Skip to main content

Are Free-to-Mint NFTs a Viable Option for Creators

 

Free-to-Mint NFTs
Image Source: Google images Search


Free-to-mint NFTs have been the norm recently. Contrary to traditional NFT drops where collectors are required to pay a set (or changing) cost, the gas cost for creating and buying an NFT Free-to-mint collection provides an opportunity for those interested to develop an NFT at a minimum or free.


Individuals and teams working on product development have been choosing to launch mint-free NFT launches to build buzz, create communities, and avoid the typical NFT launch issues. However, these should not be confused with airdrops because they reward and encourage holders of collections that already have NFTs Mints for free and have become a popular method to start new projects.


More Info: Latest NFT News


At present, most NFT enthusiasts are aware of free-to-mint NFTs. The range of mints is vast, from Loot from Goblin-town to WAGDIE Mints that are free are now a standard and appealing aspect in NFTs. NFT ecosystem. However, is this mint mechanism sustainable? What is the likelihood that it will function in the first place? Let's explore.


Do NFTs that are free-to-mint work?


In short, Yes. Free-to-mint NFT launches appear to be working fine. They're not a bad thing. Since free-claim, NFTs have existed for a long time, and some have even laid the foundation for various important projects that have been launched in the last few years.


It is possible to trace free-to-mint NFTs to the beginning of NFTs. The very beginning of one of the most well-known NFT projects of all time, CrypoPunks, was built around the mechanics of free-to-claim. It was released in June 2017. Punks were initially offered for free to those who would like to claim them. However, since you required the Ethereum wallet to purchase Punks, they were only available to those engaged in or interested in the crypto market.


While the CryptoPunks claim is still an outstanding illustration of the early NFT success, other companies have taken on the cause for the free-to-mint. In particular, Loot, the brainchild of Dom Hofmann, was launched without warning on the 27th of August 2021. It was a no-cost NFT on a first-come priority basis. This was the sole project that started a chain of projects that further developed the strategy of free-mint.


However, there are a lot of changes in the present than when CryptoPunks were released in the wild. It's true that free-to-mint NFTs are effective well and work effectively for the majority of the time as a means of rolling out a brand new NFT project. However, things get more complex with regard to an alternative market that offers free mints making many wonders whether they're sustainable in the long term.


Who gets the most benefit from mints for free?


It seems that free-to-mint NFTs are only effective for large-scale projects. In general, free-to-mint NFTs promote the notion of exclusivity. For the most part, they are a major occasion and one that automatically generates a lot of attention. Who wouldn't love a no-cost NFT from a venture with hundreds of thousands of followers on Twitter? This is an NFT flipper's wish.


While auctions on dutch require collectors to plan and time their purchases, free-to-mint NFTs result in a free-for-all, creating massive FOMO (fear of not being able to get) and, often, that leads to the ever-so-frightful gas battles. In the end, paying such as 0.1 or 0.4 per ETH to mint one free-to-mint NFT isn't cheap.


These kinds of NFT drops are an enjoyable experience for those who take part and make a profit. They generate excitement in the larger NFT community, but they're not an alternative for all. Although the teams behind large-scale free-to-mint NFT collections are likely to make money in the end through making a (sometimes quite a surprisingly large) per cent off the top of each sale on the secondary market, independent artists won't earn much from a drop that is free to mint.


Many artists, even those with an extensive following and had significant sales of 1/1 in the past, are still struggling to sell their NFTs independently; making their pieces available at no cost probably won't bring in any revenue. Of course, this depends on the artist and demand vs supply since we won't likely have Beeple having trouble selling a tiny batch of limited editions soon.


Perhaps this contrast is not as revealing of free-to-mint NFTs as well as an excellent example of tacit knowledge from the NFT market: that it is not just is it works for one group or individual (i.e. utility tokens, free-mints airdrops, companion collections etc.) does not mean that it is suitable for everyone.


A long-term solution to NFTs?


Although there is some argument against free-to-mint NFTs, most investors/collectors in the market believe they're, in fact, an attractive option for creators. As PFP projects remain dominant in the market, earning millions of dollars of capital through their sales in the first place and lack of accountability for the creators behind the projects has become a source of contention among members of the NFT community.


The fact that NFTs with free-to-mint pricing don't offer everyone the same benefits could be why they're able to gamble on their longevity. In a kind of pay-to-play way, NFTs that are free to mint could require creators to announce the services they offer collectors rather than creating elaborate roadmaps that can only be implemented after a collection has sold.


Since free-to-mints aren't a good fit for all people, they (theoretically) should not work very well for bad actors worldwide. Why? Because free mints seem counterintuitive to those who want to join the NFT community on a rollercoaster with a laughable money grab.


Of course, free-to-mint NFT scams do exist. However, they typically use malicious smart contracts. They are generally easy to figure out with a bit of searching. But, using the best practices, such as triple-checking your smart contract providers, storing valuable funds in cold wallets, and knowing how to identify red flags in NFT, will help guard investors from free mint scams like any other.


However, giving the gift of hundreds of NFTs for free isn't certain to yield profits. Free-to-mint collections are intended to be flashy, and then it will take time to burn off, which means that the cash won't start flowing in for the collector until the hype reaches an end. In the overall scheme in the marketplace, this could represent one of the main advantages of free-to-mint NFTs and offer more proof of their longevity.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What are Gas Fees and How Can We Fix Them?

Blockchain transactions were very affordable prior to 2020. With the rise of Web3 & NFTs, mandatory blockchain transaction charges -- also known by gas fees -- are now the greatest barrier to mainstream adoption. Network congestion is what determines the gas price for blockchains like Bitcoin or Ethereum. The network congestion is the reason why the gas fees are higher for more people. Web3's ethos of inclusivity and democracy means that this fundamental scaling problem largely challenges those core tenants. Although gas can seem quite simple in concept, it can be quite complicated under the hood. This explanation explains gas fees and how they work. It also explains what Ethereum and other Blockchains can do to make them cheaper. What's a gas charge?   Gas fees, as defined in our dictionary are payments made to complete transactions on a blockchain. These fees are paid to blockchain miners to cover the computing power required to verify transactions on blockchain. These

Should NFT Creators Expect Royalties? Sudoswap Says No

Reator royalties have been a major part of the NFT market over the years.   Artists of all faiths were able to survive in the early days Web3.0 creative economy by a combination of primary sales and kickbacks from secondary market royalties. Despite being crucial, creator royalties are not hard-coded into any smart contracts.   Creator royalties  also known as creator fees  are an option that is used to reserve a percentage of secondary sales (peer to peer trades), and send it back to the NFTs originalator. Most collectors don't mind paying an artist a royalty fee when collecting secondaries.   It's almost impossible to avoid paying creator royalty fees in the NFT space, even though it is an option.   This could be either a good thing or a bad thing depending on your source. Decentralized payments are made through centralized means. OpenSea is an example: When an artist's NFT sells in the secondary market on OS the platform receives the royalty through the transaction.   Op

What the Proposed Crypto Bill Could Mean for NFTs

After months of speculation about the possibility of a new U.S. regulator focusing on cryptocurrency, U.S. Senators Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) from the Senate Banking Committee and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) from the Senate Agriculture Committee introduced bipartisan legislation on Tuesday. Although the  document's 69-page length  doesn't deal with NFTs, it provides important information to determine if a token should be classified as a commodity rather than a security.' More News: Latest NFT News Definition of "digital assets" as well as 'virtual currencies In its current version, Lummis and Gillibrand's bill defines a "digital asset' as an electronic asset that grants access rights for economic or proprietary reasons or powers, including virtual currencies and payment stablecoins. The bill defines "virtual currency" as a digital asset used "primarily" as a medium for exchange, the unit of account, or store of value that is not supp