Loading video...
Video Failed to Load
NFTs could create a deeper ownership layer for users who actually want exposure to a protocolโs revenue โI don't think it replaces buybacks. I think they both can exist at the same timeโ โNFTs could be another way that you can share in a business revenueโ โThere's kind of... show more
16,378 views โข 4 days ago โขvia X (Twitter)
15 Comments

@blknoiz06 I hope the bullpen and Bulltoshi gang gets a whitelist if you do something like that for Ansem.

Hello.

@blknoiz06 Baton watching nftโs go up

revenue nfts just add friction.

@blknoiz06 ๐ฏ this is why Iโm buying $TROLL NFTs

ft: @blknoiz06, @rasmr_eth, @MarketBubble

Revenue-linked NFTs sound great until regulators call them what they are: securities. Also splits liquidity and attention away from the token. Two layers of ownership, double the dilution risk.

That would actually be a great utility for NFTs. Now it's just community and exclusivity, making the whole nft marketplace basically worthless. MadLads is a good example

@blknoiz06 Tibbir SBT maybe?

@blknoiz06 Gribbit

Segmenting users into distinct levels of alignment is a sharp framework, as token buybacks drive broad value to passive holders while revenue-linked NFTs offer a specialized instrument for long-term power users seeking direct skin in the game. Rather than competing with traditional tokenomics, structured digital collectibles can act as a high-conviction tier that deepens community loyalty and aligns protocol incentives directly with core participants.

@blknoiz06 ๐ฏ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ

Dual revenue streams look solid.

why not mint those NFTs by locking the token? gives existing holders a way into the revenue share without having to buy a second asset

Revenue sharing unlocks protocol value.
