Apparently the big ticket item coming out of Buddy's 100th goal is an NFT.

When the footage is already in the public domain I'm not sure how NFT's and live sport work together but apparently they do. (Seems they are like the old swap cards)

Top Shot is an NFT marketplace where basketball fans can buy, sell, and trade NBA moments. So far, the most expensive collectible traded is LeBron James dunking against the Houston Rockets, which was sold for over $387,000. 

Would you pay for a bang bang bang NFT

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/next-afl-player-pay-deal-must-consider-revenue-drop-mclachlan-20220406-p5ab6g.html

Edited April 6, 20222 yr by Diamond_Jim

When you own a football swap card, you at least get to hold the card. Frame it. Burn it. Use it as a miniature cheese board. Whatever you want.

With an NFT, you get to say you own the card. Even if it's just a JPG picture of a card. Even if someone else has a copy of the picture. (The actual paper card might not even exist.)

Imagine if Dean Kent sold the moment when he kicked the goal to lock us in to finals in 2018. Someone out there gets to say "hey, see this bit here where Kent slots the goal? I own that." His mate might say "so what? I've got that on a video somewhere at home. And it's on the AFL web site, and Fox sports, and youtube, and so on." The first guy can say, "ah yes. You can watch that very special moment on all those places. But I OWN it."

 

NFT's are a weird thing.  Can't do much with them except store them on a digital device.  So value is in the scarcity and hope the value goes up.  Presumably the AFL will release only one NFT for each image to not dilute value.

Copyright doesn't transfer to the NFT holder.

One would hope they just aren't the latest fad.

Would rather buy something tangible or the original.

 

2 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

NFT's are a weird thing.  Can't do much with them except store them on a digital device.  So value is in the scarcity and hope the value goes up.  Presumably the AFL will release only one NFT for each image to not dilute value.

Copyright doesn't transfer to the NFT holder.

One would hope they just aren't the latest fad.

Would rather buy something tangible or the original.

 

i rather stick a needle in my eye balls

1 minute ago, daisycutter said:

i rather stick a needle in my eye balls

Get a photo of that so you can sell it as an NFT. Better yet, get an artist to mock it up in photoshop and sell that.

all the latest rage

would totally get an nft of bang^4 or max^5 or max after the siren

Why would you spend good money on an NFT?  I have NFI.

2 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

Why would you spend good money on an NFT?  I have NFI.

I suspect you are in the present majority but increasingly the digital world and its uses surprise me.

NFT's are certainly newsworthy these days

7 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

Why would you spend good money on an NFT?  I have NFI.

I wondered how long it would take for someone to post that connection!

You take first prize, Ds!!

A by-product of this is the long standing AFL policies that players have no rights to any images taken of them.

As it is that article is not very clear as to whether a player in this case Buddy gets any $ for the NFT's.  It says 20% was negotiated with the AFLPA but not sure if that is for the AFLPA, Club or Player.  How do others interpret this from McLachlan:

“There’s an arrangement between us and the players’ association that’s been reached in the last couple of days. They’ll take 20 per cent, and then if clubs or individuals, an additional 5 per cent for marketing of the product, and there’s obviously our partnership with [software company] Animoca,” he said.

I can see in future players agitating with the AFLPA to give them back their rights for images of them doing something special or iconic images eg The famous Tayla Harris kick.

Edited April 6, 20222 yr by Lucifers Hero

29 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i rather stick a needle in my eye balls

Here you go. Will we split the millions 50/50?

12 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

I can see in future players agitating with the AFLPA to give them back their rights for images of them doing something special or iconic images eg The famous Taylor Harris kick.

Didn't Leo Barry get some compensation for all those pictures of that mark he took? His argument was that there wouldn't be that special moment if he hadn't taken that mark, yet his picture was all over the place.

Missed his moment by 15-odd years.

28 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

Didn't Leo Barry get some compensation for all those pictures of that mark he took?

 

I don't know.

I don't think Tayla Harris got paid for her iconic image but the AFL made tons of $ from the promotion of  AFLW because of it.

Will Buddy?  Depends how one interprets the McLachan's comment I posted above. 

Edited April 6, 20222 yr by Lucifers Hero

Non fungible tokens has to be the worst name since fracking.

47 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

all the latest rage

would totally get an nft of bang^4 or max^5 or max after the siren

The concept could be one or more of each bang with one bang being rare thus increasing the desire to complete the set.

Manipulation of the gullible masses but ........

I love NFT Nba top shot I made a killing selling them, we will see something similar come into the AFL Now that there are so many crypto sponsorships, since Covid began this sort of stuff NFTs, crypto and even AFL Trading cards has gone bonkers 

Could someone  please explain ( in terms you would use to a complete dodo) what the [censored] this thread is all about. 

12 minutes ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

Could someone  please explain ( in terms you would use to a complete dodo) what the [censored] this thread is all about. 

The AFL is planning to create NFT's starting with Buddy's 1000th goal and sell them.  They can be on-sold.  They are a speculative 'investment'.  Anyone can create one.  But they don't exist in any sort of physical form; a bit like cryptocurrencies.

I doubt this will help but it was the most stratight forward definition I could find...

Nonfungible tokens are units of data that represent a unique digital asset stored and verified on the blockchain.

 

These examples of multimillion $ NFT's will blow your mind:  https://decrypt.co/62898/most-expensive-nfts-ever-sold

Well ....... err thanks Luci ........ I think.

Well to be honest, I still have NFI ......... but thanks for trying.

NFT's have two elements

Digitally they are verified (think incredibly long serial number). That's the blockchain like Bitcoin etc

Secondly because the item whatever it is is verified as one of one or one of a few it is therefore rare.

Anything could be the subject of the token which is what makes the thing sound stupid. It merely has to be something that a group of people want to possess

And being non fungible it doesn't exist

https://www.creativebloq.com/features/what-are-nfts

Edited April 6, 20222 yr by Diamond_Jim

Even less stable than crypto.   Was the next big thing but fallen off a cliff at the moment.  May get organised and become something over the long term, but who knows.  But people pay lots for all sorts things I think are crap when there's lots of spare cheap cash floating around....

As you own it, you can commercial the image etc in a formal manner.  If you just want to look at it, what's the point. 

 

4 hours ago, Mazer Rackham said:

When you own a football swap card, you at least get to hold the card. Frame it. Burn it. Use it as a miniature cheese board. Whatever you want.

With an NFT, you get to say you own the card. Even if it's just a JPG picture of a card. Even if someone else has a copy of the picture. (The actual paper card might not even exist.)

Imagine if Dean Kent sold the moment when he kicked the goal to lock us in to finals in 2018. Someone out there gets to say "hey, see this bit here where Kent slots the goal? I own that." His mate might say "so what? I've got that on a video somewhere at home. And it's on the AFL web site, and Fox sports, and youtube, and so on." The first guy can say, "ah yes. You can watch that very special moment on all those places. But I OWN it."

 

Hmm... I can easily find an image of any normal football card and with the right skill print an exact replica. It's the same with the Mona Lisa. Or any of Van Gough's work. Print it at high enough quality. Frame it well enough. I can claim to have an original but its *true* value is much lower than the original. NFTs are much the same. Easier to copy to share, of course. But if you *own* it, it doesn't matter how much it's shared or copied or replicated. You own the original digital copy. That's where the value is.

1 hour ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

Well ....... err thanks Luci ........ I think.

Well to be honest, I still have NFI ......... but thanks for trying.

if you are interested, uncle, i have some excellent pet rocks i can sell you at a very reasonable price

even better these pet rocks are metamorphised into a genuine virtual digital token and each one is unique

don't thank me, just send me money and i will digitally register your new assets 

what is an nft? read on...

https://twitter.com/lennydil/status/1511540923054030848