Rising from its modest minting cost of 0. 08 Ether (ETH), Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) has climbed to nonfungible-token (NFT) stardom, competing with one of the earliest examples of Larva Labs CryptoPunk NFT. Many crypto-natives are speculating about whether the collection of BAYC will “flip” CryptoPunks due to its steady growth. There are many reasons to support it.
Tip-toeing around which collection is the top NFT contender, the competition between these two collections is driven by several factors. Due to the existing divide between mainstream media adoption, and IP rights granted to its owners by the collection of CryptoPunks, there are also a variety of unique holders for the BAYC or CryptoPunks collections. This is significant because the number of unique holders can often be indicative of a larger spread of owners. It means that the project’s overall value or floor value is less dependent on a single sale. Let’s look at what NFT traders and advocates are discussing in relation to the BAYC project that will flip the CryptoPunks floor price.
Two different labs and visions
The stagnation of CryptoPunks in comparison to the dynamic marketing nature of BAYC leaves many speculating that a “flippening” is inevitable. LarvaLabs does not offer the “no rights retained” option, despite many copyright options available to creators.
Many have commented on the speculation via Twitter. One particular now-former CryptoPunk #4156 was sold for 2,500 Ether on principle and contention regarding Larva Labs’ stance on Creative Commons 0 (CC0) — otherwise known as “no rights reserved.”
it’s not entitlement, it’s activism. It happens all the time on public markets. A large stakeholder believes that they can unlock more value and tries to argue their case. if it doesn’t work out (as seems to be the case here) they sell and move on https://t.co/dZBErq07A4
— 4156 (@punk4156) December 5, 2021
Aside from issues regarding intellectual property rights, it seems that people are joining forces to “flippen” since BAYC appears to have mastered its marketing and strategic partnerships.
Launched April 20, 2021, the funny, but bored-appearing Apes were minted for 0. 08 ETH, valued at $300 at the time. Not long after more notable names like NBA star Stephen Curry began switching their Twitter profile pictures to Apes did the market begin to surge, solidifying the collection as an apparent “blue chip.”
Gaining the attention and adoption of mainstream media and celebrities alike, BAYC seems to have a different trajectory than CryptoPunks. BAYC partners with other brands, such as Adidas, and most recently announced its partnership with Animoca Brands. This Hong-Kong-based software company is focused on blockchain games. BAYC confirmed its partnership with Adidas by referring to its potential interoperability – the ability to exchange data between different systems, or in this case, Metaverses.
— adidas Originals (@adidasoriginals) December 2, 2021
CryptoPunks were first generated for free on June 23, 2017, for anyone with an Ethereum wallet. Only the cost of gas to mint was charged. Although at the time, many considered CryptoPunks to be the first “NFT,” the token itself is not an ERC-721 token. While built on the Ethereum blockchain, it turns out that the CryptoPunk pre-dates the ERC-721 standard and is closer to being an ERC-20 token.
According to Larva Labs, it no longer has any control over the code utilized to buy, sell and trade the CryptoPunks over the blockchain. It gave the code credibility and transparency by letting go of its control. This was in anticipation that it would deliver what it promised.
Whether this is what the community expected is another story.
Creators control the IP or bust
There seems to be a climate shift regarding where value is placed in an NFT collection. In the NFT world, the ongoing dispute is over who owns the rights.
Many are questioning projects that grant their owners only limited rights. However, very few NFT projects align themselves with a CC0 mentality where “no rights are reserved.” The few NFT projects operating in this way are CrypToadz and NounsDAO — a project dear to @punk4156.
it’s not about copyright vs no copyright, it’s about making the pixels as censorship resistant as the token they’re attached to. If you don’t give the token and image the same rights what’s the point in binding them together forever on a blockchain?
— 4156 (@punk4156) December 5, 2021
Not satisfied or content with the limited rights granted to CryptoPunks owners caused renowned CryptoPunks Ape Punk #4156 to change their tune. Despite the rather embedded relationship to CryptoPunks — particularly the one behind their “brand” Punks #4156, placed one of the rarest types in the collection for sale. Their Ape punk up was listed for sale at 2,500 ETH, valued at $10. 26 million. Many have taken to Twitter in response to this historic sale, which was the third most valuable CryptoPunks.
Copyright was what drove one of the most prominent community members out. Given its reputation, many are now turning their attention to the left-facing CryptoPhunks. Since they are allegedly giving its owners IP rights, Phunks supporters claim that they are on the “right side” of history. Despite all the rights being granted, it is important to mention figures. There is no disputing the number of transactions the BAYC collection has made.
Power in numbers
For the last 30 days, the BAYC collection has amassed a trading volume of nearly 44 Ether, according to data from OpenSea. Impressively, in November alone, the floor price of BAYC surged over 50% and the average price is roughly 56.5 Ether, suggesting its floor could easily inch closer to that of Punks.
Comparatively, the Crypto Punks collection’s locked in 32,005 Ether in the last four weeks. Since the sale of Punk #4156, its floor price has steadily been decreasing and is down 7% from last month, according to data from Dune Analytics.
With so much emphasis on floor prices, the number of unique holders in an NFT collection often gets overlooked. One can lose sight of the token’s true value if one focuses solely on how much liquidity is being traded.
One could argue that the greater the number of unique holders, then the more successful the collection. It’s more widely used and less vulnerable to a few individuals who might set the fire ablaze with one sale.
When comparing the two collections, BAYC has nearly 6,000 unique holders, whereas CryptoPunks has less than half the number of unique holders at 3,273. According to Larva Labs, the top 10 CryptoPunk owners have over 100 CryptoPunks in their wallets with the top wallet holding 410.
According to Dune Analytics, the top percentage of Apes owned is 1. 05%, meaning that no wallet owns more than 105 Apes. The BAYC collection has a smaller number of wallets than the rest, which means that fewer wallets own more Apes than . The Bored Ape Yacht Club community members that will protect the value the brand has seemed to capture through its partnerships and are “diamond handing.”
A potential “flippening” — but does it matter? The emphasis on “will/when BAYC turn CryptoPunks” is great. But, the bigger question is: does it matter?
Regardless of Apes flipping Punks, many argue that Apes would never outprice premium tier punks like Aliens or the CryptoPunk version of Apes. Some argue that the BAYC collection lacks visual “stratifications of status,” which makes them more difficult to value.
Only time will tell if Apes turn Punks. The narrative could shift to focus less on market caps and floor prices for both collections and more on the value each collection captures over time regardless of copyright restrictions.
There is always another “blue chip” potential.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect those of Cointelegraph.com. You should do your research before making any investment or trading decision.