I think I'm beginning to understand the prices of art NFTs: the majory of people simply don't understand that NFTs aren't representing much anything of value. It's even harder to believe that the box is empty when its price was so high.
€2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
11–20 of 398 posts
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#12 > 1. Make the book public (to the
> extent permitted by law)
Seems like NFT logic in reverse, lol
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#13Since it is an auction, besides the winning bidder, there was at least another bidder, which makes two of them and is even more perplexing. It is not really the "Dune" book, but rather its storyboard, more details and a few photos here: https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211122-doomed-dune-s...
> Since it is an auction, besides the winning bidder, there was at least another bidder, which makes two of them and is even more perplexing. I see nothing perplexing about it because this was not an ordinary auction, but an auction with one member being a public DAO, where the amount of money the DAO will bid is thus public. Let's say the DAO bids $100, but they have $200 in contributions. Someone can then safely bi…
>Disclaimer: I know nothing about this specific auction, and may be missing some key detail. This is simply an observation and speculation from a naive bystander
Sorry, but how do you know it was a DAO (whatever it is)?
From what I could find:
https://www.capital.fr/economie-politique/dune-le-storyboard...
>Les enchères se sont rapidement envolées et ont donné lieu au final à une rude bataille entre deux enchérisseurs étrangers, au téléphone. L'enchérisseur gagnant est américain.
it was a normal auction with two bidders (on the telephone).
EDIT: Ok, found some more info: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/amansethi/spicedao-dune...
the winning bidder was a guy for TheSpiceDAO, but who was the other bidder?
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#14It's actually 2.66M + 5.5% VAT = 2.8M euros ($3.2M USD), as stated on the bottom of the auction page:
"VAT at the rate of 5.5% will be due on the total of the hammer price and fees charged to the buyer."
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Since it is an auction, besides the winning bidder, there was at least another bidder, which makes two of them and is even more perplexing. I see nothing perplexing about it because this was not an ordinary auction, but an auction with one member being a public DAO, where the amount of money the DAO will bid is thus public. Let's say the DAO bids $100, but they have $200 in contributions. Someone can then safely bi…
>Disclaimer: I know nothing about this specific auction, and may be missing some key detail. This is simply an observation and speculation from a naive bystander Sorry, but how do you know it was a DAO (whatever it is)? From what I could find: https://www.capital.fr/economie-politique/dune-le-storyboard... >Les enchères se sont rapidement envolées et ont donné lieu au final à une rude bataille entre deux enchérisseur…
The twitter thread this post is to retweets the DAO in question claiming responsibility, specifically this twitter account: https://twitter.com/TheSpiceDAO
Googling finds this website: https://dune.foundation/, and some info about the etherium they raised here https://juicebox.money/#/p/spicedao
Maybe this is some sorta elaborate hoax, but it looks like it's real eth, so unless juicebox is also in on it, it seems like a hard hoax to pull.
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Since it is an auction, besides the winning bidder, there was at least another bidder, which makes two of them and is even more perplexing. I see nothing perplexing about it because this was not an ordinary auction, but an auction with one member being a public DAO, where the amount of money the DAO will bid is thus public. Let's say the DAO bids $100, but they have $200 in contributions. Someone can then safely bi…
>Disclaimer: I know nothing about this specific auction, and may be missing some key detail. This is simply an observation and speculation from a naive bystander Sorry, but how do you know it was a DAO (whatever it is)? From what I could find: https://www.capital.fr/economie-politique/dune-le-storyboard... >Les enchères se sont rapidement envolées et ont donné lieu au final à une rude bataille entre deux enchérisseur…
[deleted]
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#172 things confuse me about this.
1. This was a normal auction and not an NFT one. How is a DAO enforced in this case? What happens if the nominated bidder decides to go rogue and bid more or less than the decided cap? What happens if the price of Ethereum drops to the point that the DAO is no longer able to find the 2.6M they need?
2. If this is an auction then there has to be another bidder (I doubt even the people in this DAO are dumb enough to make their initial bid 2.6M). Who was bidding 2.5M against them?
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#18Who was the seller? Where did the 2.6 million come from? How many other bidders were there? What was the auction model used? How are they going to recover the investment now? And if they won't how will they deal with the write-off? So many questions...
Yes, we need answers to these !
I'll add one: why does the thread mention "cryptobros" about buyers when the auction was nothing related to crypto in any way?
Is it just becoming a generic insult to dumb people or am I missing something?
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#19It's actually 2.66M + 5.5% VAT = 2.8M euros ($3.2M USD), as stated on the bottom of the auction page: "VAT at the rate of 5.5% will be due on the total of the hammer price and fees charged to the buyer." https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-6345488
It's probably even more than that with the "Buyer's Premium" tacked on - the Christie's cost calculator linked reckons that would be another EUR540,000 on top...
Re: €2.6M spent for a book at auction, believed they would own the IP
#20They bought a rare Dune storybook, created by an all-star team of artists (Jodorowsky, Moebius, HR Giger, ...). I think that storybook was used to pitch the concept art to Movie Producers and Studios.
To make this easier to understand, substitute "Dune book" with "Gutenberg Bible" or, even better, "historic, ultrarare, pre-medieval parchment of a Bible translation".
The new owners of that Bible probably do not think (and do not intend to promote the idea) that they now own the property rights for "the" Bible, or for all Bibles, or for any Bible - except for that particular instance of the Bible.
Rather they now own that parchment, with all its decorated pages, handwriting, scripts, gemstones, peculiar translations, and compilation of Gospels and Letters.
These content, drawings and illustrations inside that Bible are really unique, unless the monks decided to draw everything ( or even more often.)
This content could indeed be monetized, or shared with the world, for the greater good.