Friendly reminder that NFT avatar projects or collectibles are strongly concentrated to a few thousand owners, hence the illiquidity.
Punks, BAYC, etc are competing in the luxury goods market, restricting supply and consolidating ownership into those who can afford them.
Punks, BAYC, etc are competing in the luxury goods market, restricting supply and consolidating ownership into those who can afford them.
https://twitter.com/AndrewSteinwold/status/1421680568111091719
This isn't to say that Punks, Meebits, Bored Apes, or other #NFT avatar/collectibles can't be valuable or won't continue to rise in value.
But let's all just be clear on what people are buying – status and to a lesser extent, community.
But let's all just be clear on what people are buying – status and to a lesser extent, community.
In regards to "Punks = Store of Value"
To a degree, yes Punks or NFT collectibles can be a greater store of value than their legacy luxury goods counterparts (e.g. handbags and Rolex's deteriorate over time) but the drivers of social status change over time.
To a degree, yes Punks or NFT collectibles can be a greater store of value than their legacy luxury goods counterparts (e.g. handbags and Rolex's deteriorate over time) but the drivers of social status change over time.
Ultimately the concentrated ownership helps drive the scarcity narrative, but reduces the growth of the community unless individuals sell.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
