0.08 Rise from modest casting price of Ether (ETH), Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) has climbed a non-fungible token (NFT) stardom in competition with one of the earliest examples of the Larva Labs CryptoPunk NFT.
Given its steady but amplified growth, BAYC has many crypto natives who speculate that its collection will eventually “reverse” CryptoPunks, and there are several reasons to support it. there is.
Considering which collections are the top candidates for NFTs, the competition between these two collections is caused by several factors. Due to the existing gap between the adoption of mainstream media and the intellectual property rights granted to its owners, the BAYC and CryptoPunks collections also have different numbers of unique owners. This is important because the number of unique owners often indicates a spread of owners. This means that you are less likely to be at the mercy of a single sale that determines the value of the entire project or floor.
Let’s take a look at some of the factors that NFT supporters and traders are talking about regarding the BAYC project, which reverses the lowest rates for CryptoPunks.
Two different labs and visions
The stagnation of CryptoPunks compared to the dynamic marketing nature of BAYC leaves many speculations that “flipping” is inevitable. There are many copyright options given to the author to add fuel to the fire, but the “no reservation” option was not given by Larva Labs.
That’s why many people use Twitter to support and comment on speculation. One particular current CryptoPunk # 4156 was sold for 2,500 Ether based on the principles and controversy of Larva Labs’ stance on Creative Commons 0 (CC0). This is also known as “no reservation”.
It’s not qualification, it’s activism. It always happens in the public market. Large stakeholders try to sue their proceedings, believing they can unleash added value.If that doesn’t work (as in this case), they sell and move on https://t.co/dZBErq07A4
— 4156 (@ punk4156) December 5, 2021
Beyond the issue of intellectual property (IP) rights, BAYC appears to have mastered overall marketing and strategic partnerships, so it seems that groups of individuals are gathering around “flip”.
Launched on April 20, 2021, the funny but boring ape was cast at 0.08 ETH, worth $ 300 at the time. Shortly after celebrities like NBA star Stephen Curry began switching Twitter profile pictures to Apes, the market began to skyrocket and the collection clearly solidified as a “good company.”
BAYC, which has gained the attention and recruitment of mainstream media and celebrities as well, seems to have a different trajectory than CryptoPunks. BAYC has strategic partnerships with other brands such as Adidas as well as individuals, and is recently based in Hong Kong with a focus on blockchain games for future Play-to-Earn (P2E) games. Announced a partnership with software company Animoca Brands.
When confirming its partnership with adidas, BAYC hints at potential interoperability, the ability to exchange data in different systems, in this case the Metaverse.
Today we dive into the Metaverse @BoredApeYC, @gmoneyNFT & @punkscomic..
It’s time to enter the world of infinite possibilities.https://t.co/LmgtrRn20c pic.twitter.com/40kU8tayrS
— Adidas Originals (@adidasoriginals) December 2, 2021
CryptoPunks was first generated for free on June 23, 2017 for those who have an Ethereum wallet. The only charge was the price of gas to the Monetary Authority. At the time, many considered CryptoPunks as the first “NFT”, but the token itself is not an ERC-721 token. Although built on the Ethereum blockchain, CryptoPunk was found to be prior to the ERC-721 standard and close to the ERC-20 token.
According to Larva Labs, the code is out of control. use Buy, sell and trade CryptoPunks via blockchain. By relinquishing that control, we increased the reliability of our code through transparency, assuming it provides everything promised.
Whether that’s what the community expected is another story.
Creator controls IP or bust
There seems to be climate change as to where to value the NFT collection. The ongoing controversy within the NFT territory is who owns the rights: the creator or the owner.
Many are questioning projects that give owners limited rights. However, few NFT projects are in line with CC0’s notion that “rights are not reserved”. Some NFT projects that work this way are CrypToadz and NounsDAO. This is an important project for @ punk4156.
It’s not the difference between copyright and non-copyright, but to make the pixels as censorable as the attached tokens. If you don’t assign the same rights to tokens and images, what’s the point of binding them forever on the blockchain?
— 4156 (@ punk4156) December 5, 2021
The famous CryptoPunks Ape Punk # 4156 has changed its tone because it is not satisfied or satisfied with the limited rights granted to the owners of CryptoPunks. The relationship with CryptoPunks is quite embedded, but especially the one behind the “brand” Punks # 4156 sold one of the rarest types in the collection. Their Ape Punk Up was for sale at 2,500 ETH and was worth $ 10.26 million. With the sale of the third most valuable CryptoPunks, many are using Twitter to comment on this historic sale.
Copyright issues have driven one of the key members of the community out, and given their reputation, many are looking to the left-handed CryptoPhunks. Funk supporters claim to fit themselves “on the right side of history” because they allegedly give owners intellectual property rights.
Despite the declared and granted rights, there is something to say about the numbers — the numbers drawn by the BAYC collection cannot be denied.
The power of numbers
Over the last 30 days, the BAYC collection has accumulated approximately 44 Ether trading volumes, according to OpenSea data. Impressively, in November alone, BAYC’s minimum price surged above 50%, with an average price of around 56.5 Ether, which could easily approach the punk’s minimum price. Suggests.
By comparison, the CryptoPunks collection has been locked to 32,005 Ether in the last 4 weeks. According to Dune Analytics data, the minimum price has been steadily declining since the sale of Punk # 4156, down 7% from last month.
Due to the great emphasis on floor prices, the number of unique owners of the NFT collection is often overlooked. Focusing the laser on the amount of liquidity exchanged loses sight of the number of individuals holding tokens.
It can be argued that the larger the number of unique owners, the more successful the collection. This is because it is widely adopted and is less likely to be at the mercy of a small group of individuals who can easily burn gas in a single sale.
Comparing the two collections, BAYC has nearly 6,000 unique holders, while CryptoPunks has less than half the unique holders of 3,273. According to Larva Labs, the top 10 owners of CryptoPunk have over 100 CryptoPunk in their wallets, and the top wallet holds 410.
Top percentage of apes, according to Dune Analytics Owned Is 1.05%. This means that no wallet owns more than 105 apes. The smaller the number of wallets in the BAYC collection, the greater the majority of ownership, which means that not only will the majority of the collection be won, but the number of individuals who share collective values will increase in the community. Community members of the Bored Ape Yacht Club are doing “diamond handling” to protect the value that brands may have acquired through partnerships.
Potential “flipping” —but is it important?
The emphasis is on “When will BAYC flip CryptoPunks?” Perhaps the bigger question is, is it important?
Regardless of how apes play punk, many claim that apes never outperform premium tier punks like aliens and the CryptoPunk version of apes. Some say that the BAYC collection has no visual “leveling of status” and is difficult to evaluate.
Whether or not apes play punk will be known over time. However, regardless of copyright restrictions, the story can shift and focus on the value that both collections acquire over time, rather than focusing on the market capitalization and minimum price of both collections. increase.
After all, there is always another potential “good stock” on the horizon.
The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Cointelegraph.com. All investment and transaction movements carry risks. When making a decision, you need to do your own research.