Let’s talk HASHMASK.
While I’m impressed with the concept, I think the piece has some figuring out to do. Maybe CT can solve some of these issues with ingenuity… or maybe there won’t be demand to do so.
Let’s first go through an overview.
Overview
Scarcity: 16,384
Distribution: Fair(ish) and Random
The sale started at 0.1 ETH for the initial 3k, and gradually ascended up the order-book at .3 ETH, .5 ETH, .9 ETH, 3 ETH, and finally, a stunning, 100 ETH.
No mask were revealed until the sale was completed.
Design:
Distinct Character, Mask, Eye Color, Item, Skin Color.
NCT Tokens
Any participant during the first 14 days of the contribution period will receive 1 years worth of NCTs (3,660 NCTs, the equivalent of 2 name changes). After the 14 days, each Hashmask will start with enough supply for a single name change (1,830 NCTs).
1830 NCT will need to be burned to name an HM.
Each day, 10 Name Changing Tokens (NCTs) are accumulated by each Hashmask and can be claimed by the current holder.
After exactly 10 years, on 26 January 2031 (Timestamp: 1927206000), the last NCT will be emitted and from then on, the supply will only decrease until one day, the last NCT token is burnt and the art piece is complete.
Consensus and Relativity
First, NFTs are not intrinsically valuable because of cash-flows.
Instead, they’re valuable because of consensus. Given the last 3 sold for 100 ETH (~$130k at the time of writing), cryptopunk-esque zeal is certainly here.
Furthermore, in terms of your individual HM, the additional value is determined by the conflation of their character traits and their respective rarity.
For instance, owning an animal mask with a pixel background, or a HM with book, would fetch a considerable amount of value relative to a standard HM.
An Evolutionary Piece
The real catch however is the NCT tokens.
Beyond just the chain of ownership, the chain of ‘name’ allows the HM to become a vivacious, organic piece of art.
This evolutionary design capability is what could turn an HM into a stunning piece of work. Imagine, “Nakamoto” —> “Buterin” —> “Cronje” —> “ … etc.
But one can also imagine “Lady Gaga” —> “Drake” —> “Have Fun Staying Poor” —> “lol” … Maybe CT would eat this shit up… you never know with these Degens.
Ultimately, the evolutionary design is a double-edged sword.
Mix and Match
Perhaps if the evolution of the piece is soiled, the real juice is matching a rare HM with a clever name, reaching an HM’s ‘faux-nirvana’ state.
For instance, you own the following HM:
Male
Tech mask
White-skin
Rare item
You decide to name it Vitalik Buterin. I would hazard a guess and say this would fetch a considerable amount in the market-place.
However, to arrive here assumes not just cost, but leg-work.
Let’s imagine a few scenarios.
Scenario #1
You were early in the NCT hype and secured ‘Vitalik Buterin’ in the pre-sale, but none of your 5 HMs resemble him. They’re all dark skinned.
In this instance, the rational decision would be to scour the web to find something that looks appropriate — male, white skin, tech mask, etc.
Wallah. Purchase. De-name your original HM with ‘Vitalik Buterin’ and quickly transfer it over.
This would be be home-run trade.
Scenario #2
On the flip-side, however, you don’t have a great name but you have a rare HM.
Either you can sell the HM or you can try to find a name that is appropriate. Requires a bit of individual creativity and maybe some market temperature checks… “CT what do you think of naming this one Udi Wertheimer?”
Scenario #3
By provenance, you’re able to receive a super rare HM and also secure a name that fits right and the market will demand.
Scenario #4
By sin and late-adoption, you’ve shit the bed with neither rare HM nor unique name.
In all of these scenarios, it seems apt for the HMs to require a dedicated market-place. An buyer could filter by attributes as well clearly seeing the evolution of the piece (name and ownership).
Only then can the chaos ensue…
Big downside
I’ve sorted alluded to this problem in the above paragraph, but I wanted to flesh out the idea a little more.
There seems to be one big problem with the NCT token model (even if this hypothetical marketplace were to exist).
It would have been better to be able to trade the ownership of the name instead of the NCT Tokens.
This would allow a buyer to append the name to an underlying HM instead of waiting for anon-kun to release Vitalik Buterin from his possession. This would also allow an HM to be released of a name should it not fit with the underlying HM.
Said differently, we need a mechanism to trade names, not the option to name.
However, as far I know, there is no smart-contract mechanism for the transfer/burn of name.
End State
Ultimately, when the NCT tokens are effectively halted in 10-years, the ability to name will become increasingly scarce with most HMs having achieved their faux-nirvana state.
(Some may even surprise in 20-years when a whale or anon changes a name with horded or forgotten NCT tokens).
In other words, the marginal cost to ‘name’ an HM will sky-rocket and NCT tokens should be quite valuable.
However, the marginal revenue (price appreciation) may not be worth it given the underlying characteristics of the HM. Given this, maybe the NCT tokens will experience gradual sell pressure.
Note: If these are a dunce, I’ve sold mine already and have already broken even on the investment. The rest is gravy… maybe I should have brought 20…
Closing
I think these will be break-even at the end of this for no other reason that these are artistically unique. However, I’m unsure if they’ll be crypto-punk valuable because of their ‘NFT model’.
(A small dig. It feels like the model was only hashed out between digital artist, but lacked the DeFi expertise and learnings).
To sum up… by banking on 1) characteristic rarity 2) scarcity of ‘unique and memetic’ names (again many were taken before the sale ended), 3) lack of liquidity for HMs 4) inability to transfer name ownership but just NCT tokens, and 5) the evolution of the piece being sublime … I’m unsure of their future value.
Wild guess: <5% will be worth over $50,000 USD and the rest will be nearly worthless / breakeven.
I guess we’ll see.
Pour l'avenir de la France,
A.K
Rarity
(H/T https://twitter.com/0xdef1/status/1356442700443242497?s=20)
skin:
"Gold" 165 (1.01%)
"Steel" 1476 (9.01%)
"Gray" 4658 (28.43%)
"Dark" 3784 (23.10%)
"Freak" 152 (0.93%)
"Wood" 591 (3.61%)
"Light" 4252 (25.95%)
"Blue" 1292 (7.89%)
"Transparent" 2 (0.01%)
"Mystical" 12 (0.07%)
baseCharacter:
"Golden Robot" 165 (1.01%)
"Robot" 1476 (9.01%)
"Male" 8660 (52.86%)
"Female" 5480 (33.45%)
"Puppet" 591 (3.61%)
"Mystical" 12 (0.07%)
eyes:
"Heterochromatic" 134 (0.82%)
"Dark" 7420 (45.29%)
"Green" 2634 (16.08%)
"Glass" 1626 (9.92%)
"Painted" 591 (3.61%)
"Blue" 3532 (21.56%)
"Freak" 435 (2.66%)
"Mystical" 12 (0.07%)
mask:
"Basic" 2216 (13.53%)
"Mexican" 2476 (15.11%)
"Animal" 2061 (12.58%)
"Abstract" 319 (1.95%)
"African" 967 (5.90%)
"Hawaiian" 1573 (9.60%)
"Street" 925 (5.65%)
"Indian" 802 (4.90%)
"Steampunk" 229 (1.40%)
"Crayon" 490 (2.99%)
"Pixel" 980 (5.98%)
"Doodle" 2187 (13.35%)
"Aztec" 263 (1.61%)
"Chinese" 885 (5.40%)
"Unique" 10 (0.06%)
"Unmasked" 1 (0.01%)
item:
"Bottle" 377 (2.30%)
"Shadow Monkey" 233 (1.42%)
"Mirror" 319 (1.95%)
"No Item" 14533 (88.70%)
"Book" 450 (2.75%)
"Golden Toilet Paper" 77 (0.47%)
"Toilet Paper" 395 (2.41%)