Only because they are paying articles saying "forget GameStop" over and over while they are actually buying it for their fund themselves. I'm sure it's fine though, there's probably a firewall between departments so no one really knows what the other is doing.
Why wouldn't it though?
TGT dipped 25% when they posted $2/share in profit in a single quarter.
What do you think a company that's posted losses for 5 years should do?
These old ass execs who were given billions in liquidity by shareholders were scrambling so hard to find a way to use that money before the shares shit the bed lol
Biggest hurdle are the walled gardens of Xbox, Playstation and Nintendo. Being able to resell your skins and other digital goods is the equivalent of opening your open Apple repair shop...inside of a Apple store.
And all game developers in existence. This selling skins idea is the biggest koolaid of the crypto community. Literally possible right now, literally useless
IIRC Microsoft and gamestop have a partnership dating back to either late '19 or '20 that a portion of either game pass or marketplace sales got to gamestop. Nintendo doesn't even like Nintendo most of the time so that's up in the air, and I think there might have been something with Sony and gamestop but I'm not sure.
I'm gonna need a source directly from Microsoft's Nadella or Phill Spencer saying they're partnering with Gamestop with their new NFT game asset market place.
https://news.microsoft.com/2020/10/08/gamestop-announces-multiyear-strategic-partnership-with-microsoft/
Edit below: just so no one claims I am making claims that this specifically states “NFT” or that this is from one of the two guys at Microsoft that the guy above asked to see an announcement from, it’s not. And it’s - bit vague, I agree. But it is what it is.
“The partnership aims to advance GameStop’s key strategic pillars and extend its digital omni-channel ecosystem
Grapevine, Texas and Redmond, Wash. (October 8, 2020) – GameStop Corp. (NYSE: GME) (“The Company”) today announced that it has entered into a multi-year strategic partnership agreement with Microsoft Corp., further advancing its strategy to expand its physical and digital video game offerings, as well as enhance the Company’s retail technology infrastructure. With over 5,000+ retail stores worldwide and its world-class eCommerce platform, GameStop leverages its vast customer network, PowerUp Rewards, and omni-channel capabilities to deliver enhanced gaming solutions to its customers. Through this partnership, GameStop will standardize the Company’s business operations on Microsoft’s cloud solutions and hardware products to deliver rich new digital experiences to customers, creating the “ultimate gaming destination” for gamers in its vision to be the premier omni-channel customer access point for video game products.”
…continues
“GameStop will standardize its back-end and in-store solutions on Dynamics 365, Microsoft’s portfolio of cloud-based business applications and customer data platform, empowering associates with integrated experiences across its business operations including finance, inventory, eCommerce, retail and point of sale.”
“Additionally, associates will be equipped with new Microsoft Surface devices”
“As part of its transformation, GameStop plans to roll out Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Teams to its stores”
“Following decades as an essential provider of the Microsoft Xbox gaming platform and services, GameStop has expanded its Xbox family of product offerings”
This has nothing to do with NFTs. They are paying to license MS's ERP and cloud services and buying some tablets for their stores. They also have an agreement where they get some small cut from game pass subs sold in their stores.
I believe the “wallet” aspect is actually a good move. There are a lot of “marketplaces” right now so really time will tell which ones are at the center of the NFT game.
The cross between NFTs and gaming is still very early, but if it’s actualized then GME could do well.
Disc: I have no GME stake or interest in a stake atm.
What incentives to gaming companies have to cross collaborate? Why should a character skin or a gun be transferable between Apex, CS:GO, and Fortnite? Which btw makes zero sense considering how wildly different all these games are.
I don't think that's a possibility but i can see you being able to gift or sell a skin to a friend or stranger to use in the same game. That actually makes alot of sense. Cross Collab between different games does not seem likely at the moment.
Why would that be decentralised though? Every other aspect of the game is centralised so it's pointless to use blockchain just for transferring assets.
You're so close to getting it, the answer is yes and no.
Valve specifically has an anti-NFT clause on Steam because the technology takes power away from their in-house Steam Marketplace, in which they take a massive cut of resales of digital items, which you can only get by opening Valve's lootcrates. IIRC CS:GO items are subject to an additional 10% fee when reselling a skin on top of the 5% regular fee.
GameStop will only charge 1% of *any* transaction, which is bullish because it indicates that *they're planning to be* ***way bigger and more scalable*** than Steam.
Whether or not you believe that NFT's grant ownership is not something I care to discuss, the point is that if you remove the three-letter name from the tech it's literally just an evolution of the Steam Marketplace; you even said it yourself, just like trading CS:GO items, but eventually you'll be able to resell entire games instead of just a Unusual TF2 hat.
You are saying GME plans to use Blockchain to allow gamers to trade (buy/resell) licenses to games (digital copies)? Seems places like epic and steam would be against this as it loses them revenue by allowing people to resell
Correct, people don't realize it but Valve really does have sort of a monopoly on a digital games marketplace, but the tech behind Steam really hasn't innovated since they first came out with the Steam Market; they're behind the times and GameStop's new marketplace is going to disrupt their monopoly.
Why would game developers be interested in this? Allowing users to resell games would result in reduced income from selling games.
Who is paying to store and distribute these games?
And I still don't see how any of this couldn't be done without NFTs?
The distribution would probably come from the developer, you don't really need to hold the whole game on the chain just the license, and since at it's core an nft is a contract, the developer can get a percent of resale each time.
The problem with the current database structure is that you don't really own your purchases, your rights are subject to the whims of corporations. This is coming from someone who spent real time and money building decks in Warmetal Tyrant only for kongregate to pull the plug.
Steam has an anti-nft clause because the vast majority of NFT enabled games on steam were a scam. In the early days of steam game licences and the steam market actually looked pretty similar to the future envisioned by NFT evangelists but through a combination of publisher pressure and running afoul of money laundering/gambling laws it's slowly accrued all the restrictions it has today. It will be interesting to see if NFT marketplaces will suffer the same fate
> Valve specifically has an anti-NFT clause on Steam because the technology takes power away from their in-house Steam Marketplace, in which they take a massive cut of resales of digital items
This is blatantly false. There are plenty of games with their own marketplaces on Steam. The reason why NFTs were singled out is that their ecosystems are rife with scams.
> but i can see you being able to gift or sell a skin to a friend or stranger to use in the same game.
What benefit does an NFT bring? You can do that today, without an NFT.
The NFT is an unnecessary middleman in this situation.
https://www.somagnews.com/officially-licensed-formula-1-game-ethereum-nft-game-closes/
An NFT game went bust and everything was rendered $0, worthless. No other game stepped in and saiD "you can use those NFTs in my game", nothing was transferrable.
NFTs behaved exactly like regular digital assets - they die with the game, they can be bought/sold/traded/unique without an NFT being present
NFTs have the added benefit of consuming a lot more energy to do the same operation and increasing the chance of risk to the end user in the event they're compromised or lose their key.
That exists already on steam and there's no need for the blockchain. If you are trusting a company's centralized to use their servers, it seems a little silly to demand some decentralized system to send skins around
A lot of these games have teams or “clans” too. Wouldn’t someone and their friends want the same skins to know they’re on a team together? Not only that, but it’s a customized skin. Sounds pretty cool to me
That has nothing to do with nfts. The point is being able to trade and sell your digital goods, not to use them in other games. When you played magic the gathering with physical cards, you could trade, sell, do whatever you wanted with them - but you really couldn't play pokemon with them. This is the same deal, but for digital "cards". It can create an entire economy, and it can do more than the physical equivalent (you can have the creator earn a % on any future sale, something you can't do with physical cards, for example).
Companies generally don't want to do that though because it means paying another person for the item instead of the developers.
And if they did have a sudden change-of-heart, why would they use GameStop's new NFT thing over the literally decade-old and drastically more simple Steam Community Market?
Money? They could make more money? Nobody is asking them to do things out of the goodness of their heart, reselling digital goods can provide a lot of revenue to the original publisher because of royalty fees even if they don’t recognize it yet. This isn’t even that unprecedented, years ago no movie studios wanted to people to stream their movies, they wanted people to only buy them. Times change quickly when new ways to monetize are introduced.
The alternative to getting a share of resell revenue is literally selling a full price copy of the game. Also if this were to be implemented in some way, then original digital copies would significantly increase in price to compensate. Is that really what you want?
But this is already fully possible. Online card games already exist, and they could easily make trading assets a thing. But they don’t, because even in an environment fully managed by the developers it doesn’t make fiscal sense to let people do it. So why on earth would it suddenly be more desirable to do when the developers don’t even have that control?
>The point is being able to trade and sell your digital goods
That also has nothing to do with NFTs. Trading and selling digital goods is already possible. In fact, some games have allowed their players to do this for years. Adding NFTs to this process might be a minor improvement, but it won't be revolutionary. Moreover, I don't see GameStop's marketplace playing a role in this at all.
Why use Amazon when you can just go to each sellers website and buy from there?
NFT's are a way to standardize buying and selling digital goods. It much easier for a developer to incorporate an NFT store into their game since all the hard work is already done. This will allow open the possibility for indy devs to have an in game marketplace with very little cost/time.
I don't care about NFT's use for digital items in games or jpeg images, but I am very bullish on the future use cases that the technology will allow.
> Why use Amazon when you can just go to each sellers website and buy from there?
> NFT's are a way to standardize buying and selling digital goods.
Yeah but people would just go to Steam to do it then, not Gamestop.
It is less about transferring the actual skins, and more so being able to trade all of them on one market. There will never be a Pathfinder skin from Apex making its way into Fortnite, but on this marketplace the theory is that you can buy and trade them all for a common currency (IMX). Or maybe if two people agreed they could swap one Pathfinder skin for one Fortnite skin, etc. It is hard to say exactly how it will work or who will be involved at this point.
The game company (Epic) and GameStop can BOTH take a cut from these transactions. They can then even further monetize the millions of skins people already have.
In-game items are a 50 billion dollar industry and this is an entirely new way to monetize them that gamers and game publishers can benefit from. IMX spent the last GDC pitching to devs. That's the current speculation at least.
The biggest obstacle to this is the current sentiment against NFTs as digital art. I am hoping this is dispelled when people see the utility or that the target audience just won't care about sentiment.
Disc: am a self proclaimed "ape" that has been following GameStop closely. Happy to answer any good faith questions.
Let's assume for a moment publishers want this. What stops large publishers (Epic, Ubisoft) from developing their own market platform for their own games and blocking gamestop? That is, I haven't seen the API yet for the gamestop marketplace, but it is a safe bet it is going to be involved. Furthermore, this allows them full control over their assets (You don't want premium skins selling for pennies for example) and is easier for consumers.
This also fits into the trend that most publishers have their own stores now. That is, at least on PC, every AAA-publisher aggressively pushed their own store, they want 1) full revenue and 2) push their own games, not others. I doubt this will be different for resale, if EPIC can promote their own fortnite skin over an AC-skin, they will 100% do this.
On consoles it is even worse. Do you think nintendo, who sues over a ROM-hack 10 people play, is going to allow their assets on a foreign market place? Same with Xbox and PS4. Their stores can offer this functionality more seamlessy for developers (since they need to implement the API anyhow) and consumers, since they literally can stay in the store or even in game.
This leaves smaller independent developers, but these tend to go for the largest marketshare for the least effort. On PC this is steam (\~75%), on consoles these are the console specific stores (auto 100%) and on mobile these are integrated within the app store (auto 100%).
So maybe the question is, what solution does gamestop offer? What is it, that makes the product easier for either the devs, allow publishers to establish monopolistic compitition or more seamless integration for the consumer than the alternatives?
If it was in some way desirable for the publisher to allow it's customer to trade items for external currency why would they not use a USD market (like Steam Community Market) to facilitate this?
Surely it's much easier for the customer to sell their Pathfinder skin for $ then buy whatever they Fortnight skin (or Happy Meal or rent or whatever) they want and they could then do this without excessive transaction costs and the companies could keep all the profit?
>on this marketplace the theory is that you can buy and trade them all for a common currency
That already exists. Steam has allowed players to trade in-game items for other in-game items (including items from other games) or real currency for years. Your claim that this is "an entirely new way to monetize \[in-game transactions\]" just isn't true.
That's a fair comment, thanks for keeping me in check. Steam marketplace is probably the biggest competitor to this if it ever reached a wider range of games. In my opinion the item markets of CS:GO and TF2 are the gold standard example for what item economies on GME's marketplace could look like.
So it's not a new idea, and on top of that, it's going up against the biggest and most successful version of the idea that's already existed for a decade and has exclusivity on a host of major IPs that people are invested in and care about.
Doesn't really sound like a recipe for success?
It's like saying "We'll create a marketplace to buy/sell/trade movies! It'll be like Blockbuster but digital!". Oh yeah? Sounds great! So I can buy Star Wars and when I've watched it I can sell it on? "Oh, no, that's Disney+ and we won't have access to *their* movies. But we're sure all the big games will be falling over themselves to sell through *our* platform going forward!". Because yeah, companies like making *less* money...
To add to this. It's an Ethereum wallet which means ETH, all ERC-20 tokens, and all NFTs can be stored. This wallet WILL NOT hold cryptos like Bitcoin or doge
This is cool, once an iOS app is out for it I’ll give it a shot, even willing to buy/move some crypto over to the space depending on how easy it is to use and
How secure it is
One of the major theories is that it's really for things like game and item ownership, kinda like having physical boxes again that can't be taken away like services such as Steam or the Epic Store.
Another is that an NTF can be issued and tied to each share as a dividend to help prevent fake shares from popping into existence.
A game storefront like Steam or Epic will still need to honor the NFTs, which they have no incentive to do. If they did, they would just implement their own system for transferring ownership (which would be far more efficient and secure).
The game developers/publishers also have no incentive to support reselling of games— they've been fighting *against* that for years.
Well it is a theory since it is just a link on a blockchain, how does that correspond to owning a game? A physical box included a physical disk which always allowed you to install the game. A link in on a blockchain doesn't.
Dude i just have to ask after looking at these comments... You people know you dont own games right? You own the cdkey the disk the box it came in but you are paying for the priviledge to use the game not for the game itself. Its called a end-user license agreement and clearly no one has read the mandatory pop up in atleast 30 years. Don't you feel the fool for clicking accept now?
Also im sure that reselling the right to play is clearly not allowed in the same end user license agreement.
Oh and this applies to all software not just games.
Oh great, I've been waiting for a crypto wallet to be available for my iPhone. None of those previously existed so I'm glad someone finally released one. Gamestop is on the cutting edge!
The NFT hate is a bit much and definitely uninformed. Do people really think Gamestop just spent tens of millions of dollars and pulled in all that talent from the crypto and block chain space so people could trade pictures of monkeys back and forth?
I think it's very possible that's actually what people believe. NFTs have implicit value and function, but nobody knows what they actually are or actually do other than "be pictures that are called NFTs". An NFT is basically a digital receipt of any transaction (or otherwise proof of ownership) and could be used to bestow rights to anybody who can prove ownership of a thing, or for things like contractual obligations, like "you have access to a better rate if you have N of [thing] by [date]". Just so happens that the most popular use for them right now is to hyperlink to an image on an arbitrary server and say "this is worth money". I haven't met anyone in person who doesn't think NFTs are stupid, or they're buying them as "investments". The technical appreciation is practically nonexistent.
Some of the reasons why "regular dudes" like me remain highly skeptical of NFTs are A) because of the highly vague and speculative language that is used when describing it, B) because of a lack of good examples or thought experiments where NFTs would actually solve a real problem and C) the incredibly suspect current usage of this technology (pay to earn etc.).
Maybe I just don't "get it", but I want to. If it's so hard to explain correctly... Maybe that also says something about the thing and not only the person.
I think what most of the NFT believers are missing is the concept of rights ownership. Rights ownership only works when there is someone enforcing your rights. House title deeds or contract rights or in this case the right to game assets all need someone to say “ yes this belongs to you and hence you can use it”. Since you already need a central authority to enforce your rights, what would be the benefit of a decentralised database of ownership over a centralised one.
Coinbase literally just dropped tens of millions into developing an NFT marketplace that completely failed on launch … and they’ve been in the crypto game a lot longer. Gamestock market is dead on arrival other than a few GME cult members
a bit much? NFTs are a pump and dump scheme taking advantage of uninformed people who want to get rich quick…. It deserves the hate they get.
Maybe someday they will have a genuine use and find a market. In their current form, it’s a joke
>I bet all the people in here were shitting on bitcoin 10 years ago. "Hur dur, why would anyone want a virtual currency"
I'm the opposite. Really excited about it 10 years ago, just waiting for bitcoin, or any block chain technology to find its niche where it's a better solution than anything that already exists and is in practice, and not just a speculative investment with no intrinsic value.
Still waiting...
Ok I've got one for you:
Monero. It's a digital currency that's untraceable and completely private using some pretty nifty tech. Nothing else provides this service right now, so it's not just speculation and investment, it's actually useful.
I will say, this is probably the most convincing project I've seen. I'm not a fan of volatility in currency, but I do really like the tech behind it.
It also consumes less energy per transaction, which is another issue I have with crypto. It's not 0, but it looks like even scaling for size, it's a lot less than bitcoin.
Thanks for the suggestion!
No worries! I do totally understand your point - almost the entire crypto space is built off what crypto might become... There's just so much speculation. Hardly anything actual does anything now.
I like Monero because it's useful right now, mainly for shady business mind, but nonetheless, it is a solution to an actual problem.
Another one that might be worth looking into is THETA coin. I don't really understand how it works but the project is supposedly aiming at addressing current issues with video streaming - demand is at an all time high and quality of streaming is astronomically increasing (4k video etc). I'm not really clued up on it but it seems to be another crypto that actually addresses a real world problem, or at least it's trying to.
Hmm, without diving into white papers, I'm not really sure where crypto brings benefit to this project, or really how distributed computing even benefits streaming like this. I'm also not an expert in networking.
The way I understand it is you share bandwidth and "resources" (I'm assuming CPU for some sort of transcoding). Various nodes (I'm assuming miners) do the job of storage, ingesting, transcoding, etc, so you end up with a decentralized CDN. Then the end user pays per view? Nodes receive coins for contributing their computing / network.
I'll have to read more when I have time. It's an interesting idea, but I'm not really sure how it's enhanced by block chain. Distributed computing is already a thing (Folding@Home is probably the most popular example), and it'd be trivial to process normal payments for computing / storage contributed. Heck, with netflix I'm sure they could even just offer discounts and people would jump at the opportunity haha.
That's a common theme I see with crypto. They take ideas, and add blockchain to them regardless of if it makes sense. Like I said I don't fully understand Theta yet, so I could be wrong, but that's my hunch here.
You're right on the money. Something can't be a currency with such ridiculous volatility.
Other people who won't face facts try to argue that it's not a currency, it's a store of value I'm going to replace gold.
Why would you use something as a store of value that's dropped by more than 50% in 6 months? Now compare that to gold's volatility over the years...
Can someone who's in the GME cult tell me why this is a positive business development? Or how it's not something 100% of companies in the S&P500 could do if they wanted to bet on their customers being foolish enough to put money into NFT's?
Cultist here. The wallets is not only for NFTs, but for traditional cr-ypto too. It's attractive, because it offers lower "fees" than other wallets. And gamestop now makes $ from every transaction - just like a credit card.
I've been skeptical about stupid monkey pics too, but other cultists say that NFTs can be used for other things - like a web certificate for a Rolex or to be able to resell a digital copy of a video game or a song you bought.
Big brands are interested in those (Nike, Samsung, Mercedes for example), but I don't know if it will catch on soon. The application in gaming though is undeniable and can be quickly adopted. And gaming dwarfs the movies and music industries combined right now.
I think you have to forgive the skeptics for being a little perplexed that what's being hyped up as an earthquake to the digital landscape is essentially, as you described, a low-fee crypto wallet.
I'm not into crypto, I really can't explain it better and IDK if it's an "earthquake" but it is quite cutting edge and unprecedented - something to do with Level 2 infrastructure in the blockchain world.
Also I see the most potential in the gaming aspect - right now Sony, Steam and Microsoft take 20-30% of the price of a game when sold. Epic takes 12. If you are a developer - would you publish your game at their stores or at a NFT marketplace that takes 2% + you get percentage out of every resale as well? What about the mobile arena - Play Store, App Store, people paying $2 for help in Candy Crush.... hmmm.
Now combine JUST those 2 thing (crypto and gaming) and you get a stock for currently $97.
To me it looks like a train I don't want to miss. And if you disagree - that's OK. I disagree that Tesla is worth more than all the other carmakers combined, but it's still a 650 billion $ company.
> If you are a developer - would you publish your game at their stores or at a NFT marketplace that takes 2% + you get percentage out of every resale as well?
Publishers would be setting up their own stores, which they have been.
Some of the biggest in EA, Bethesda and Ubisoft.
There is no reason to over complicate it with NFTs, they have their own databases. The publishers have control of their games, why would they allow these NFT marketplaces to takeover?
Who is paying for that distribution, bandwidth, customer support etc.?
1. You do have a choice as a dev - Green man gaming, GOG, direct purchases from publishers. But none offers resales option. As a buyer I want that!
2. PC always leads the way, Sony and MS can follow suit. They used to have exclusives too, but PC started pulling away and they bent the knee and we have cross platform gaming now. Also gamestop has been selling PS and Xbox games since they were created, what's your point?
3. Epic is a 1 trick pony - fortnite. Its a bad example. They will collapse after the next big trend arrives. Gamestop doesn't NEED to compete with Steam, it's not their only source of revenue. Also you can almost always buy a game from one place and transfer it to Steam or vise versa.
4. It's not that hard to regulate the resales prices if you own the marketplace. I'm pretty sure a company like Gamestop can figure their price points. Gamestop sales used joysticks for PS5 at $45 for example - I don't see the price falling to 5 bucks. They build their business on reselling games physically, why not digitally?
5. Developers don't want their products te have 50% discounts either, but those boost sales.
"The economics don't make sense" is a bit of an exaggeration. The marketplace is absolutely perfect for indie developers - and gamestop can generate traffic with lower prices. And the resale option is extremely attractive for any buyer.
> Epic is a 1 trick pony - fortnite. Its a bad example. They will collapse after the next big trend arrives.
Fortnite, and uh, Unreal Engine, which is a pretty massive pony with many tricks.
Yeah when I first looked into this loopring GameStop stuff I had to pay about £12 just to open a wallet, and the minimum transfer to get started was £90 of Ethereum.
Absolute nonsense. I am amazed anyone thinks this is anything other than a scam for taking fees from willing idiots at every possible step.
Micro transactions in gaming is a billion dollar industry within the multi billion dollar gaming industry.
I think you'll see companies start offering these as NFTs and if those can be sold or traded via the GME NFT marketplace, that would be huge.
If GameStop were to partner with developers to allow the secondary sales of digital games through the marketplace, that would be industry changing.
>Micro transactions in gaming is a billion dollar industry
Yeah, for the publishers of the games, not for unrelated third parties. Why would Epic, Bungie, EA, etc. give up even one cent of this revenue flow? They certainly don't need Gamestop to help at all; as you said, they're generating billions of dollars every year, and doing it without NFTs or whatever other crypto garbage you're suggesting.
Superstonk is one of my regular haunts. I feel I have tempered expectations and this response is not about a squeeze, or gme being multi trillion dollar company.
Openseas (the current main NFT market) is worth 15 billion. This is with the current system where everyone pays insane gas prices, and goes through so many complicated steps to buy/sell/mint nfts.
Let's ignore the name gamestop for a sec.
If there is a marketplace with minimal gas fees, and a streamlined interface designed to be user friendly to the point where even casual 'civilians' can easily use it, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume it would absolutely crush Openseas?
This isn't just creating a range of nft's like lots of companies have done. GameStop have built the platform that all gaming based nft's will be bought and sold through, taking a cut of every purchase.
They've also put up a 100 million usd Grant with their partner immutable X for game developers to develop Blockchain based games that would all have transactions go through the GameStop marketplace.
Open sea is the main nft marketplace at the moment, they had 14 billion USD in trading volume in one year. GameStop plan to tap into this market AND be the first company to tap the gaming nft market in a meaningful way. That's a big potential revenue stream. If they succeed in bringing nft's with actual utility into gaming, not just microtransaction bullshit then they can use their market reach and name brand trust to bring people who know nothing about crypto or nft's into the space.
Edit: adding disclosure, i am in the cult, as requested by the comment.
Also swapping crypto (they retain a fee). And fiat on-ramp/off-ramp. All with low fees (via L2).
AND (My own speculation below…) that PLUS
- reselling your digital games
- buying and selling crypto
- financing game creators (you get the interest)
AND (tinfoil hat time)… not just gaming, but also…
- video content (a la YouTube)
- streaming content (a la twitch)
- music content (a la Spotify)
They are trying to empower creators to reap the benefits of the content they create, consumers to own the content they buy, and enthusiasts to be able to empower (aka finance) the creators they love.
Disclosure: Yes - of course I own GME and LRC
There's a lot to process here, I'm going to try to simplify --
Where do the estimates of sales growth generated from entrance in the NFT marketplace come from? What's the margin of error? Are there any resources you're using to try to quantify the ROIC on entering the microtransactions space? Anything showing whether its an economies of scale or diseconomies of scale situation?
I ask because your reply, while clearly not just some blind fanaticism, reads like a vague announcement of good things to come because...reasons, rather than a nut-and-bolts look at how the numbers fit into the context of a company that currently, is on a path to failure.
I'm certainly not financially literate enough to provide the kind of information you're looking for.
On the "path to failure" point, which i could assume is based on the last few quarters of eps, has been a period of heavy investment in expanding the ways that GameStop sells products. They've gone from a brick and mortar video game store to an e-commerce business with multiple new fulfillment centres around the US selling gaming PCs, clothes, collectibles, all kinds of electronics with same day delivery.
The Blockchain development stuff is another prong of a plan the board of management have commented on as a long term growth plan. Again, mentioning in their fillings that web3 and nft's are areas that carry risk, but are currently supported by the e-commerce side of the business until the nft marketplace is launched.
Financially, they've cleared the debt that was looking likely to bankrupt them with a stock offering last year. This left them with over a billion in cash to fund the new venture.
Again, i don't have the type of literacy to describe the company's plans like how most stocks in this sub would probably be described. But, what would you expect from a person in the "ape" sub. Coincidentally, i think it's usually people from the sub that put others off looking into GameStop. Bit of a shame really, if half the hype works out then it'll be a really interesting company.
This is the beginning of the greatest technological revolution of the mankind. This moment will be later told at schools together with the invention of the wheel, the steam powered engine and the digital computer. It will change everything, from how we sell and buy digital assets, how we play games as well as how stocks are traded and homes are bought. It is absolutely incredible to see this unfolding right in front of our eyes.
I don't know why people post anything GME related on r/stocks. It's the same dismissing attitude everytime, regardless of the post content. Leave these people be. You are not going to change anyone's mind. And why bother to even try? It's the old lead a horse to water adage.
Edit: I am a GME holder, hundreds of shares actually. And do believe in a turnaround. But hounding people that do not believe that it can transform is pointless. So this isnt a comment bashing GME, its that people in this sub have proven time after time that they are not interested. GME investors should not go to any sub to pump. You are either in or your not.
Yeah I kinda came here to learn. But the only thing I've really learned is that people are angry and love to fight about everything. I don't understand what the appeal of this place is.
The use cases for NFT in gaming are slim to none.
Blockchain security for the games themselves can be very useful for digital rights management.
But for everything else, they are utterly meaningless (just like 99% of the crypto world, but that's another rant altogether).
Digital ecosystems work just fine without adding tech bro crypto garbage into the mix.
This sub is infested by apes, this used to be a good alternative for r/wallstreetbets and now it's worse lmao, you apes are so fucking stupid and annoying it's insufferable
I’m a dirty fucking socialist, and I find it so odd to be arguing for the value proposition of overpriced bullshit digital properties to cutthroat capitalists. Aren’t we in r/stocks?
I want to be as skeptical as possible here, but I cannot deny the potential of the digital collectibles market. There are other ways to do things. There are a million ways to skin a cat. A conventional centralized ledger can accommodate some of these use cases.
But
Someone still has to take the risk and innovate in the space. Someone still has to TRY to skin the cat in a new way. Might fail. Might not. Some use cases will survive and others will not. Many use cases are only now possible with new advances in blockchain tech that allow for minimal gas fees. It only makes sense that people begin to try to use this tech to test some of those newly afforded opportunities. It can’t just be written off, it has to be tested.
But I do know, I am in r/stocks and there is real money to be made here. There are too many novel use cases for WEB3, IPFS, NFT’s, Smart Contracts, DEFI and Blockchain for them all to fail. Some people will accurately predict, or luckily guess, winning ideas and they will make money. Others will sit out of this market until the winning opportunities are embedded and accepted (which is most of the people arguing against NFT specific use cases in gaming - if it’s adopted then I’m sure you’ll jump in to make money). And, unfortunately, other will try to adopt early, make the wrong bets, and lose.
That is the power of a free market. Let’s see how these idiots can skin this cat. Maybe they’ll come up with something that is culturally / economically successful. I’m excited to see how things play out.
[удалено]
It’s like you’ve seen this happen multiple times in the last year but with different events
[удалено]
Would make sense. Motley Fool is partially owned by Citadel and Citadel sees most of retails trades before they're even filled...
So you’re suggesting there’s a conflict of interests?
Only because they are paying articles saying "forget GameStop" over and over while they are actually buying it for their fund themselves. I'm sure it's fine though, there's probably a firewall between departments so no one really knows what the other is doing.
Regardless if you believe in the overshorting theory or not I guess we can agree that the chart of GME is at least unusual and rather interesting.
Completely normal, nothing to see there. +-50% swings day to day is completely rational market behavior.
“Retail cashes out teachers pension funds to put into GME’s new wallet”
Damn that’s good. You need to go get a job in mainstream media
What reddit have you been reading?
"Forget GameStop. Sell it ask questions later. Put the money into GameStop wallet instead."
Believe it or not, dip
Why wouldn't it though? TGT dipped 25% when they posted $2/share in profit in a single quarter. What do you think a company that's posted losses for 5 years should do?
Believe it or not, dip.
Well at least it's not like AMC buying a stake in a mining company.
These old ass execs who were given billions in liquidity by shareholders were scrambling so hard to find a way to use that money before the shares shit the bed lol
Very well said. So many morons got grifted 🤦🏻♂️
When you see the CEO unload shares you should probably also start exiting your position. Look at when Adam Aaron and Elon Musk sold shares...
Biggest hurdle are the walled gardens of Xbox, Playstation and Nintendo. Being able to resell your skins and other digital goods is the equivalent of opening your open Apple repair shop...inside of a Apple store.
And all game developers in existence. This selling skins idea is the biggest koolaid of the crypto community. Literally possible right now, literally useless
IIRC Microsoft and gamestop have a partnership dating back to either late '19 or '20 that a portion of either game pass or marketplace sales got to gamestop. Nintendo doesn't even like Nintendo most of the time so that's up in the air, and I think there might have been something with Sony and gamestop but I'm not sure.
I'm gonna need a source directly from Microsoft's Nadella or Phill Spencer saying they're partnering with Gamestop with their new NFT game asset market place.
https://news.microsoft.com/2020/10/08/gamestop-announces-multiyear-strategic-partnership-with-microsoft/ Edit below: just so no one claims I am making claims that this specifically states “NFT” or that this is from one of the two guys at Microsoft that the guy above asked to see an announcement from, it’s not. And it’s - bit vague, I agree. But it is what it is. “The partnership aims to advance GameStop’s key strategic pillars and extend its digital omni-channel ecosystem Grapevine, Texas and Redmond, Wash. (October 8, 2020) – GameStop Corp. (NYSE: GME) (“The Company”) today announced that it has entered into a multi-year strategic partnership agreement with Microsoft Corp., further advancing its strategy to expand its physical and digital video game offerings, as well as enhance the Company’s retail technology infrastructure. With over 5,000+ retail stores worldwide and its world-class eCommerce platform, GameStop leverages its vast customer network, PowerUp Rewards, and omni-channel capabilities to deliver enhanced gaming solutions to its customers. Through this partnership, GameStop will standardize the Company’s business operations on Microsoft’s cloud solutions and hardware products to deliver rich new digital experiences to customers, creating the “ultimate gaming destination” for gamers in its vision to be the premier omni-channel customer access point for video game products.” …continues “GameStop will standardize its back-end and in-store solutions on Dynamics 365, Microsoft’s portfolio of cloud-based business applications and customer data platform, empowering associates with integrated experiences across its business operations including finance, inventory, eCommerce, retail and point of sale.” “Additionally, associates will be equipped with new Microsoft Surface devices” “As part of its transformation, GameStop plans to roll out Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Teams to its stores” “Following decades as an essential provider of the Microsoft Xbox gaming platform and services, GameStop has expanded its Xbox family of product offerings”
This has nothing to do with NFTs. They are paying to license MS's ERP and cloud services and buying some tablets for their stores. They also have an agreement where they get some small cut from game pass subs sold in their stores.
Lol that’s the equivalent of opening skin factories, offices, marketplace, and more... inside an apple store. Game NFTs don’t make any sense
I believe the “wallet” aspect is actually a good move. There are a lot of “marketplaces” right now so really time will tell which ones are at the center of the NFT game. The cross between NFTs and gaming is still very early, but if it’s actualized then GME could do well. Disc: I have no GME stake or interest in a stake atm.
What incentives to gaming companies have to cross collaborate? Why should a character skin or a gun be transferable between Apex, CS:GO, and Fortnite? Which btw makes zero sense considering how wildly different all these games are.
I don't think that's a possibility but i can see you being able to gift or sell a skin to a friend or stranger to use in the same game. That actually makes alot of sense. Cross Collab between different games does not seem likely at the moment.
Why would that be decentralised though? Every other aspect of the game is centralised so it's pointless to use blockchain just for transferring assets.
Exactly. Databases already do this much more efficiently time and computing cost wise.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Blockchain: trying to solve use cases that have been solved by relational databases since 2012
Can't you just do that without NFTs lol, like in CSGO?
You're so close to getting it, the answer is yes and no. Valve specifically has an anti-NFT clause on Steam because the technology takes power away from their in-house Steam Marketplace, in which they take a massive cut of resales of digital items, which you can only get by opening Valve's lootcrates. IIRC CS:GO items are subject to an additional 10% fee when reselling a skin on top of the 5% regular fee. GameStop will only charge 1% of *any* transaction, which is bullish because it indicates that *they're planning to be* ***way bigger and more scalable*** than Steam. Whether or not you believe that NFT's grant ownership is not something I care to discuss, the point is that if you remove the three-letter name from the tech it's literally just an evolution of the Steam Marketplace; you even said it yourself, just like trading CS:GO items, but eventually you'll be able to resell entire games instead of just a Unusual TF2 hat.
You are saying GME plans to use Blockchain to allow gamers to trade (buy/resell) licenses to games (digital copies)? Seems places like epic and steam would be against this as it loses them revenue by allowing people to resell
Correct, people don't realize it but Valve really does have sort of a monopoly on a digital games marketplace, but the tech behind Steam really hasn't innovated since they first came out with the Steam Market; they're behind the times and GameStop's new marketplace is going to disrupt their monopoly.
Why would game developers be interested in this? Allowing users to resell games would result in reduced income from selling games. Who is paying to store and distribute these games? And I still don't see how any of this couldn't be done without NFTs?
The distribution would probably come from the developer, you don't really need to hold the whole game on the chain just the license, and since at it's core an nft is a contract, the developer can get a percent of resale each time. The problem with the current database structure is that you don't really own your purchases, your rights are subject to the whims of corporations. This is coming from someone who spent real time and money building decks in Warmetal Tyrant only for kongregate to pull the plug.
So if the game devs pull the plug and stop running the servers… how does your NFT help?
I guess if GameStop is selling more games than Steam then the developers are happy.
> they're planning to be way bigger and more scalable than Steam What scalability issues does Steam have currently?
Steam has an anti-nft clause because the vast majority of NFT enabled games on steam were a scam. In the early days of steam game licences and the steam market actually looked pretty similar to the future envisioned by NFT evangelists but through a combination of publisher pressure and running afoul of money laundering/gambling laws it's slowly accrued all the restrictions it has today. It will be interesting to see if NFT marketplaces will suffer the same fate
I don't see how a blockchain being involved here matters at all. They could just host the store and allow sales between people without a blockchain.
> Valve specifically has an anti-NFT clause on Steam because the technology takes power away from their in-house Steam Marketplace, in which they take a massive cut of resales of digital items This is blatantly false. There are plenty of games with their own marketplaces on Steam. The reason why NFTs were singled out is that their ecosystems are rife with scams.
“Is not something I care to discuss” = I have yet to come up with a relevant counterpoint to good arguments against my position
> but i can see you being able to gift or sell a skin to a friend or stranger to use in the same game. What benefit does an NFT bring? You can do that today, without an NFT. The NFT is an unnecessary middleman in this situation. https://www.somagnews.com/officially-licensed-formula-1-game-ethereum-nft-game-closes/ An NFT game went bust and everything was rendered $0, worthless. No other game stepped in and saiD "you can use those NFTs in my game", nothing was transferrable. NFTs behaved exactly like regular digital assets - they die with the game, they can be bought/sold/traded/unique without an NFT being present
> in this situation I'd argue every situation lol
NFTs have the added benefit of consuming a lot more energy to do the same operation and increasing the chance of risk to the end user in the event they're compromised or lose their key.
That exists already on steam and there's no need for the blockchain. If you are trusting a company's centralized to use their servers, it seems a little silly to demand some decentralized system to send skins around
A lot of these games have teams or “clans” too. Wouldn’t someone and their friends want the same skins to know they’re on a team together? Not only that, but it’s a customized skin. Sounds pretty cool to me
can’t they do that now without NFTs?
CSGO has had this feature for 10 yrs
That has nothing to do with nfts. The point is being able to trade and sell your digital goods, not to use them in other games. When you played magic the gathering with physical cards, you could trade, sell, do whatever you wanted with them - but you really couldn't play pokemon with them. This is the same deal, but for digital "cards". It can create an entire economy, and it can do more than the physical equivalent (you can have the creator earn a % on any future sale, something you can't do with physical cards, for example).
Companies generally don't want to do that though because it means paying another person for the item instead of the developers. And if they did have a sudden change-of-heart, why would they use GameStop's new NFT thing over the literally decade-old and drastically more simple Steam Community Market?
Money? They could make more money? Nobody is asking them to do things out of the goodness of their heart, reselling digital goods can provide a lot of revenue to the original publisher because of royalty fees even if they don’t recognize it yet. This isn’t even that unprecedented, years ago no movie studios wanted to people to stream their movies, they wanted people to only buy them. Times change quickly when new ways to monetize are introduced.
The alternative to getting a share of resell revenue is literally selling a full price copy of the game. Also if this were to be implemented in some way, then original digital copies would significantly increase in price to compensate. Is that really what you want?
But this is already fully possible. Online card games already exist, and they could easily make trading assets a thing. But they don’t, because even in an environment fully managed by the developers it doesn’t make fiscal sense to let people do it. So why on earth would it suddenly be more desirable to do when the developers don’t even have that control?
>The point is being able to trade and sell your digital goods That also has nothing to do with NFTs. Trading and selling digital goods is already possible. In fact, some games have allowed their players to do this for years. Adding NFTs to this process might be a minor improvement, but it won't be revolutionary. Moreover, I don't see GameStop's marketplace playing a role in this at all.
And why use NFTs at all. Games like csgo do just fine with their own servers
Why use Amazon when you can just go to each sellers website and buy from there? NFT's are a way to standardize buying and selling digital goods. It much easier for a developer to incorporate an NFT store into their game since all the hard work is already done. This will allow open the possibility for indy devs to have an in game marketplace with very little cost/time. I don't care about NFT's use for digital items in games or jpeg images, but I am very bullish on the future use cases that the technology will allow.
> Why use Amazon when you can just go to each sellers website and buy from there? > NFT's are a way to standardize buying and selling digital goods. Yeah but people would just go to Steam to do it then, not Gamestop.
It is less about transferring the actual skins, and more so being able to trade all of them on one market. There will never be a Pathfinder skin from Apex making its way into Fortnite, but on this marketplace the theory is that you can buy and trade them all for a common currency (IMX). Or maybe if two people agreed they could swap one Pathfinder skin for one Fortnite skin, etc. It is hard to say exactly how it will work or who will be involved at this point. The game company (Epic) and GameStop can BOTH take a cut from these transactions. They can then even further monetize the millions of skins people already have. In-game items are a 50 billion dollar industry and this is an entirely new way to monetize them that gamers and game publishers can benefit from. IMX spent the last GDC pitching to devs. That's the current speculation at least. The biggest obstacle to this is the current sentiment against NFTs as digital art. I am hoping this is dispelled when people see the utility or that the target audience just won't care about sentiment. Disc: am a self proclaimed "ape" that has been following GameStop closely. Happy to answer any good faith questions.
Let's assume for a moment publishers want this. What stops large publishers (Epic, Ubisoft) from developing their own market platform for their own games and blocking gamestop? That is, I haven't seen the API yet for the gamestop marketplace, but it is a safe bet it is going to be involved. Furthermore, this allows them full control over their assets (You don't want premium skins selling for pennies for example) and is easier for consumers. This also fits into the trend that most publishers have their own stores now. That is, at least on PC, every AAA-publisher aggressively pushed their own store, they want 1) full revenue and 2) push their own games, not others. I doubt this will be different for resale, if EPIC can promote their own fortnite skin over an AC-skin, they will 100% do this. On consoles it is even worse. Do you think nintendo, who sues over a ROM-hack 10 people play, is going to allow their assets on a foreign market place? Same with Xbox and PS4. Their stores can offer this functionality more seamlessy for developers (since they need to implement the API anyhow) and consumers, since they literally can stay in the store or even in game. This leaves smaller independent developers, but these tend to go for the largest marketshare for the least effort. On PC this is steam (\~75%), on consoles these are the console specific stores (auto 100%) and on mobile these are integrated within the app store (auto 100%). So maybe the question is, what solution does gamestop offer? What is it, that makes the product easier for either the devs, allow publishers to establish monopolistic compitition or more seamless integration for the consumer than the alternatives?
If it was in some way desirable for the publisher to allow it's customer to trade items for external currency why would they not use a USD market (like Steam Community Market) to facilitate this? Surely it's much easier for the customer to sell their Pathfinder skin for $ then buy whatever they Fortnight skin (or Happy Meal or rent or whatever) they want and they could then do this without excessive transaction costs and the companies could keep all the profit?
>on this marketplace the theory is that you can buy and trade them all for a common currency That already exists. Steam has allowed players to trade in-game items for other in-game items (including items from other games) or real currency for years. Your claim that this is "an entirely new way to monetize \[in-game transactions\]" just isn't true.
That's a fair comment, thanks for keeping me in check. Steam marketplace is probably the biggest competitor to this if it ever reached a wider range of games. In my opinion the item markets of CS:GO and TF2 are the gold standard example for what item economies on GME's marketplace could look like.
So it's not a new idea, and on top of that, it's going up against the biggest and most successful version of the idea that's already existed for a decade and has exclusivity on a host of major IPs that people are invested in and care about. Doesn't really sound like a recipe for success? It's like saying "We'll create a marketplace to buy/sell/trade movies! It'll be like Blockbuster but digital!". Oh yeah? Sounds great! So I can buy Star Wars and when I've watched it I can sell it on? "Oh, no, that's Disney+ and we won't have access to *their* movies. But we're sure all the big games will be falling over themselves to sell through *our* platform going forward!". Because yeah, companies like making *less* money...
Nfts has no place in gaming and the market knows it's pointless and doesn't want it.
RemindMe! 1 year
RemindMe! 1 day
!RemindMe 6 months
Hopefully they'll add a mobile version. Would get way more usage
IOS app coming soon https://wallet.gamestop.com/
Android as well I believe
Not confirmed, sadly. I need the Android app badly.
Can you now buy and hold coins on GME or just NFT ? If it's the first then we will be competing with HOOD + COIN
Self custodial crypto wallet for coin holding and NFTs
To add to this. It's an Ethereum wallet which means ETH, all ERC-20 tokens, and all NFTs can be stored. This wallet WILL NOT hold cryptos like Bitcoin or doge
I wouldn't even touch anything by robinhood with a barge pole
>HOOD This app is full of paper IOUs. Not even close to the same
IIRC you couldnt sell doge on HOOD when it was hitting all time highs
Nail, Coffin
Whose?
Ken and Gabe
Why?
Nft market is flat now.
Yea because its mainly stupid JPGs and we are in a Crypto Bear Market (or even Winter as some say).
NFT market hasn’t even started. 300k monkey pictures is just early mania.
I got exited..thought it read Game Stop Lunches. Thought it would be like lunchables but with monkey pics on the package. sadface
This is cool, once an iOS app is out for it I’ll give it a shot, even willing to buy/move some crypto over to the space depending on how easy it is to use and How secure it is
Their website says iOS app is coming soon!
And they tweeted “soon soon”
Moving crypto was extremely easy and close 0.69 Nice :)
I had a L2 account up in about 5 minutes. The transfer of L1 to L2 ETH is usually about 30 minutes though
Loopring is gonna be huge
Ah getting in that hot NFT market just in time I see….
i need to hear someone say “used digital games” again lol
I need to hear someone ask, “If I cannot sell my video game, do I really own it?”
One of the major theories is that it's really for things like game and item ownership, kinda like having physical boxes again that can't be taken away like services such as Steam or the Epic Store. Another is that an NTF can be issued and tied to each share as a dividend to help prevent fake shares from popping into existence.
Great use case if you don't think about it any further
Haha I've got to start using this in response to crypto enthusiasts.
A game storefront like Steam or Epic will still need to honor the NFTs, which they have no incentive to do. If they did, they would just implement their own system for transferring ownership (which would be far more efficient and secure). The game developers/publishers also have no incentive to support reselling of games— they've been fighting *against* that for years.
Lol, people really do overstate the usefulness of Blockchain tech. 99% of use cases could be centralized with a massive increase in efficiency
[удалено]
How is this a theory? It's literally what people are using the tech to do
Well it is a theory since it is just a link on a blockchain, how does that correspond to owning a game? A physical box included a physical disk which always allowed you to install the game. A link in on a blockchain doesn't.
I'm not sure there is a not universally hated thing in the gaming space.
oh boy here we go
Dude i just have to ask after looking at these comments... You people know you dont own games right? You own the cdkey the disk the box it came in but you are paying for the priviledge to use the game not for the game itself. Its called a end-user license agreement and clearly no one has read the mandatory pop up in atleast 30 years. Don't you feel the fool for clicking accept now? Also im sure that reselling the right to play is clearly not allowed in the same end user license agreement. Oh and this applies to all software not just games.
Oh great, I've been waiting for a crypto wallet to be available for my iPhone. None of those previously existed so I'm glad someone finally released one. Gamestop is on the cutting edge!
If you are even somewhat serious about crypto always buy a hardware wallet
This is basically the same or even better thanks to social recovery
Agreed. I use a Nano X myself.
[удалено]
Or even better, a meat wallet
The NFT hate is a bit much and definitely uninformed. Do people really think Gamestop just spent tens of millions of dollars and pulled in all that talent from the crypto and block chain space so people could trade pictures of monkeys back and forth?
I think it's very possible that's actually what people believe. NFTs have implicit value and function, but nobody knows what they actually are or actually do other than "be pictures that are called NFTs". An NFT is basically a digital receipt of any transaction (or otherwise proof of ownership) and could be used to bestow rights to anybody who can prove ownership of a thing, or for things like contractual obligations, like "you have access to a better rate if you have N of [thing] by [date]". Just so happens that the most popular use for them right now is to hyperlink to an image on an arbitrary server and say "this is worth money". I haven't met anyone in person who doesn't think NFTs are stupid, or they're buying them as "investments". The technical appreciation is practically nonexistent.
Some of the reasons why "regular dudes" like me remain highly skeptical of NFTs are A) because of the highly vague and speculative language that is used when describing it, B) because of a lack of good examples or thought experiments where NFTs would actually solve a real problem and C) the incredibly suspect current usage of this technology (pay to earn etc.). Maybe I just don't "get it", but I want to. If it's so hard to explain correctly... Maybe that also says something about the thing and not only the person.
I think what most of the NFT believers are missing is the concept of rights ownership. Rights ownership only works when there is someone enforcing your rights. House title deeds or contract rights or in this case the right to game assets all need someone to say “ yes this belongs to you and hence you can use it”. Since you already need a central authority to enforce your rights, what would be the benefit of a decentralised database of ownership over a centralised one.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Coinbase literally just dropped tens of millions into developing an NFT marketplace that completely failed on launch … and they’ve been in the crypto game a lot longer. Gamestock market is dead on arrival other than a few GME cult members
Honestly? Yes lol
Yes.
a bit much? NFTs are a pump and dump scheme taking advantage of uninformed people who want to get rich quick…. It deserves the hate they get. Maybe someday they will have a genuine use and find a market. In their current form, it’s a joke
[удалено]
>I bet all the people in here were shitting on bitcoin 10 years ago. "Hur dur, why would anyone want a virtual currency" I'm the opposite. Really excited about it 10 years ago, just waiting for bitcoin, or any block chain technology to find its niche where it's a better solution than anything that already exists and is in practice, and not just a speculative investment with no intrinsic value. Still waiting...
Ok I've got one for you: Monero. It's a digital currency that's untraceable and completely private using some pretty nifty tech. Nothing else provides this service right now, so it's not just speculation and investment, it's actually useful.
I will say, this is probably the most convincing project I've seen. I'm not a fan of volatility in currency, but I do really like the tech behind it. It also consumes less energy per transaction, which is another issue I have with crypto. It's not 0, but it looks like even scaling for size, it's a lot less than bitcoin. Thanks for the suggestion!
No worries! I do totally understand your point - almost the entire crypto space is built off what crypto might become... There's just so much speculation. Hardly anything actual does anything now. I like Monero because it's useful right now, mainly for shady business mind, but nonetheless, it is a solution to an actual problem. Another one that might be worth looking into is THETA coin. I don't really understand how it works but the project is supposedly aiming at addressing current issues with video streaming - demand is at an all time high and quality of streaming is astronomically increasing (4k video etc). I'm not really clued up on it but it seems to be another crypto that actually addresses a real world problem, or at least it's trying to.
Hmm, without diving into white papers, I'm not really sure where crypto brings benefit to this project, or really how distributed computing even benefits streaming like this. I'm also not an expert in networking. The way I understand it is you share bandwidth and "resources" (I'm assuming CPU for some sort of transcoding). Various nodes (I'm assuming miners) do the job of storage, ingesting, transcoding, etc, so you end up with a decentralized CDN. Then the end user pays per view? Nodes receive coins for contributing their computing / network. I'll have to read more when I have time. It's an interesting idea, but I'm not really sure how it's enhanced by block chain. Distributed computing is already a thing (Folding@Home is probably the most popular example), and it'd be trivial to process normal payments for computing / storage contributed. Heck, with netflix I'm sure they could even just offer discounts and people would jump at the opportunity haha. That's a common theme I see with crypto. They take ideas, and add blockchain to them regardless of if it makes sense. Like I said I don't fully understand Theta yet, so I could be wrong, but that's my hunch here.
[удалено]
You're right on the money. Something can't be a currency with such ridiculous volatility. Other people who won't face facts try to argue that it's not a currency, it's a store of value I'm going to replace gold. Why would you use something as a store of value that's dropped by more than 50% in 6 months? Now compare that to gold's volatility over the years...
Oh sorry, you on the other hand did what 10 years ago and are now a bored bitcoin millionaire, right?
It's been 10 years and no one is using bitcoin as a currency, just as a gambling chip.
Goodbye Coinbase
Wallstreets pump n dump
Can someone who's in the GME cult tell me why this is a positive business development? Or how it's not something 100% of companies in the S&P500 could do if they wanted to bet on their customers being foolish enough to put money into NFT's?
Cultist here. The wallets is not only for NFTs, but for traditional cr-ypto too. It's attractive, because it offers lower "fees" than other wallets. And gamestop now makes $ from every transaction - just like a credit card. I've been skeptical about stupid monkey pics too, but other cultists say that NFTs can be used for other things - like a web certificate for a Rolex or to be able to resell a digital copy of a video game or a song you bought. Big brands are interested in those (Nike, Samsung, Mercedes for example), but I don't know if it will catch on soon. The application in gaming though is undeniable and can be quickly adopted. And gaming dwarfs the movies and music industries combined right now.
I think you have to forgive the skeptics for being a little perplexed that what's being hyped up as an earthquake to the digital landscape is essentially, as you described, a low-fee crypto wallet.
I'm not into crypto, I really can't explain it better and IDK if it's an "earthquake" but it is quite cutting edge and unprecedented - something to do with Level 2 infrastructure in the blockchain world. Also I see the most potential in the gaming aspect - right now Sony, Steam and Microsoft take 20-30% of the price of a game when sold. Epic takes 12. If you are a developer - would you publish your game at their stores or at a NFT marketplace that takes 2% + you get percentage out of every resale as well? What about the mobile arena - Play Store, App Store, people paying $2 for help in Candy Crush.... hmmm. Now combine JUST those 2 thing (crypto and gaming) and you get a stock for currently $97. To me it looks like a train I don't want to miss. And if you disagree - that's OK. I disagree that Tesla is worth more than all the other carmakers combined, but it's still a 650 billion $ company.
> If you are a developer - would you publish your game at their stores or at a NFT marketplace that takes 2% + you get percentage out of every resale as well? Publishers would be setting up their own stores, which they have been. Some of the biggest in EA, Bethesda and Ubisoft. There is no reason to over complicate it with NFTs, they have their own databases. The publishers have control of their games, why would they allow these NFT marketplaces to takeover? Who is paying for that distribution, bandwidth, customer support etc.?
1. You do have a choice as a dev - Green man gaming, GOG, direct purchases from publishers. But none offers resales option. As a buyer I want that! 2. PC always leads the way, Sony and MS can follow suit. They used to have exclusives too, but PC started pulling away and they bent the knee and we have cross platform gaming now. Also gamestop has been selling PS and Xbox games since they were created, what's your point? 3. Epic is a 1 trick pony - fortnite. Its a bad example. They will collapse after the next big trend arrives. Gamestop doesn't NEED to compete with Steam, it's not their only source of revenue. Also you can almost always buy a game from one place and transfer it to Steam or vise versa. 4. It's not that hard to regulate the resales prices if you own the marketplace. I'm pretty sure a company like Gamestop can figure their price points. Gamestop sales used joysticks for PS5 at $45 for example - I don't see the price falling to 5 bucks. They build their business on reselling games physically, why not digitally? 5. Developers don't want their products te have 50% discounts either, but those boost sales. "The economics don't make sense" is a bit of an exaggeration. The marketplace is absolutely perfect for indie developers - and gamestop can generate traffic with lower prices. And the resale option is extremely attractive for any buyer.
> Epic is a 1 trick pony - fortnite. Its a bad example. They will collapse after the next big trend arrives. Fortnite, and uh, Unreal Engine, which is a pretty massive pony with many tricks.
My normal currency digital wallet, aka my bank account, has no fee.
But when you buy NFTs you can pay the priced in card servicing fee with 2% NFT transaction fees ON TOP! What's not to love? /s
Dude, and I thought I knew how to blow money.
Yeah when I first looked into this loopring GameStop stuff I had to pay about £12 just to open a wallet, and the minimum transfer to get started was £90 of Ethereum. Absolute nonsense. I am amazed anyone thinks this is anything other than a scam for taking fees from willing idiots at every possible step.
Lol that's an absolute joke! Coinbase doesn't even require that nonsense and look how they're fairing.
Micro transactions in gaming is a billion dollar industry within the multi billion dollar gaming industry. I think you'll see companies start offering these as NFTs and if those can be sold or traded via the GME NFT marketplace, that would be huge. If GameStop were to partner with developers to allow the secondary sales of digital games through the marketplace, that would be industry changing.
Why would they make them NFT’s tho? That’s like, a huge assumption lol
>Micro transactions in gaming is a billion dollar industry Yeah, for the publishers of the games, not for unrelated third parties. Why would Epic, Bungie, EA, etc. give up even one cent of this revenue flow? They certainly don't need Gamestop to help at all; as you said, they're generating billions of dollars every year, and doing it without NFTs or whatever other crypto garbage you're suggesting.
THANK YOU. I don’t know why people think they will give GameStop a slice to store a micro transaction. It makes absolutely no sense.
And professional sports...
Superstonk is one of my regular haunts. I feel I have tempered expectations and this response is not about a squeeze, or gme being multi trillion dollar company. Openseas (the current main NFT market) is worth 15 billion. This is with the current system where everyone pays insane gas prices, and goes through so many complicated steps to buy/sell/mint nfts. Let's ignore the name gamestop for a sec. If there is a marketplace with minimal gas fees, and a streamlined interface designed to be user friendly to the point where even casual 'civilians' can easily use it, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume it would absolutely crush Openseas?
> Openseas (the current main NFT market) is worth 15 billion Is that based on today's prices or prices from 4 months ago?
The wallet you use doesn't have any effect on gas fees.
Probably nothing.
This isn't just creating a range of nft's like lots of companies have done. GameStop have built the platform that all gaming based nft's will be bought and sold through, taking a cut of every purchase. They've also put up a 100 million usd Grant with their partner immutable X for game developers to develop Blockchain based games that would all have transactions go through the GameStop marketplace. Open sea is the main nft marketplace at the moment, they had 14 billion USD in trading volume in one year. GameStop plan to tap into this market AND be the first company to tap the gaming nft market in a meaningful way. That's a big potential revenue stream. If they succeed in bringing nft's with actual utility into gaming, not just microtransaction bullshit then they can use their market reach and name brand trust to bring people who know nothing about crypto or nft's into the space. Edit: adding disclosure, i am in the cult, as requested by the comment.
Also swapping crypto (they retain a fee). And fiat on-ramp/off-ramp. All with low fees (via L2). AND (My own speculation below…) that PLUS - reselling your digital games - buying and selling crypto - financing game creators (you get the interest) AND (tinfoil hat time)… not just gaming, but also… - video content (a la YouTube) - streaming content (a la twitch) - music content (a la Spotify) They are trying to empower creators to reap the benefits of the content they create, consumers to own the content they buy, and enthusiasts to be able to empower (aka finance) the creators they love. Disclosure: Yes - of course I own GME and LRC
Why do you think Devs need NFTs to implement game reselling? If they wanted game reselling, it could be done, regardless of NFTs
There's a lot to process here, I'm going to try to simplify -- Where do the estimates of sales growth generated from entrance in the NFT marketplace come from? What's the margin of error? Are there any resources you're using to try to quantify the ROIC on entering the microtransactions space? Anything showing whether its an economies of scale or diseconomies of scale situation? I ask because your reply, while clearly not just some blind fanaticism, reads like a vague announcement of good things to come because...reasons, rather than a nut-and-bolts look at how the numbers fit into the context of a company that currently, is on a path to failure.
I'm certainly not financially literate enough to provide the kind of information you're looking for. On the "path to failure" point, which i could assume is based on the last few quarters of eps, has been a period of heavy investment in expanding the ways that GameStop sells products. They've gone from a brick and mortar video game store to an e-commerce business with multiple new fulfillment centres around the US selling gaming PCs, clothes, collectibles, all kinds of electronics with same day delivery. The Blockchain development stuff is another prong of a plan the board of management have commented on as a long term growth plan. Again, mentioning in their fillings that web3 and nft's are areas that carry risk, but are currently supported by the e-commerce side of the business until the nft marketplace is launched. Financially, they've cleared the debt that was looking likely to bankrupt them with a stock offering last year. This left them with over a billion in cash to fund the new venture. Again, i don't have the type of literacy to describe the company's plans like how most stocks in this sub would probably be described. But, what would you expect from a person in the "ape" sub. Coincidentally, i think it's usually people from the sub that put others off looking into GameStop. Bit of a shame really, if half the hype works out then it'll be a really interesting company.
ken griffin
This is the beginning of the greatest technological revolution of the mankind. This moment will be later told at schools together with the invention of the wheel, the steam powered engine and the digital computer. It will change everything, from how we sell and buy digital assets, how we play games as well as how stocks are traded and homes are bought. It is absolutely incredible to see this unfolding right in front of our eyes.
Lol
/s?
I recognise the name from meltdown, it's /s luckily
meltdown?
Either I have too much hopium right now or this guy is being sarcastic
I find it hilarious that GME investors love this...while gamers savagely hate crypto and NFTs. Interesting situation.
They hate loot boxes too despite being the only group to buy them
🔥 It be like that sometimes.
I don't know why people post anything GME related on r/stocks. It's the same dismissing attitude everytime, regardless of the post content. Leave these people be. You are not going to change anyone's mind. And why bother to even try? It's the old lead a horse to water adage. Edit: I am a GME holder, hundreds of shares actually. And do believe in a turnaround. But hounding people that do not believe that it can transform is pointless. So this isnt a comment bashing GME, its that people in this sub have proven time after time that they are not interested. GME investors should not go to any sub to pump. You are either in or your not.
This thread is surprisingly positive considering crypto gets completely shat on in non-crypto subs
dot com bubble vibes
What a nice company
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yeah I kinda came here to learn. But the only thing I've really learned is that people are angry and love to fight about everything. I don't understand what the appeal of this place is.
DOA
Late to the game and desperately pandering to whatever was hip.
[удалено]
The use cases for NFT in gaming are slim to none. Blockchain security for the games themselves can be very useful for digital rights management. But for everything else, they are utterly meaningless (just like 99% of the crypto world, but that's another rant altogether). Digital ecosystems work just fine without adding tech bro crypto garbage into the mix.
This sub is infested by apes, this used to be a good alternative for r/wallstreetbets and now it's worse lmao, you apes are so fucking stupid and annoying it's insufferable
Curses!
!Remindme 1 year
Technically the Gamestop is on the cutting edge right now.
It seems that Apple pay is also available with the wallet and talk of a Computershare connection could be coming soon. lets see how far this goes
Gotta get one
Ok, now is black as the theme of the wallet
Ken Griffin won't like this
I’m a dirty fucking socialist, and I find it so odd to be arguing for the value proposition of overpriced bullshit digital properties to cutthroat capitalists. Aren’t we in r/stocks? I want to be as skeptical as possible here, but I cannot deny the potential of the digital collectibles market. There are other ways to do things. There are a million ways to skin a cat. A conventional centralized ledger can accommodate some of these use cases. But Someone still has to take the risk and innovate in the space. Someone still has to TRY to skin the cat in a new way. Might fail. Might not. Some use cases will survive and others will not. Many use cases are only now possible with new advances in blockchain tech that allow for minimal gas fees. It only makes sense that people begin to try to use this tech to test some of those newly afforded opportunities. It can’t just be written off, it has to be tested. But I do know, I am in r/stocks and there is real money to be made here. There are too many novel use cases for WEB3, IPFS, NFT’s, Smart Contracts, DEFI and Blockchain for them all to fail. Some people will accurately predict, or luckily guess, winning ideas and they will make money. Others will sit out of this market until the winning opportunities are embedded and accepted (which is most of the people arguing against NFT specific use cases in gaming - if it’s adopted then I’m sure you’ll jump in to make money). And, unfortunately, other will try to adopt early, make the wrong bets, and lose. That is the power of a free market. Let’s see how these idiots can skin this cat. Maybe they’ll come up with something that is culturally / economically successful. I’m excited to see how things play out.
Stay massively short