Which is why we lump those under “entertainment budget” around our house, same as seeing a movie, or going to the arcade, or even games for whatever console we have at the moment.[1] The value you pay for has some return – amusement, an experience, or something.
That’s what baffled me most about NFTs: all the ephemeral nature of entertainment items, with zero return or impact. Hey, you bought a JPG of a cartoon monkey.[2] Now what?
Exclusivity isn’t entertainment, in my obviously narrow world/budget. Even owning a masterpiece, one could theoretically have it installed above the head on one’s megayacht and admire the brushwork during one’s morning business. But a digital asset with no function other than be a digital asset?
[1] hence the collection of PS1, Wii, and multiple evolutions of GameBoy carts piled up here (OG through DS)
[2] yes, I know, a blockchained token of a URL of a remote hosted image, which is even MORE absurd.
In the case of Bored Apes, specifically, ownership of the NFT gets you more than just the right to say you own the JPEG.
There are the exclusive commercial licensing rights: See the Seth Green discussion above, but companies as big as Adidas have also used Bored Apes in advertisements for their own products. I find the idea of companies using Bored Apes in their ads interesting, as it’s such a weird twist on traditional celebrity sponsorships. Instead of an expensive, heavily negotiated deal with some celebrity, you just buy the NFT and can do whatever you want. Of course the risk is that somebody else uses their own Bored Ape (which will look just like yours) in a way that is antithetical to your brand (imagine somebody making videos similar to the Adidas ads with similar Bored Apes dressed like Nazis or something). So it’s still dumb. But it’s something.
Ownership of a Bored Ape NFT also effectively confers membership in a club that occasionally hosts members-only events. I’m not sure why anyone would want to go to those events, but apparently people actually do.
All of which is to say that specifically in the case of Bored Apes (not so much most other NFT projects), there is SOMETHING of value.
Hiring a celebrity to endorse a product is a time-tested way to increase sales by trading off said celebrity’s reputation. If you think slapping a picture of a badly drawn ape on your product will help sales you could just hire someone to draw one for you and be done with it instead of bothering with all this NFT nonsense.
So, people with more money than brains fell for a scam that was obvious to almost everyone else, and now they want to pay lawyers to chase even wealthier people than themselves for damages? Apparently they still have too much money. And if brains were TNT, they wouldn’t have enough to blow their noses.
I have to take exception to calling Thomas a “token”. He earned his place on the Supreme Court with his pliability, lack of a moral compass, corruptibility, and flawed legal reasoning.
Any cover that he provides for shockingly racist decisions is just a bonus
