly cleaned). Timestamps link into the video; "source page" opens that commentator's full analysis at this row. Click a mention's header line to expand it (one open at a time). For personal study — not investment advice.