Press Enter to search · ESC to close

Crypto

Adam Back Slams Bieber’s $1.3M Bored Ape as ‘Negative Value’ — But Spares Bitcoin

Adam Back has agreed that Justin Bieber's $1.3 million Bored Ape NFT now carries 'negative' value, arguing that illiquid collectibles impose real costs on holders. Back explicitly exempted Bitcoin from the verdict, sharpening the divide between monetarily scarce assets and sentiment-driven NFT speculation.

Blockstream CEO Calls Blue-Chip NFT a Liability, Not an Asset

Adam Back, the cryptographer who invented Hashcash and now leads Blockstream, has waded into the debate over celebrity NFT speculation, agreeing that Justin Bieber’s $1.3 million Bored Ape Yacht Club purchase now carries “negative” value. Back’s remark lands as the blue-chip NFT market continues to bleed against a backdrop of evaporating liquidity and shifting collector sentiment.

Bieber bought Bored Ape #3001 in January 2022 for roughly 500 ETH when the collection was trading near all-time highs. The floor price for the Bored Ape Yacht Club has since collapsed by more than 90%, turning what was marketed as a digital status symbol into one of the most visible losses in the celebrity NFT cohort.

Why ‘Negative Value’ Is More Than a Jab

Back’s framing is sharper than a simple price call. Negative value implies that holding the asset is an active cost — through storage, insurance, tax reporting, and reputational exposure — rather than a passive store of wealth. For NFTs, that burden is real: illiquidity means exits happen at steep discounts, and wash-trading has hollowed out confidence in headline floor prices.

  • Bored Ape floor prices have fallen from a peak near 150 ETH to roughly 10 ETH.
  • Celebrity-linked NFTs from 2021–2022 have underperformed the broader market.
  • Royalty enforcement and marketplace fragmentation continue to pressure secondary liquidity.

Bitcoin Gets a Pass — And That’s the Point

Back explicitly exempted Bitcoin from the negative-value verdict, reinforcing a long-held maximalist view: fungible, highly liquid, and monetarily scarce assets behave very differently from collectibles whose value rests on narrative and community signaling. The distinction matters for allocators who lump “crypto” into a single bucket. Bitcoin’s deep order books and institutional access routes — ETFs, custody, futures — contrast starkly with the thin, sentiment-driven NFT market.

The Broader NFT Reckoning

The episode is part of a wider repricing of digital collectibles. PFP projects that once commanded nine-figure valuations have seen trading volumes fall to multi-year lows, and many 2021-era buyers remain underwater. Projects with real utility — gaming assets, membership passes, token-gated infrastructure — are faring better, but the speculative tail is being written off.

What to Watch Next

Three signals will determine whether blue-chip NFTs stabilize or fade further:

  • Floor stability: whether BAYC and CryptoPunks can hold key psychological levels through the next cycle.
  • Utility pivots: whether remaining holders can convert status assets into functional ones.
  • Capital rotation: whether NFT-native liquidity keeps migrating to Bitcoin, Solana, and tokenized real-world assets.

Back’s verdict is unlikely to move the BAYC floor on its own, but it crystallizes a broader thesis: in a market that rewards liquidity and monetary credibility, illiquid collectibles carry a hidden liability that headline prices rarely capture.

View original

Share
Risk notice This site provides news and information on the crypto, blockchain and Web3 industry for reference only and does not constitute investment advice or any promise of returns. Virtual currency-related activities are illegal financial activities in mainland China; digital asset prices are highly volatile; use at your own risk. This site does not provide trading, token issuance or related referral services.

Related Reading

Latest News

TREE NEWS share card
Long-press image above → Save to Photos / Share
Pitch us Feedback