RM on Warpcast

Reid DeRamus pfp

A recurring question is whether speculation & other motivators can co-exist - in the same purchase, same product ux, etc. I think they can! One dumb example that came to mind: Phish posters, specifically Jim Pollock prints. Fans arrive early to shows to buy these prints & go through the annoying experience of being at a Phish show w/ a poster tube. Most people buying these prints do so out of fandom & show them off in their homes, offices, etc. BUT, some folks end up selling them, and there's a decent secondary market for these posters. https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=Jim%20Pollock%20Phish%20Poster IMO, financial gain is not a primary motivator for people buying these prints (there's much easier ways to make money!), but the opportunity for the price to appreciate may encourage more people to buy them and/or pay more for the prints, both of which grow revenue for these prints & expand the broader Phish economy.

3 replies

2 recasts

9 reactions

RM pfp

Not sure if I fully agree with this. Having been at the mercy of scalpers myself to. Example I started collecting sneakers probably around 20 years ago. I liked them, but in all honesty what I really liked was hanging around the store, staying in line on a release day with 10-20 people because we were all into it for mainly the same reason. When the market exploded too many scalpers arrived at the scene. Even worse when all moved online through raffles dominated by bots. Great more people loved my hobby, but its very disheartening if you loose access. A lot of this comes with a fake scarcity mindset. Yeah we will all limitations at first, but as a fan limitations is getting annoying really fast when you have to put a dollar value up for your ongoing love. So some of my favorite releases where those that required you take on your shoes and walk around in them until they slightly crease and you had to leave the box behind. Annoyed the shit out of scalpers...

2 replies

0 recast

1 reaction

Reid DeRamus pfp

This is great, thank you! I actually think this is great evidence on how speculation can ruin the vibe & integrity of these types of cherished items. In the case of Jim Pollock prints, they're only sold *inside* the venue, so you have to actually get into the show to buy them (& they limit purchases to one or two per person). If they were sold on the lot, I'd imagine scalpers would be the first in line. For us, I'm hoping we can minimize the impact & influence of pure speculators through product design and incentives. e.g., We were toying around with the idea of having transaction fees much higher, like 10%, or maybe even 50%. In theory, higher trx fees will lower involvement by bots or people looking to speculate & find quick arbitrage. Thanks again for sharing.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

RM pfp

to be honest does not matter at all if its venue exclusive if the pay off justifies it. there is even a side effect of people although fans being aware of it then going for those items to resale to recoup their cost. every form of monetization comes with side effects. to be honest this would actually be really cool area to do some general research on that topic overall. One approach i find interessting is LEGO moving away from purely exclusive sets with to sets that are just made of generally available bricks. So anyone can have the instructions but the packaging exclusive. I am not against purely against scarcity or exclusivity but I do think we are to easy on the differences of the two segments. Fans and Scalpers have very opposing motivations. How would we design for both?

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

RM pfp

Another thing is that in general most creators are not "business" savy enough to fully understand the market dynamics that they may accidentally unlock. Once something is out there that was released with good intentions the damage to the community is done and trust is very fragile these days.

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction