But creators will still need a platform to use tokens, DAOs, and NFTs to monetize their fan base.
For instance: Using web2 I can monetize my newsletter audience using subscriptions via Substack, which then takes a percentage of my revenue to run the platform. Or, using web3 I can monetize my newsletter audience using token gating and NFT drops via Papyrus, which then takes a percentage of my revenue to run the platform.
I don’t see a future in which a creator has direct access to their fan base, as well as the tools to monetize it, without a platform that can provide all of that (and thus requires a small fee to run it). And that seems to be as true with web2 as it does with web3.
Unless you have a different case study in mind that I’m missing?
Good point. Here's how I see things happening: as Web3 tech evolves, new creator platforms will emerge. And yes, they will likely need to take a % of fees at first. But they won't always.
Take Ethereum itself for example. We don't need to pay a small fee to the core devs to work on it. Only to the network itself. Emerging platforms will work this way to some extent too. The reason we aren't there yet is bc of the lack of technology.
You can find some optimism in LooksRare. It's an NFT marketplace like OpenSea. But 100% of the platform fees go back to tokenholders. Yes, there are technically fees. But there is no extractive component to it. Whereas OpenSea very clearly wants to get rich by enabling NFT trading volume.
This is just part of the process of gradual decentralization. Sooner or later, there won't be an extractive corporation making billions from value created by someone else. It's just a matter of time.
Building anything in Web3 is difficult (trust me, I've tried). But we're getting closer every day.
But creators will still need a platform to use tokens, DAOs, and NFTs to monetize their fan base.
For instance: Using web2 I can monetize my newsletter audience using subscriptions via Substack, which then takes a percentage of my revenue to run the platform. Or, using web3 I can monetize my newsletter audience using token gating and NFT drops via Papyrus, which then takes a percentage of my revenue to run the platform.
I don’t see a future in which a creator has direct access to their fan base, as well as the tools to monetize it, without a platform that can provide all of that (and thus requires a small fee to run it). And that seems to be as true with web2 as it does with web3.
Unless you have a different case study in mind that I’m missing?
Good point. Here's how I see things happening: as Web3 tech evolves, new creator platforms will emerge. And yes, they will likely need to take a % of fees at first. But they won't always.
Take Ethereum itself for example. We don't need to pay a small fee to the core devs to work on it. Only to the network itself. Emerging platforms will work this way to some extent too. The reason we aren't there yet is bc of the lack of technology.
You can find some optimism in LooksRare. It's an NFT marketplace like OpenSea. But 100% of the platform fees go back to tokenholders. Yes, there are technically fees. But there is no extractive component to it. Whereas OpenSea very clearly wants to get rich by enabling NFT trading volume.
This is just part of the process of gradual decentralization. Sooner or later, there won't be an extractive corporation making billions from value created by someone else. It's just a matter of time.
Building anything in Web3 is difficult (trust me, I've tried). But we're getting closer every day.