Let’s talk about the “IP narrative” of PFP NFT

Author: sleepy.mid Source: X, @sleepy0x13

Write in front

Have dinner I had a cup of Bawang Chaji during the night, and as expected, I fell asleep. I lay in bed and thought over and over about the topics about IP for PFP projects that I discussed with my family at Little Ghost Family at night, as well as my experience and growth since starting my business, so I decided to write this article. article.

It should be emphasized that this article is full of strong personal opinions, but this article does not mean that I want to give support to any project except the little ghost WeirdoGhostGang . Some of the opinions in the article may be contrary to you or even the market sentiment. Everyone is welcome to think independently and communicate rationally.

The excessive pursuit of "narrative" is destroying this industry

Brush the past two days On Twitter, I came across a tweet. I forgot who sent it. The tweet said: "I'm tired of seeing the narrative of the PFP project."

After reading it, I had mixed feelings. From the perspective of retail investors, "making IP" is indeed not attractive enough, especially since our industry is full of too many various "narratives", and Web3 is rich in "narratives". Having a grand narrative means that the market value of the project can be greatly increased, which will then evolve into various benefits, and finally be reflected in the currency price. From a certain perspective, retail investors' expectation of a new narrative is not that of industry development, but of making money.

This is not terrible. I also support evaluating projects from this perspective. I think this can even be regarded as a supervision method. The scary thing is that in order to raise the valuation, the project team takes advantage of market hot spots and stacks buffs on their projects. The pie they draw cannot be realized in the end, and they finally choose to be rug or fail. Such an ending is a catastrophe for this industry. Even if we talk about 10,000 "new narratives" but none of them can be implemented in the end, what's the point? What an emerging industry fears most is not developing.

Leaving the macro picture aside, overemphasis on narrative will also have a huge negative impact on the company. If a company wants to continue, it needs to have revenue. Overemphasis on narrative often causes companies to ignore revenue. They continue to burn money and invest for "grand ideals" and raise rounds after rounds of financing. But without a healthy business model, financing will come sooner or later. When it doesn't arrive. And if you make income by selling coins in the secondary market, the problem is that whether the K-line is good or not basically determines whether the project is still alive in the eyes of the public.

I think the excessive pursuit of "narrative" is ruining the industry. Therefore, compared to projects that exaggerate narratives and expectations, I appreciate projects that are down-to-earth and do practical things. They are BUIDL rather than Puff. Of course you can look for projects that maximize your profits, but please don't ignore or even belittle these real builders. I also hope that the project parties can be more down-to-earth. Industry development will bring about a rising tide, and you can exit with dignity in the future.

Why so many projects that want to "make IP" have failed

Let’s talk about it next The topic of "making IP". Because too many projects under the banner of making IP have died, many people have begun to interpret this as "the project parties have no plans for the future."

It's understandable, but I still want to analyze this issue rationally in this article. Not only do I not think that doing IP is wrong, I also firmly believe that the greatest value of the PFP project is IP. In my opinion, making IP is not the wrong choice, because this path is proven. Compared with the "narrative" of the ten thousand fantasy stages, this is a huge advantage.

I think the reason for the failure of those projects is not the narrative of "making IP", but the inaction or lack of ability of the project parties. In addition to avatars, what content have they created for IP? Have they invested energy in marketing and promotion? Have they learned and understood the methodology of making IP... Making IP is not done with words. Without investment and effort, how can there be rewards?

What does Web3 mean for IP?

T0-level IPs that can earn tens of billions in Web2 do not need to engage in Web3, but the monopoly of Web2 makes it increasingly difficult for new IPs to gain a foothold, and This is why new IPs require Web3.

Web3 plays a catalytic role, raising funds earlier and cold starting faster, giving new IP the opportunity to get money and potential at an early stage , start large-scale promotion earlier. Web3 provides a lever for new IPs. Although there is no way to jump directly to the T1 echelon, it can allow new IPs to quickly jump from T5 to T3 or even T2. ​​However, if you want to truly become a world-class IP, you still need to put in more efforts. There is no escaping time, but the process from T5 to T2 or T3 in Web2 is a gap that many new IPs cannot overcome in their lifetime.

Another lever is the pull plate. Anyone starting a business in the Web3 industry should not ignore or avoid currency prices. I don’t think there is any need to elaborate on this point. It is very important to use this lever and when to use it, otherwise it is easy to become a Bodhisattva who gives away money. According to Pang Yangqing, pulling the market is not an end but a means. It must be a means to achieve the purpose of expanding attention, rather than just to raise the price beyond a certain point. No project can pull the market forever. In addition, the prerequisite for using this leverage is to lay a good foundation. Blindly pushing the project will only turn the project into a meme. Only by building first can you gain true believers and long-term development.