A tweet directed at the BoDoggos team for charging a subscription fee on their trading news app has sparked an industry-wide debate on what NFT holders are entitled to receive.
@Lewsiphur tweeted a screenshot from what appears to be a holder-only section of the BoDoggos Discord on June 17. In the screenshot, BoDoggos CEO and co-founder Nick O’Neill shares details on the “first version of the app”, alongside a discounted link to gain access. @Lewsiphur took issue at BoDoggos holders needing to pay for app access, whilst the BoDoggos team defended their need to cover “ongoing cost”.
As this back-and-forth continued on X, many big names, collectors and everyday members of the community added their opinion on what NFT holders should be entitled to from an NFT project – in what has become the latest hot topic of the NFT industry.
Key Insights
A tweet directed at BoDoggos has sparked an industry-wide debate on what NFT holders should be entitled toThe tweet took issue at BoDoggos’ plan to charge NFT holders a discounted rate for access to their new trading news app@Lewsiphur argued that holders should get ongoing app access for free, whilst BoDoggos cited the need to cover ongoing costsThis debate caused widespread reaction in the NFT community, with big names and community members alike sharing their thoughtsThe conversation has continued, with a member of the BoDoggos team taking aim at another project
Source: @Lewsiphur on XWhat are NFT holders entitled to?
This is the crux of the debate – and why we are seeing such heated debate on this topic.
On one side, original tweeter @Lewsiphur and his supporters generally believe that holders of NFT collectables should receive access to future products, developments and releases for free as a reward their support.
On the other side, BoDoggos and their supporters argue that these products have many ongoing costs – such as API fees, employee salaries, operating costs and more – and in order to survive, grow and deliver on their promises to their holders, recurring revenue is a necessity to ensure their survival.
Core members of the BoDoggos team, including Nick O’Neill and @EasyEatsBodega, responded directly to @Lewsiphur’s tweet to discuss the situation – and the focal point of the debate sparked reaction from across the NFT space.
Source: @depressivehacks and @mattmedved on XWhat has been the reaction in the community?
A large number of big names in Web3 have waded in to the debate, alongside many passionate everyday members of the community at large.
Leon Abboud, founder and CEO of Unfungible, stated that this debate “exposed NFTs’ biggest problem” – that the expectation that “a one-time purchase equals a lifetime of entitlement” is “[preventing] the space from growing and evolving.”
@mattmedved argued that the reality is that “Web3 businesses are still businesses,” and that “they’re run by real people with bills to pay, families to support, and operating costs to cover.” In conversation with @depressivehacks, @mattmedved would discuss “the tension many projects face between building sustainable revenue streams and delivering value to holders”, noting that “more revenue doesn’t always = floor price go up.”
A day later, June 18, BoDoggos team member @Chilearmy123 took aim at NFT collection Chonks, asking “what went wrong” after their 0.01 ETH open edition mint in December 2024. Zeneca swiftly came to their defence, taking aim at “gambling degenerates” trying to “mint cheap and then dump on the next and greater fool.”
Though the bulk of the public debate has largely subsided, the question still remains: what should NFT holders expect to receive from an NFT collection?
