Brandon Donnelly

Daily insights for city builders, delivered every morning at 6 AM ET. I’m Brandon Donnelly — a Toronto-based real estate developer and founder of Globizen. I’ve been writing here since 2013.

Subscribe

Tag: NFT

  • An Ethereum story

    We’ve spoken about Vitalik Buterin before.

    He is the inventor of the Ethereum blockchain, and its most prominent figure. He also happens to have grown up in Toronto. He went to the University of Waterloo. So when I wrote this post back in 2021, I asked: Why the hell is nobody talking about this? Why are we not celebrating the fact that our great city helped birth one of the most important technologies of our time? You couldn’t ask for a better economic development story. Well, I guess the answer is twofold. Crypto isn’t mainstream. Even back in 2021 when things were frothy it wasn’t. And, we’re awful at promoting and driving a global brand for our city. Both of these things need to change. So if you’re interested in learning more about Vitalik and Ethereum, you should check out this new movie (trailer) called Vitalik: An Ethereum Story. To watch it, go to ethereumfilm.xyz and mint the NFT for $20. You’ll then be able to stream it. I haven’t done this yet, but I’ll be doing it very soon. All of the proceeds from the NFT sales will go toward getting a more mainstream distribution deal.

    So by watching, you’re helping.

    Update: I watched it. It’s great.

  • How I’m displaying my NFT art

    I recently got a Samsung Frame TV to use as an NFT display at home. I had been looking for one for a while and I finally pulled the trigger last week. The way the Frame works is that it’s a TV when it’s on, and it’s an art display when it’s off. But I really don’t care about the TV part. I just wanted a good looking art display.

    There are a lots of purpose-built NFT displays on the market right now, including Tokenframe, Blackdove, Muse, and others. And I was very close to getting a Muse Frame.

    But ultimately I decided on the Samsung Frame because it was (1) cheaper for its size (50″), (2) it looks cool, and (3) I was fine with just a simple high-quality display. I think there will be lots more software and dongles created in the future for people who want to showcase their NFTs on whatever they happen to have at home.

    However, if you’re a crypto and NFT purist, this maybe isn’t the display for you — at least right now. Out of the box, it doesn’t connect with any crypto wallets. And so you’re not going to automatically see the provenance of each art piece (more on this below). Instead, the default method is to just upload JPEGs to the TV from Samsung’s SmartThings app (insert right-click-save-as jokes here).

    Overall, I’m really happy with the display. Here are my initial thoughts:

    • I have it set to randomly rotate through my art every 3 minutes. There’s also a motion detection feature that works reasonably well. If it doesn’t detect any motion, the display will go completely to sleep. But for some reason, it occasionally gets possessed and the TV will randomly turn on. Last week it kept turning on old Baywatch episodes. Possibly user error.
    • Samsung’s SmartThings app is bad. It’s buggy and a pain to use. For example, even though I’ve given it complete access to my phone’s photos, they never seem to show up. I have to limit access and then go and select the ones I want to use in my gallery.
    • I have found that I prefer when the art is full bleed versus within the Frame’s skeuomorphic picture mat. This is a new form of art and so I like the idea of breaking past traditions. But unless your images are 16×9 and a high enough resolution (I have generally found > 3000px wide to work), then you’re going to get prompted to insert and select a mat design.
    • I have solved this problem by manually cropping and editing the individual pieces. Some NFT collections, such as CyberBrokers, also give you vector files which allows you to play around as you see fit. Again, if you’re an NFT and/or art purist, you’re probably not going to like this. But I think of it as curating the pieces.
    • Most of my art is on Ethereum, Solana, and Tezos. Being able to upload whatever I want is helpful, because not all NFT displays support all of the chains. The Muse Frame, for instance, only supports Ethereum and Polygon right now.
    • PNG files and video files aren’t supported natively. This is a significant drawback and so eventually I know I’m going to have to change up the software that powers this display. And there are options. Bright Moments offers display software for holders of its NFTs. Fred Wilson’s venture firm USV created this setup. And I’m sure there are countless others. These can solve the provenance issue mentioned above by pulling directly from the various blockchains.

    In the end, I knew what I was getting into with the Frame. I knew it wasn’t a purpose-built NFT display and I was fine with that. It’s still early days in this space. But it sure is nice to finally see my NFT art in large format.

  • Blockchain applications in real estate

    I opened up X this afternoon and I saw a photographer tweet that he hadn’t sold a single NFT in the last four months. His conclusion: The NFT market is dying, if not already dead. There are no collectors left. Damn.

    I’m sure it probably feels this way to most. But the reality is that there are a lot of asset classes that feel this exact same way today. (I know that many of you will contest whether NFTs are actually an asset class.) There aren’t a lot of buyers out there right now.

    But that doesn’t necessarily mean that the NFT market, in particular, is done with. In fact, if you look around, there are countless signs that point to the opposite.

    I, for example, find it interesting that if you’re an architect or a city planner in the US, and looking to check off some continuing education units, you can now register for a course at Harvard called From Crypto to the Metaverse: Blockchain Applications in Real Estate.

    And if you look at the learning objectives, it includes things like demystifying how Blockchain technologies work, how they might impact real estate businesses in the future, and what opportunities they may create. This suggests we’re still early.

    Right now just feels like that time in the cycle that tests both your conviction and your discipline. It’s easy to believe in something when everyone else does. But what about when most people don’t?

  • How disruptive is AI really going to be?

    AI is going to be very disruptive, right? At this point, I think it is pretty clear to most that the answer is yes, almost regardless of what industry you’re in. But is it going to be really disruptive? Like disruptive in the Clayton Christensen sense of the word. (Christensen is known for coining the term “disruptive innovation“, which he contrasted against “sustaining innovation.”)

    This is a good question, and I like how Ben Thompson thought about it in his newsletter this morning:

    I tend to believe that disruptive innovations are actually quite rare, but when they come, they are basically impossible for the incumbent company to respond to: their business models, shareholders, and most important customers make it impossible for management to respond. If that is true, though, then an incumbent responding is in fact evidence that an innovation is actually not disruptive, but sustaining.

    The point he is making is that given that the big tech companies (and of course everyone else) are all now responding to AI by incorporating it into their businesses, it, by definition, must not be a disruptive innovation. It’s a sustaining one. This doesn’t mean that AI won’t have significant impacts on our economy; it just means that maybe it won’t put a company like Alphabet out of business.

    I thought this was an interesting way of looking at things because it is a reminder that “disruptive innovations” often start out at the bottom of the market. They start in a way that can feel innocuous to incumbents; that is, until they move upmarket. But this is not at all how AI feels. As soon as you play around with ChatGPT you immediately think to yourself, “holy shit, this thing can do my job.”

    That is obviously something very meaningful. But is it going to shake up the big tech world order? I don’t know, if you follow Christensen’s definition, crypto sounds like the more disruptive innovation.

  • The next hot thing

    When I was in grad school at Penn I was active in two clubs: the real estate club and some tech/entrepreneurship club (I can’t remember the exact name). These were two areas that I was interested in and so I wanted to hang out with people who were also interested in these things and I wanted to hear from experienced people who were active in these fields.

    At that time, which was before the Great Recession, the real estate club was bigger and more active than the tech club. I think it was something like 3 to 1. But I remember one of my professors telling me that participation across the various clubs generally ebbs and flows. Before the dot-com bubble, the tech club was where you wanted to be. But that asset bubble had burst, and so people had moved onto real estate, which, at that time, was in the midst of creating its own asset bubble.

    What we students were effectively doing — by way of deciding where to spend our time — was chasing the next hot thing. They were chasing where they thought they’d be able to make the most money coming out of school. There is, of course, nothing wrong with this. The pursuit of profit is fundamental to capitalism. But at the same time, I think it’s crucially important to have some conviction.

    Right now we are going through another cycle. Real estate was hot last year and it is not right now. Tech was hot last year and it is not right now. NFTs were hot last year and they are not right now. The list goes on. But if you like these things and if you have some conviction, is it really the time to move onto the next club? You may find the opposite to be true. Now is actually the time to ramp up participation.

  • A whole new internet

    I don’t exactly know what “metaverse” means, but what is clear is that nobody really does right now. Here is an excerpt from a recent article by Benedict Evans:

    If the narrow definition of ‘metaverse’ is that VR and AR will be the next smartphone, the broad definition is that there’s going to be a whole new internet. Our experience will be 3D, but much of that will be layered onto the real world as we see it through glasses. Games will become a much larger part of daily life – instead of the current split between a few hundred people playing deep and rich AAA PC and console games and several billion playing much lighter-weight smartphone games, Roblox and Fortnite point to a growing middle ground of persistent, open, accessible and expressive environments that are much more about social and identity than games per se, and that can become platforms and ecosystems for developers. Many of these experiences will blur into each other, and digital goods (skins, avatars and other models of self-expression in digital form) will be portable and interchangeable between these worlds, rather like the characters in Wreck-it Raph could pass between games.

    Some people, namely Mark Zuckerberg, believe that VR is going to be the next smartphone. But Benedict raises an interesting point: the direction of travel for tech seems to be toward less immersion, rather than greater immersion. We used to have giant computers that filled rooms. Then computers got smaller. And now we just carry one around in our pocket and pull it out when we’re standing in a line and bored. Portability and casual usage are what won out. And so is it reasonable to assume that billions of people are going to want to immerse themselves in VR goggles all day?

    I don’t see it. Here’s my working thesis:

    • I am an urbanist. I love cities. And I believe that our deep desire to interact meaningfully with other humans is not going to go away. For this reason, I believe in the less immersion over greater immersion argument.
    • At the same time, blockchain technologies have made it possible for us to own, collect, and trade digital assets — everything from digital fashion to digital art. I think this trend is only going to continue.
    • And as this trend continues, we are going to continually look for ways to display and experience these elements of our digital identity. So how do we make that happen? This is an important part of the conversation around “the next smartphone.”
    • My view is that it’s going to be some version of augmented reality, and that we are going to end up with a continuous blurring of the line between physical and digital.

    But hey, I could be wrong. Time will tell.

  • Modern luxury

    “Luxury” is an overused term in the world of real estate. If you call everything luxury, then ultimately nothing is luxury, right? But let’s ignore this particular debate for right now. I was recently in a meeting where our interior design team — Mason Studio — made what I think is an important distinction between “classic luxury” and “modern luxury.”

    Classic luxury is old school luxury. It is the kind of luxury that says, “you can’t come in here unless you look like this.” And I’m sure that all of you can think of brands that might speak to you in this way.

    But I think this idea of luxury is quickly changing. Perhaps a good example of “modern luxury” is the recent collaboration between RTFKT — the web3 digital fashion company that Nike bought last year — and high-end luggage company RIMOWA.

    This, to me, is a brilliant collaboration. It is a sign of what’s to come — an ongoing blurring of our physical and digital worlds — and it is a less fussy kind of luxury; maybe I’ll mint an exceptionally expensive piece of luggage, maybe I’ll mint a digital collectible, or maybe I’ll just hang out on Discord.

    Now, one could argue that nothing has really changed and we’re just talking about different kinds of trappings. But that doesn’t feel exactly right. There is something about modern luxury that feels more inclusive to me. And I think that is why it is quickly becoming the dominant form of “luxury” — whatever that means.

  • Real estate marketplaces are not like NFT marketplaces

    A lot less people are buying NFTs today compared to last year. But that’s okay, everything will be fine. So let’s talk about some of the characteristics of NFT marketplaces and how they differ from real estate marketplaces today:

    • When you create or “mint” an NFT, you are doing so on a particular blockchain, such as on the Ethereum blockchain. You might do that minting through a marketplace like OpenSea, but at the end of the day, your NFT now lives on a public blockchain and not on private OpenSea.
    • What that means is that if OpenSea suddenly decides to do something bad that you don’t like (I am in no way picking on OpenSea), you can simply stop using them and just access and trade your NFTs from some other marketplace. As I understand it, there are also lots of smart people working on blockchain interoperability.
    • Once you have your NFT on a blockchain, you can choose, through various applications, to list it for sale, run auctions with a reserve price, or just hold it and do nothing, among other things. You can also set it up so that any proceeds from a future sale are automatically split with someone else — maybe they are a co-creator of the NFT that you minted.
    • Whether you’ve decided to list your NFT for sale or not, there is also the option for the market to make unsolicited offers on it. It is up to you whether or not you’d like to accept any of the offers, but in all cases the offers you receive are made fully public to the market. As a bidder, it’s easy to hide behind “burner” wallets, but you generally can’t hide real intent.
    • If/when you do sell, that sale becomes public record for all to see. The blockchain never forgets and it doesn’t matter which marketplace you decide to use.

    In some real estate markets, it’s fairly easy to see the sales history of a property. But in other markets, such as here in Toronto, it’s still fairly gated. Generally speaking, you are accessing a controlled database and so you need to abide by whatever rules might be in place. If you want to build a new application on top of your local real estate board’s database, that is going to be tricky and it will likely involve more than a few lawyers.

    It is, however, fun to imagine how this might all change with public blockchains. And I think that NFT marketplaces do offer some clues in terms of what could happen to our real estate markets.

    Consider this potentially unexpected scenario:

    In the world of NFTs, there is something known as creator royalties. And they function just as you might expect. As the creator of an NFT, you can set a royalty % that gets paid to you each and every time the NFT is sold. And because the blockchain never forgets, you never have to worry about enforcing and collecting your royalty fee. It just gets automatically distributed.

    Now imagine a world where people like the architect and the developer of a new property are able to attach their own creator royalties. This would be massively cumbersome to administer today, but it’s entirely straightforward once you’ve got everything on a blockchain. And it would be a huge boon for business models that today do not benefit from reoccurring revenues.

    In theory, it might also better align interests, because if you’re a “creator” who wants a good solid royalty fee stream, maybe you’re a little more motivated to do good long-term work. Who knows? This model might never actually happen, but I do think it is indicative of the kind of changes and innovations that we might see as crypto continues to filter through the economy.

  • Virtual artists are now being signed to digital record labels

    One of the most interesting things about NFTs is that some, but not all, come with very permissive licensing. What this could mean is that, as a holder, you are free to do whatever you would like with your NFTs, including creating businesses on top of them or using them for other commercial purposes. This is fascinating to me and I like NFT projects that adopt this open approach.

    In the past, we have talked about Bored Ape Yacht Club owners creating things like restaurants on top of their NFTs. But here is another more recent example: An NFT from the CyberBrokers collection has just been signed to a Web3 record label called Player Zero. This is the company’s first “Animated Virtual Artist”, and her inaugural album is available for streaming here, as well as from places like Spotify.

    This might sound kind of crazy if you aren’t following the crypto space. But is it really? We already have virtual influencers with millions of followers, so why can’t we have virtual pop stars being signed to digital record labels?

    I don’t know what this will ultimately mean for the holder of the above NFT, but imagine a world where the owner automatically receives X% of all the proceeds produced by the virtual artist. Now all of a sudden you have a cash flow stream that can be evaluated using traditional finance methods and an asset that can be valued and traded.

    Full disclosure: I own multiple CyberBrokers.

  • New NFT collection — Utah

    Our week of working remotely in the mountains of Utah has come to an end. Being on mountain time meant early mornings every day. But it also meant being able to enjoy the evenings, including sunsets like the one shown here at the top of Ensign Peak. This was my first time really experiencing the Salt Lake City area in the summer, and I’m grateful for the opportunity. It is a beautiful place, and one that still feels under the radar once you exclude its global draw as a ski and snowboard destination. I also had a great time capturing it on my camera. So I’m excited to share my latest NFT photography collection — Utah. All of the photos were taken on my Fujifilm X-T3 (35mm) and can be viewed and purchased over here on Foundation.