Bought for $2.9M, NFT of Jack Dorsey tweet finds few takers
fidelity.com
fidelity.com
https://www.fidelity.com/news/article/top-news/202204141032R...
Say you could buy an NFT for $1 that is currently valued on the market at $1000 (say, other similar NFTs from the same set have traded recently at that price). Would you not buy it because it has "no tangible value"? Or would you buy it and flip it to make $999. I know what I would do.
Good investments aren't about what you like or think have "value", it's about what other people like.
Not every asset has to have tangible value, they can have purely financial value. I said you technically get voting power when you buy a stock because I don't think that's why most people buy stock. I buy because I believe in the company and I believe the value will increase.
I haven't seen much tangible value from NFTs and, as this article shows, they don't have much financial value either.
Also by your definition an expensive NFT does have tangible value, I can brag to my friends about it and get social clout (probably the most important kind of value that exists).
Any real art that is being sold as an NFT is probably stolen anyways.
Art is hard to define. Is a banana duct-taped to a wall (and later eaten), art? It sold for $120k I believe. It doesn't get lower effort than that.
Maybe the "art" here is in fact the scam. I find it artistic, at least. At the same time, it can be about making money.
A better argument would be that NFT's don't benefit independent artists, regardless of whether the content is actually art or not. I already brought up the rampant art theft on NFT marketplaces, and these NFT projects aren't about artists. Take the bored ape yacht club; go to their website, or opensea profile. You won't see any of the artists credited. The whole thing is owned by a parent company. It's just here to make money.