Re: topshot I think it was @jacobm9 that talked about it a bit in a video and made a very good point IMO. Topshots don’t even exist yet of “good” moments. Given what some of these are trading at right now just attached to relatively tame “moments” throughout regular season play… what the hell is going to happen when Luka Doncic “posterizes” someone in the finals and it’s a 1/25? What about when another big name drains a 3 to win a finals game at the buzzer. Are those $1M, $10M moments? I mean just think ahead 50 years assuming this all is still around then. Year 1 so maybe some of these will stand out as the “first edition”, but will they really? There is just going to be such massive amount of dilution going on every new year that passes by what is it really going to take to stand out.
Look at this breakaway fairly routine dunk from LeBron. He is quite old as far as topshots are concerned but imagine a young guy like Luka if he turns out to have a career even a fraction of Lebrons. He is going to have hundreds of these dunks across his thousands of games. What makes them stand out?
Similar things can be said for Pokemon especially with respect to some high print early stuff and almost everything modern. The amount of money that needs to keep flowing in to sustain everything that currently exists at todays prices, then factoring in reasonable presumed growth for all that as well as picking up all the new releases over the next 50 years. It’s just crazy to think of it all and the sheer magnitude of interest and money it will take to keep it all going. The most reasonable answer is it will take significantly less money to maintain it because many won’t be maintained and “what ones won’t be maintained?” is the million dollar, or perhaps billion (trillion?) dollar question.
I currently don’t plan on purchasing an upcoming creator’s NFT, but I’m interested in their’s because I know they would use it as more of an access token similar to a season pass of a sports team. I think when put in that applicability that is when it becomes a major asset to own as you bank on the other individual’s brand.
I think the argument regarding NFTs is the implementation, and the warped impressions of those buying and selling at the moment.
If Bansky creates an NFT of a previously unseen work of art, and offers it at auction with complete future rights to that work of art, then that NFT will have value, probably major value.
If Bansky creates an analog work of art and then offers a one-time only limited edition NFT of that work of art, complete with defined and irrevocable rights of ownership, then that NFT can be perceived as the digital equivalent of a limited edition lithographic offering. That will also have some specific value. Especially if those NFTs are the only digital hi-res copies of the piece of art, and if the original is limited on its digital presentations.
If the NBA and Top Shots are dropping 5 second video clips of a game that was offered digitally for free, then what is the value? If they only offer the rights to a “number” associated with that clip, with no other rights, and with the provision that they can yank the number back for any perceived slight by you, what is the value? Based on that market to date, speculators are trying to define value based more on which number NFT you get than the clip itself, like some sort of lottery within a lottery. While I am sure there is a collector out there who wants a complete set of Lebron NFTs with single-digit numbers, that kind of market tends to get extremely thin extremely fast. And it often leads to all but those few special “number” copies losing value over time.
Finally, I have seen a ton of NFT offerings using someone else’s intellectual property. You can’t stick these into “fair use” categories, they are outright theft. And while the NFT creators can hide their identity and payments, it doesn’t mean these are legal. I guess if you are a collector who likes to live on the wild side you can brag about your “illegal” holdings, but I doubt that alone will support long-term gains in value.
I will never be interested. Everything I enjoy is physical or tied to an emotion from actually doing something in real life. I can’t see that ever changing and don’t mind if my ‘digital existence’ is less than someone else’s.
While I don’t like NFTs either, I wonder what would happen if Pokemon entered the NFT space big time. Imagine them creating a very limited set of digital cards with baller art, you gonna tell me that these won’t sell for monstrous prices?
I differentiate between personal feelings towards NFTs and future potential. I do think the potential is there, so even if you don’t like the idea, at least think about trying to use NFTs for your own gain. I don’t want anyone to miss a potential opportunity out of spite (as was my position initially) and regret it later.
Picture this…If PSA gave you a digital version of your graded card, something you can keep on you at all time without the worry of walking round with a psa 10 1st ed zard poking out your back pocket. Im sure this is something most people here would want to see.
I think I already mentioned it, but something like this would be needed for me to be interested. If I can’t physically hold something to some capacity, then there’s no real desire for me.
With a handheld hologram projector, where you can store your uniquely data-fied items, you’d be able to share with your friends, share video transmissions, etc. You could potentially press a few buttons on your device and it would showcase the unique identifier that’s also tied to your device and NFT item that marks it as yours.
I imagine it would decrease the environmental load as well that NFT’s and crypto have, which is another major concern for me as well. Not looking to destroy the planet more than we already have. I don’t know if this would actually fix the environmental issue but that would be the hope instead of just having your data stored on official servers and wracking up the heat.
Yes, but I don’t think that’s applicable. If you own the card you then taking a picture of your card to he able to look at is fine. You know that picture is of the actual card you own. There will always be folks who will try to appear like they own things they don’t.
1999: Pokeman cards? Why would I pay $50 for cards with cartoon characters on them? I’ll stick to numismatics, that feature real life historical figures.
2011: Bitcoin? Why would some 1’s and 0’s be worth anything to anyone? I’ll stick with the trusted and proven US Dollar.
2021: NFTs? what is the value in proof of ownership of digital pieces of art? RiGhT cLiCk > sAvE!<— you are here2050: I wish I invested in those NFT contracts for ownership rights to plots of land on Mars while they were available, now my family is stuck on earth during the COVAIDS-49 pandemic and my Alexa™ wife has gone rogue and won’t unlock my Gates Foundation mandated chastity belt. Fucking scalpers.
