Rugby League NFTs

[Tommygilf]

9 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Having tried to find the story there’s loads done it. Also someone chucked the wrong hard drive away and lost £280m worth. The story was about him trying to get the council to let him search the tip. 

I'm not surprised at all. That function of course is what most people entrust a bank with doing at the risk the bank loans your money to other people who can't afford to pay it back.

The more you have of course the more paranoid people become and that creates a lot of this level of silliness.

[gingerjon]

10 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Having tried to find the story there’s loads done it. 

There's one bloke who seems to have told the same story multiple times over the past two years.

You look into him and he's head of his own set of digital start ups and crypto (and crypto adjacent) stuff.

The stories are all essentially designed to get you thinking about the ease of the wealth involved.

[emesssea]

On 16/01/2023 at 12:11, Tommygilf said:

I suppose with the NFTs the issue is that like any image on the internet, a screenshot can negate it.

 

 

In my baseball-sphere of twitter, I saw people making that same point, sarcastically screen shotting NFTs and saying they now own them. Someone responded by saying thats no different that people who own a Mickey Mantle replica rookie cards saying they own the real thing.

For those who don't know, Mickey Mantles rookie card is considered one of the most valuable baseball cards out there, I can only think of one that is more valuable. I remember having his replica rookie card as kid, the thing is worthless and mine and everyone else's replica rookie card did nothing to bring down the value of his rookie card, just like screen shots of NFTs don't bring down their value, only the "market" does. And it appears the bubble has bursted on  NFTs as many assumed it would and many are worthless, but at some point, like with everything else, Mickey Mantle's rookie card with be worthless as well, and in most of the world it's considered worthless by people who don't understand what theyre looking at.

[Dunbar]

On 19/01/2023 at 14:20, emesssea said:

 

In my baseball-sphere of twitter, I saw people making that same point, sarcastically screen shotting NFTs and saying they now own them. Someone responded by saying thats no different that people who own a Mickey Mantle replica rookie cards saying they own the real thing.

For those who don't know, Mickey Mantles rookie card is considered one of the most valuable baseball cards out there, I can only think of one that is more valuable. I remember having his replica rookie card as kid, the thing is worthless and mine and everyone else's replica rookie card did nothing to bring down the value of his rookie card, just like screen shots of NFTs don't bring down their value, only the "market" does. And it appears the bubble has bursted on  NFTs as many assumed it would and many are worthless, but at some point, like with everything else, Mickey Mantle's rookie card with be worthless as well, and in most of the world it's considered worthless by people who don't understand what theyre looking at.

I absolutely agree with the analogy of the baseball cards and the ownership of something that is unique.  That is what the block chain does, it guarantees the ownership of digital assets. 

But this leads to the next point. The reason why Mickey Mantle's baseball card was so valuable is that it was a one of a kind, a unique physical item that held a specific value for a specific reason... the baseball card of a legend of the sport.  A unique and rate item.

What seems to have happened with NFT's is that people seem to believe that an NFT has an intrinsic value because it is an NFT which is bizarre because there a billion digital assets that could have a unique owner.

When we need to get to is the point that a specific digital asset is unique for a specific reason and the block chain verifies that;  then we will have long term value in some NFT's.  But there must be a reason and not just an assumed value.