W o r l d . C r y p t o . G l o b a l

Loading

Welcome at World Crypto Global. This portal is packed with useful content and resources to built out your own crypto skills. WorldCrypto is a site member of Gabriel Vega Network.

Contact Info

CATEGORY: bogus


The Wall Street Journal Is Dead Wrong About The NFT Market’s Supposed Collapse

Author: Eduardo Próspero
United Kingdom
May 04, 2022 04:50

The Wall Street Journal Is Dead Wrong About The NFT Market’s Supposed Collapse

The NFT market is thriving, actually. Once again, the Wall Street Journal makes a fool of itself by tackling subjects beyond the publication’s comprehension. The author declares “the NFT market is collapsing,” citing suspicious numbers and two cases of bad trades as proof. And then, to top it all off poses a terrible theory. The “NFT Sales Are Flatlining” article is embarrassing beyond belief. Disclaimer: The following op-ed represents the views of the author, and may not necessarily reflect the views of Bitcoinist. Bitcoinist is an advocate of creative and financial freedom alike. Among other things, it proposes the worst definition of NFTs ever written:  “NFTs are bitcoin-like digital tokens that act like a certificate of ownership that live on a blockchain.” No, NFTs are not “bitcoin-like” at all. And the WSJ just forgot about the “non-fungible” aspect of these unique digital assets. And yes, someone bought an NFT of Jack Dorsey’s first tweet for $2.9M, another person bought a Snoop Dogg endorsed one for $32K. Both tried to auction the digital assets and only got embarrassingly low offers. Based on those two cases, the WSJ implies that the whole NFT market is dead on the water. THE DEATH OF NFTs… One buyer purchased a Snoop Dog curated NFT in early April for about $32,000 worth of the cryptocurrency ether. It's now up for auction, with an asking price of $25.5 million. The highest current bid is for 0.0743 ether—about $210.https://t.co/dg54XYijxh — Steven Russolillo (@srussolillo) May 3, 2022 The WSJ bogus numbers about the NFT Market Admittedly, the Wall Street Journal probably has access to a wider array of data than NewsBTC. However, the numbers they use to prove the NFT market is dead are suspicious as hell.  “The sale of nonfungible tokens, or NFTs, fell to a daily average of about 19,000 this week, a 92% decline from a peak of about 225,000 in September, according to the data website NonFungible.   The number of active wallets in the NFT market fell 88% to about 14,000 last week from a high of 119,000 in November.” Notice that they don’t link to NonFungible and provide a few low-resolution graphs that the normal eye can’t audit. However, everyone can go to NonFungible. The number of sales for May 3rd is 104.465 and that represents $206B. Hardly the signs of a dead NFT market. Granted, the number of sales for April 3rd is approximately 14K, but on May 1st the NFT market moved a whooping $778B in 117K sales. That’s not it. The WSJ also presents these stats as if they prove its case: “The imbalance between supply and demand is also hurting the NFT market. There are about five NFTs for every buyer, according to data from analytics firm Chainalysis. As of the end of April, there have been 9.2 million NFTs sold, which were bought by 1.8 million people.” Have they even been to OpenSea? There are hundreds of collections. And NFT aficionados own dozens of pieces. Sometimes, hundreds. Sometimes, thousands. And that’s just one platform that serves one blockchain. Five NFTs for every buyer is nothing. ETH price chart for 05/04/2022 on Coinbase | Source: ETH/USD on TradingView.com The Wall Street Journal’s Off The Mark Theory This might be the most ridiculous part of the article. Let’s let the author bury himself: “There are signs that collectors may also differentiate between NFTs that catalog a vast set of cartoonlike characters—like the CryptoPunks—and tailored, NFT art projects spurred by major artists who already enjoy museum followings.”  And then he talks about Jeff Koons and Chinese artist Cai Guo Qiang, who sold out NFT collections, and director Kevin Smith, who’s planning to. Meanwhile, Moonbirds set the NFT market on fire and the Bored Ape’s Otherside literally broke Ethereum. We’re talking billions of dollars for the “cartoonlike characters” team. Not only that, The Nightly Mint points us towards Nansen’s numbers.  6/ Taking a look at NFT Paradise, volume is robust – the last two weeks are both set to be among the top-10 in history (measured in ETH). Users per Week and Transactions per Week are likewise looking to reverse downtrends that began at the start of the year. pic.twitter.com/edNKzddMQW — Nansen?? (@nansen_ai) May 3, 2022 They clearly show that “the last two weeks are both set to be among the top-10 in history (measured in ETH).” And that “the Blue Chips and Social sectors are on a tear, up 81% and 83% YTD.” So, what game is the Wall Street Journal playing? Is this a case of poor research or evidence of malicious intent? That’s for you to decide, dear reader. Featured Image by Philip Strong on Unsplash | Charts by TradingView

What Happened To Tarantino ’s “Pulp Fiction” NFT Collection? The Strange Finale

Author: Eduardo Próspero
United Kingdom
Feb 15, 2022 04:50

What Happened To Tarantino ’s “Pulp Fiction” NFT Collection? The Strange Finale

In the end, Quentin Tarantino ’s “Pulp Fiction” NFT Collection collapsed under its own weight. Did Miramax’s lawyers scare them off? Or was there not sufficient interest in the collection by the buyers? Did the Secret Network have any technical problem that they’re not telling us about? Sadly, we can’t answer those questions at the moment. Something happened, though. We will present the facts and nothing but the facts so that each one can arrive at their own conclusions. As a reminder, in the collection’s official site they now describe the pieces as, “Each NFT in the collection consists of the original script from a single iconic scene, as well as personalized audio commentary from Quentin Tarantino himself.” The Story So Far This case is very complicated. It has a lot of ins, a lot of outs, a lot of what-have-yous. As soon as the news about Quentin Tarantino entering the NFT space hit the press, Miramax sued. The pieces were based on the 1994 movie “Pulp Fiction,” and they owned the rights. There was a strange caveat to the whole story, which Bitcoinist explained: “The Secret Network is a Layer 1 privacy blockchain created by SCRT Labs. The unique value proposition from The Secret Network lies in the name; the NFTs will be “secret” and only accessible by the NFTs owner.” “Just that fact makes the lawsuit endlessly interesting. Only the person that buys the NFT can see what’s inside, so Miramax has no clue about the kind of content they’re suing for. They just know they own the rights to the picture and the discarded material, but, besides the reports and the marketing material, they’re as in the dark as the rest of us about the actual content.” Despite Miramax lawyers working overtime, The Secret Network went all in. Two days before the first auction, they were talking David Vs. Goliath.  “The Secret Network, on the other hand, is milking the situation to the extreme. Money can’t buy this kind of publicity. Their press release quotes Guy Zyskind, founder and CEO of SCRT Labs: “Secret Network is proud to stand with Quentin. We are committed to working with talented artists across the globe, by providing them a better way to release their works directly to fans without relying on older distribution models, which favor conglomerates over creators.” Tarantino NFTs’ First Sale At first, everything seemed normal. The first piece, based on the “Royale With Cheese” scene, sold for a whopping $1.1M. The collection’s tweet sold it as a big win. “And the winner of the ORIGINAL ‘ROYALE WITH CHEESE’ SCREENPLAY NFT is AnonsNFT, who bid $1.1M! We received a lot of great bids on the first NFT in the collection, but Anons took the prize.” And the winner of the ORIGINAL 'ROYALE WITH CHEESE' SCREENPLAY NFT is @AnonsNFT, who bid $1.1M! ???? We received a lot of great bids on the first NFT in the collection, but Anons took the prize. The 2nd auction, 'Pumpkin and Honey Bunny' is now live @ https://t.co/O1fmcrN4Rm pic.twitter.com/8U44PHQ6HP — Tarantino NFTs (@TarantinoNFTs) January 24, 2022 However, looking into AnonsNFT, the DAO defines itself as “1st @SecretNetwork PFP Collection.” So, is the organization related to the Secret Network in any way? That would put a dent in the “whopping $1.1M” story. SCRT price chart on Huobi | Source: SCRT/USDT on TradingView.com The Nuclear Option: Cancel The Whole Thing A few days later, the Secret Network used the most bogus excuse to cancel the whole thing. Volatility. With a straight face, they blamed it all on volatility. “AN IMPORTANT UPDATE FOR OUR COMMUNITY: In light of extreme market volatility, we’ve decided to postpone the remainder of the auction to put the needs of our community first. We know that these exclusive collector’s items will be valuable for generations to come. Instead of adding to the volatility, we will wait for the right market conditions to ensure the integrity and fair market value for our community and creators.” We know that these exclusive collector’s items will be valuable for generations to come. Instead of adding to the volatility, we will wait for the right market conditions to ensure the integrity and fair market value for our community and creators. — Tarantino NFTs (@TarantinoNFTs) January 28, 2022 Why did they do that? Nobody knows for sure. But the cover story is terrible, volatility? Really? Miramax didn’t take credit for the kill. And the Secret Network did not admit to low interest in the series or to technical difficulties. They just shut down the whole operation. Was Plagiarism A Factor? Did Tarantino Know About This? This case was plagued with copyright issues. And, to add insult to injury, the Andrew Cremeans story just comes out of nowhere. “It has been brought to my attention that Quentin Tarantino has been using my art without permission to sell his Pulp Fiction NFTs,” Cremeans said in a tweet.  It has been brought to my attention that Quentin Tarantino has been using my art without permission to sell his Pulp Fiction NFTs. Please see below. #nft #nfts #pulpfiction #tarantino #quentintarantino #jules #vincent #ripoff #art #artist #graphicdesign pic.twitter.com/MuTxRi9o2p — Andrew Cremeans (@Andrew_Cremeans) January 24, 2022 In a case as complex as this, it’s hard to believe that the operation collapsed because of an illustrator’s copyrights claims. The art is clearly his, though. And Cremeans complaint had to be brought to the front. Before dropping this story forever. This seems to be it for the Tarantino “Pulp Fiction” NFT collection, the saga’s last chapter. It’s a shame that it leaves an open ending such as this, with no definitive answers. Featured Image: Tarantino NFTs promotional image from this tweet | Charts by TradingView

Feb 13, 2022 01:45

FTC Warns of Romance Scams Luring People Into Bogus Cryptocurrency Investments – Regulation Bitcoin News

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has warned about romance scams using cryptocurrency. Scammers use romance as a hook to lure people into bogus investments, especially crypto, the federal agency explained. “2021 numbers are nearly five times those reported in 2020, and more than 25 times those reported in 2019,” said the FTC. FTC Warns […]

Your Crypto Gateway

Claim 1,000
Free WCG Coins

World Crypto Global opens the door to digital freedom for everyone.
Manage your free WCG Coins securely—where simplicity meets global accessibility.

11 bn

FREE CRYPTO COINS

8.9 bn

AVAILABLE FOR RESERVATION

2.1 bn+

ALREADY ALLOCATED

× WCG Coin

🎉 Get 1,000 WCG Coins

No fees. No catch. Your crypto journey starts here.