internet rabbit • comms @ /splits • https://www.sonyasupposedly.com/

the NFT model is way better for creator revenue too, versus a cut of swap fees + token allocation. the exception is if your cointent goes viral *and* you sell at the right time (see comments above re: pump and dump)

in theory, the more liquid, trader-friendly coin model leads to more posts reaching greater heights in terms of volume — that is the bet, clearly — but I'm not sure it's working out like that

40 mints on Rodeo = 40 x 0.0001 ETH mint price x 50% creator cut = 0.002 ETH for the artist

0.004 ETH volume on a Zora coin —> 1% trading fee of 0.00004 ETH x 50% creator cut = 0.00002 ETH for the artist
(ignoring the token allocation because that's typically worth ~nothing)

literally 100x difference... NFTs are so much better than content coins for the average creator. I'm not even against content coins per se — I think memecoins are interesting and this is another flavor — but the empowerment rhetoric is hard to swallow

Imagine if you had creator coins, but the creator also minted a 721 token on creation, and 100% of the fees for the coins went to the holder of the 721.

The creator gets it all, but has the option to also sell their NFT, and the buyer then owns the ongoing revenue of the creator coin.