Written in front
I drank a cup of Ba Wang Cha Ji during dinner, and as expected, I couldn’t sleep. I lay in bed and thought over and over again about the topic of PFP project IP that I discussed with my family members in the Little Ghost family group at night, as well as my experience and growth since starting my business, so I decided to write this article.
It should be emphasized that this article is full of strong personal opinions, but this article does not mean that I want to support any project other than WeirdoGhostGang. Some of the opinions in the article may be contrary to you or even market sentiment. You are welcome to think independently and communicate rationally.
The excessive pursuit of "narrative" is destroying the industry
I was browsing Twitter a few days ago and saw a tweet. I forgot who posted it. The tweet said: “I’m tired of the narrative of the PFP project.”
After reading it, I felt mixed emotions. From the perspective of retail investors, "making IP" is indeed not attractive enough, especially since our industry is full of too many "narratives" and Web3 is rich in "narratives". With a grand narrative, the market value of the project can be greatly increased, which will then evolve into various benefits and finally be reflected in the price of the currency. From a certain perspective, retail investors are looking forward to new narratives not for the development of the industry, but for making money.
This is not terrible. I also support evaluating projects from this perspective. I think this can even be regarded as a form of supervision. What is terrible is that in order to raise the valuation, take advantage of the market hot spots, and stack buffs for their own projects, the pie they have drawn cannot be implemented in the end, and finally chooses Rug or rots. Such an ending is a disaster for this industry. Even if there are 10,000 "new narratives" but none of them can be implemented in the end, what is the point? The most feared thing for an emerging industry is that it will not develop.
Without talking about the macro, over-emphasis on narratives will also have a huge negative impact on the company. If a company wants to continue, it needs to have income. Over-emphasis on narratives often causes the company to ignore income, and continue to burn money for "grand ideals" and raise rounds of funds. But without a healthy business model, there will be a time when it will not be able to raise funds sooner or later. If you sell coins in the secondary market to make income, the problem is that the appearance of the K-line basically determines whether the project is still alive in the eyes of the public.
I think the excessive pursuit of "narratives" 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, not Puff. You can certainly look for projects that can maximize your profits, but please don't ignore or even belittle these real builders. I also hope that project parties can be more down-to-earth. The development of the industry will bring rising tides to all boats, and you will be able to exit with dignity in the future.
Why do so many projects that want to "create IP" fail?
Next, let’s talk about the topic of “creating IP”. Since there are so many projects that died under the banner of creating IP, many people began to interpret it as “the project parties have no plans for the future”.
I understand, but I still want to analyze this issue rationally in this article. I don’t think it’s wrong to do IP, I firmly believe that the greatest value of PFP projects is IP. And doing IP is not a wrong choice in my opinion, because this path has been verified, which is a huge advantage compared to the "narrative" of the ten thousand fantasy stage.
I think the reason for the failure of those projects is not the narrative of "creating IP", but the inaction or lack of ability of the project party. In addition to the avatar, what content did they create for the IP? Did they invest energy in marketing and promotion? Did they learn and understand the methodology of creating IP... Creating IP is not done with words. How can there be a return without investment and hard work?
What does Web3 mean for IP?
T0-level IPs that can earn tens of billions in Web2 don’t need to engage in Web3, but the monopoly of Web2 makes it increasingly difficult for new IPs to gain a foothold, which is why new IPs need Web3.
Web3 plays a catalytic role. Earlier fundraising and faster cold start give new IPs the opportunity to get money and potential in the early stage and start large-scale promotion earlier. Web3 provides a lever for new IPs. Although it is impossible 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 effort and time. This is inevitable. However, the process from T5 to T2 or T3 is a gap that many new IPs cannot cross in their lifetime in Web2.
Another lever is to pull the price. Anyone who starts a business in the Web3 industry should not ignore or avoid the price of coins. I don't think I need to elaborate on this point. How and when to use this lever is very particular, otherwise it is easy to become a bodhisattva who gives away money. According to Pang Yangqing, pulling the price is not a goal but a means. It must be a means to achieve the purpose of expanding attention, rather than just to pull the price up and break through a certain point. No project can pull the price forever. In addition, the premise of using this lever is to lay a good foundation. Blindly pulling the price will only turn the project into a meme. Only by building a BUIDL can you gain true believers and long-term development.
OpenSea content you care about
Explore | Collect | Sell | Buy
Bookmark and follow OpenSea Binance Channel
Get the latest news