That was my point, we can draw the line as favourable or unfavourable for whatever side we want. It’s not a particularly useful measure when comparing apples and oranges. If it was just a matter of investing in the thing with the highest market cap, then every one of your dollars should go to Apple.
But we do have the privileged of hindsight and NFTs were objectively overvalued
I think this is a great idea for a thread. Next, lets compare the pikachu illustrator PSA 9 market cap to the NFT nike 2021. If we use SMPRATTE’z 4 million dollar valuation and the pop of 8 we can get a total market cap of: $32,000,000.00
$32M vs $166M !!!
What could this mean? 
that’s a lot of Jason Paige presence.
Always nice to see a lurker leave the shadows!
The tough thing with NFT’s is no one can explain why people buy them outside of making money. Where in this comparison, it’s obvious why people buy charizard, most just want to own the card. Sure there is an investment element, but it’s more peripheral to the main generational nostalgia.
These 3d Nike nfts are just apples vs oranges. There is also a certain irony collecting a digital shoe. Anyway I just don’t see the longevity with non functional nfts. Maybe branded nfts like this will have more legs. But it’s just a tough comparison as charizard has already stood the test of time, and is more about nostalgia/collecting where nfts are new and feel more like a trend atm.
Resident NFT shill here, gonna get my post in before thread is locked.
I think the CloneX NFTs are a by and large aesthetically dog shit BUT they have great fundamentals:
Everything @mathonsunday said about why they cost so much is on the money. Personally I think they’re way over-valued BUT I do think they have a lot more upside in the short term than any PSA slab that literally does nothing.
Also worth noting for context, the CloneX collection was not a “Nike” digital collectible at release, but rather a collaboration between web3 company RTFKT and Takashi Murakami. It was after their success in the web3 space that they were acquired by Nike. Personally i’m much more curious what Nike does with .SWOOSH, their own “web3” marketplace.
ok this is where i peace out
So you’re saying they look like dog shit, but they have great fundamentals… Shouldn’t aesthetics be one of the fundamentals of a digital collectible? Every time I read about NFTs, it’s only about value and market stability. Nobody gives a shit about how they actually look. Which to me is the exact opposite of having ‘‘great fundamentals’’…
It means that Chipotle currently has a market cap of 45.64B and I really like eating their chicken burrito bowls.
I’ll bite I guess.
Amusing comparison. NFTs have little to no organic demand. Organic demand, within the context of a collectible, defined as demand that is driven by factors outside of market speculation. Strong organic demand helps create price floors. It is a major factor in determining the stability and long-term value of a collectible.
What I see here in regards to Nike Digital collectibles, is speculative demand driven by the strength of the brand. You may enjoy the thrill of extreme volatility as many people did the same with TCG and sports throughout 2020 and the first half of 2021, at which point there was a large downturn afterwards.
Markets have largely stabilized since over the course of the past year, at least for Pokémon TCG, in part due to strong organic demand allowing for floors to be created. Pokémon products are still flying off shelves to be ripped despite the staggering volume produced; not scalped or kept sealed as speculators would, but opened. You can say there’s a tiny segment of people hoarding modern, but generally, consumers are opening. I just don’t see that sort of genuine passion for any digital collectible.
Personally, I like to view organic demand as a safety net. I don’t see significant amounts of organic demand within the digital collectibles space. Without that safety net, you run the risk of catastrophic losses.
Maybe I’m too much of a nihilist in this case, but for the life of me I just can’t see why a comparison like NFT vs Charizard matters at all or what it is trying to accomplish or how it’s even supposed to make sense.
Charizard is primarily a collectible, whereas NFTs seem primarily an investment vehicle. They attract different kinds of people with different intentions and different amounts of money they’re willing to risk. That’s about it, imo.
Pokemon has a higher market cap than Magic, Magic has a higher market cap than Digimon. Do you think a Digimon collector cares in the slightest about that? He (/she) genuinly simply wants Digimon cards, not Pokemon cards - and most definitly doesn’t look for the best high-risk short-term speculative investment.
TrU collectors don’t buy with the intention of the best profit margin, they just want that god-damn empty slot in their binder filled.
The fundamental reasons that people buy and collect these two ‘assets’ are so far apart that its a nonsensical comparison, imo.
I’ve bought, sold, traded my fair share of NFT’s and at no point did I have any sort of emotional connection to the idea of ‘collecting’ them. They were parts of a trading portfolio, expendable at any moment should the price be right. I’d imagine the same could not be said for most of the people who own the PSA 10 Charizard.
There are Times Cards get to expensive.
There will never be a Time NFts are so cheap i buy them.
Nfts are the intelligent smartasses of pyramid scheme.
If i want to get scammed i prefer an lovely written email by some african prince
Let’s be charitable here and pretend for a moment that NFTs and Pokémon cards are equitable collectibles. Suspend your disbelief for this exercise.
Now, let’s change these two equitable collectibles to two other collectibles. Let’s say instead of NFTs and trading cards, it’s comic books and train sets.
Have you ever in your life seen comic book collector evangelize comic books to a model train collector? Have you ever seen someone make a thread on a model train forum titled Action Comics #10 Vs Lionel Standard Gauge Mini? Have you ever seen comic book collectors trying to force comic books on collectors with no interest in them, no attachment to them, on the basis that comic books are a better investment? Does any of this sound like it would appeal to a model train collector, whose interest in model trains is fundamentally non-transferable to the experience of collecting comic books?
You would never see this because it is preposterous. Someone who collects model trains because they love the history of them, the artistry of the sculpts, the realism of their recreations, the functionality of the models, cannot transfer any of that interest to comic books. That is a different collectable that people like for different reasons. Someone can be independently interested in both, but it is nonsense to try to sell one collectable to the opposite collector.
Crypto and NFT collectors try really hard to present their collectable as something other collectors should value, which they don’t. They present them as logical additions to other existing collections, which they’re not. They do this because the business model requires new recruits to sustain itself as a financial investment, a crucial aspect of crypto that most collectors of other collectibles do not consider ever.
When someone from the NFT community shows up to try to sell NFTs to other collectors, it is perceived as totally and absolutely preposterous. You will never convince people to buy in to your hobby like this and the fact that it is the modus operandi for a lot of NFT collectors is just one of the numerous reasons the crypto well is poisoned beyond salvage. They are not good at getting people to like their stuff because all their tactics to initiate people are extremely alienating. Give it a rest.
Not gonna lie. I’m here for the memes.
I know it wasn’t the main point of your post, but now I’m wondering: do Pokemon cards have a higher market cap than MTG? I actually don’t think they do. For in-print cards, maybe. But the entire market cap for graded Pokemon cards is <$1b. The market cap for P9 alone is >$1b. The market cap for dual lands is also >$1b.
Regardless, I do agree that it’s a pointless comparison. NFTs aren’t really collectibles – they’re more like regular cryptocurrency.
They look like dog shit to me but there is definitely people who resonate with the aesthetic and many people use them as their “online identity”. Similarly I think a PSA 10 Unlimited Charizard is one of the most boring things you could own but it’s still highly coveted to others.
If NFT bros didnt always try to sell me on NFTs maybe id look into them. Nobody is out there saying you gotta get into pokemon, or stamps, or coins and badgering them.
The people behind the NFTs are the problem and i dont believe it is in them to be less obnoxious about NFTs ever. Ive never seen a group more focused on pushing their beliefs
Sheldon Cooper could argue this.
you’d have to assume a spherical chicken in a vacuum
