Karim looked directly into the camera yesterday and said, “Bryan and I hate crypto, but we’re doing this for you because you guys want crypto.”

Most people would see that as a problem. I see it as exactly why our partnership works.

Here’s what happened: We just recommended two crypto positions while admitting we hate crypto.

We got into ANIX at the perfect price while I wanted to chase it higher. We killed our most profitable 30-year strategy because Karim refused to trust corrupted government data.

Every time one of us wants to do something, the other one makes us do it better.

The Discipline vs Enthusiasm Problem

Take ANIX yesterday. Phase-one breast cancer results were due December 11th. I’m seeing catalyst opportunity – this thing could explode on good news.

Karim’s seeing risk management – “This thing could explode, which is exactly why we wait for our price.”

Stock jumps 70% premarket. Hits $6.40. Then crashes back to $3.25.

We got filled at $3.25.

Anyone who chased at $5? Destroyed.

“Had we gotten in at four and a half or five,” Karim told our subscribers, “we’d get massacred. Even though it went up, it would have come right down into our face.”

That’s the partnership working.

My catalyst hunting finds the opportunity. His price discipline keeps us from getting killed by the opportunity.

The Crypto Confession

When subscribers kept asking for crypto exposure, I saw portfolio diversification. Karim saw speculative garbage.

The solution? “Stash positions” – maximum exposure for minimum upfront cost. We structured I-Bit and XRP as long-term lottery tickets, not core holdings.

“We want to have the least amount of money committed and have the most amount exposure,” I explained to subscribers. That’s not compromise – that’s Karim making my ideas better by forcing risk management into them.

So far? We haven’t blown up our subscribers’ accounts chasing crypto to the moon. While everyone else got destroyed by the recent crypto crash, our position sizes were too small to do real damage. Mission accomplished.

When We Kill Winners

The biggest test came when government data became unreliable and killed our 30-year JOLTS strategy.

I wanted to find workarounds – use ADP private sector data instead of government reports, maybe track alternative employment metrics that still moved markets.

Karim shut it down: “If the market doesn’t trust government data, we don’t trade on any version of employment data. Period.”

We killed a profitable strategy because Karim’s skepticism overruled my optimism about finding alternatives. Most newsletters would keep running variations of the trade until subscribers got crushed.

“It would be a disservice to you if we did that because we’d be guessing,” Karim told our audience.

That’s partnership protection in real-time.

Your Action Plan

Here’s what I’ve learned: The best trading partnerships aren’t built on agreement. They’re built on useful disagreement.

When Karim tells a subscriber “Phil, open your eyes dude, I can’t do your work for you” mid-livestream, that’s not rudeness – that’s the same protective instinct that keeps our portfolio from chasing shiny objects.

When I explain complex option spreads on Novo Nordisk while Karim focuses on position sizing, we’re covering different aspects of the same trade protection.

We’re not trying to be likeable. We’re trying to be useful.

Every argument we have in public is an argument our subscribers don’t have to have in private. Every time Karim’s discipline saves us from my enthusiasm, it saves our subscribers too. Every time my forward-thinking pushes Karim toward new opportunities, everyone benefits.

That’s why the guy who hates crypto recommends crypto positions. That’s why the catalyst hunter waits for perfect prices.

That’s why useful disagreement beats polite agreement every single time.