Crypto Grit

Pudgy Penguins’ last 30 days volume was $5M. At 5% royalties, that’s ~$250,000/month in additional revenue. That capital could be fully reinvested into the NFT ecosystem through buybacks, a strategy token, or other benefits. In the short to medium term, this helps reduce the current bleeding and prevents discontent within the core community, the same people who are still supporting the brand's releases and social metrics. So why would any NFT holder be against it? 1. “Floor price doesn’t matter is cope. ” (Luca’s own words) Numbers going up is still the best utility. It reinforces everything else in the ecosystem. 2. “You lose on-chain provenance.” This would still be an official migration/solution. But more importantly, does Pudgy Penguins really prioritize on-chain purity? Over the past year, it’s clear the brand has been optimizing for web2 expansion, proliferation, and growth, even at the cost of web3-native culture. That’s very different from collections like CryptoPunks or BAYC, where provenance is good chunk of the value. Migrating those would be far more controversial. 3. “Migration is a mess.” Yes, there are challenges, especially with dormant holders, which could impact the full 8,888 supply. But unless there’s an alternative solution, this tradeoff is hard to avoid. In reality, you'll lose the clean 8,888 supply, but you’re effectively reducing active supply, which can make the collection more attractive to new collectors and entrants. 4. “It’s extracting from the community.” Luca and Peter acquired the brand, and royalties disappeared right after, so that argument doesn’t really hold. Especially if those royalties are fully reinvested into supporting the floor, and strengthening the flywheel. Are we doing this?👍👎

Pudgy Penguins