"are there any zoomers who dislike content coins?"

my zoomer friends:

helping build farcaster | surfing @ venice, ca | eating @ gjusta / gjelina | “lucky me, lucky mud”

Isn’t buying a subscription kinda like buying stock in a creator

Reporter and writer. I cover energy, climate change and geopolitics. Contact me via my website www.alexanderckaufman.com and subscribe to kaufman.substack.com.

And unlike a subscription that remains stagnant, buying a token/stock of a creator early can be rewarding for both you and the creator should the creator gain popularity.

Coinbase employee (Investigatooor), personal account. Onchain is the future.

A few weeks ago, I coined a post: "Base is for ____"
to commemorate a site I built, http://baseisfor.xyz that allowed anyone to share what Base means to them.

Yesterday, @base used the site to coin "Base is for everyone" which went viral.

This morning, I woke up to my original coin going up too.
Early believers of my content earned. I earned too.

Because my content was onchain, it had provenance.
Because it had provenance, it captured upside.

Posts carry value, attention moves markets, and remix culture is becoming economic.

Something real is happening.
https://zora.co/coin/base:0xbcc8bdd91d9589385d028118d61a71747bdfc178?referrer=0xede3a75aca635c531b6198c230f3da67949678fe

Real life example here: 

https://warpcast.com/aneri/0x34c03c6e

No the creators split remains the same based on the trading volume of their content. 

The idea being that if the creator grows in popularity, their supporter can sell a portion of the 'stock' or tokenized content they bought early for a higher price than they purchased as demand grows.

the idea being that the creator is paying out part of what they're earning via ads and subscriptions to the purchaser of the token? i'm just confused as to how this works with an individual