NFTs Are a Pyramid Scheme and People Are Already Losing Money

NFTs Are a Pyramid Scheme and People Are Already Losing Money

Photographers, filmmakers, and digital artists are falling over themselves to mint NFTs in a get-rich-quick scheme that will do little beyond transferring wealth from artists to tech billionaires. Why are so many people buying into the idea that something is rare because everyone says it is?

If you’ve yet not minted your first NFT and you’re wondering how it works, here’s a quick summary of the process: you create a wallet, buy some Ethereum, and choose a platform. You then pick one of your digital creations and pay around $70-100 to “mint” this artwork into a Non-Fungible Token. You choose a starting price and wait for the bids to come rolling in. You may even like to build up to a “drop” to create some hype.

One of the easiest places to get started is Rarible, which is bewildering, thanks to the crypto aesthetic made up of nightmarish visions of randomness and memes. Certain tropes emerge: Pepe the Frog, rhinos, and rainbows proliferate, creating a nonsensical soup of chaos and confusion that feels like a terrifying mash-up of kids cartoons and 4chan.

If you’re one of the early adopters or have some friends who were ahead of the curve, you might have landed yourself an invitation to a platform such as These sites create a degree of exclusivity, as there’s a level of filtering to ensure that only a small number get to mint their work. If you don’t know anyone with an invite, you can head to a specific channel on Foundation’s Discord server and ask politely, though such is the FOMO, meaning requests have been piling in at more than one every 30 seconds.

Whichever platform you choose, you won’t be able to ignore the fact that a lot of people seem to be selling a lot of questionable digital art for ludicrous amounts of money. That’s a very strong nudge for you to get involved.

Incentivization is such a feature of these platforms that many of the artworks being minted and traded reflect it in the aesthetic. Pieces involving the letters FOMO proliferate in a self-referential sea of urgency to buy, sell, and be sold. This sense that you’re not on board with the beginnings of something big underpins the entire NFT experience, and it’s a marketing masterstroke. Almost every tweet telling you about an auction that you should get involved in will remind you that artwork will only be available for a brief window. The FOMO is so powerful that you probably feel like you're already losing money by having not signed up yet.

The top sellers on over a 24 hour period. 60.15ETH works out to just over $100,000 at time of writing.

NFTs offer a new type of ownership and an exciting way for digital creators of all sorts to sell their work. As a concept, it has some appealing aspects such as the fact that whenever you mint a token, you can determine the royalty that you will receive each time that it’s sold on in the future (typically around 10%). Cryptocurrencies offer an alternative to an economic system that is dominated by Wall Street bankers, politicians, and insider dealing, promising a degree of democratization of economic structures that offers freedom and flexibility. This upstart, new-contender, f***-you mentality also infuses the artworks being created with seemingly endless celebrations of how this new system will redistribute power.

Mass Enchantment

To many, it’s a means of overthrowing the existing regime; when you look a little closer, you realize that it’s just an extreme manifestation of neoliberalism. Instead of convincing you to buy stuff that you don’t need, they’re convincing you to buy imaginary optimism based on a mass enchantment. In addition, as a generation, we have the fervent belief that every single one of us is special and that therefore our creativity must have innate value; NFTs are our chance to sell it.

Under auction on at time of writing.

The rhetoric is compelling if a little naive at times. I stumbled upon a statement accompanying the forthcoming drop (i.e., the beginning of an auction) of one reasonably well-established digital artist, which, like many NFT artworks, ties the concept of the NFT into the artwork itself. This is how he described his animation of a futuristic character and his flying car: “NFTs are a rallying call for creatives,” it read. “A call to explore, to dream, and to leap into a world where our solitary dreams become a collective reality.” He added: “Collecting and creating NFTs is not an act of defiance but a tribute to a historical moment of a movement that is changing our lives.”

I’m not sure anything can be more meta than the simulated ownership of a digital copy of an artwork that describes itself as a tribute to a historical moment of a movement. It also conveniently ignores that these platforms are owned by millionaires such as the Winklevoss twins, who famously sued Mark Zuckerberg for stealing their idea for Facebook.

Oh the FOMO

“Buy, sell, and discover rare digital items,” reads the strapline on If you’re wondering how a digital item can be rare, you’re asking the right question. Last century, philosopher Walter Benjamin explored how the authenticity of art was tied to its uniqueness and that photography — along with mechanical reproduction — brought instability. I’m not sure what Benjamin would have made of NFTs, but this disconnect between our love of authenticity and the virtual world’s inability to provide an alternative isn’t resolved by owning tokens that barely even exist. Digital rarity is a pretense.

Society is becoming less physical and more virtual, and it’s no coincidence that NFTs have taken hold at a time when our social interactions have never been less tangible. Furthermore, the creative industries now play a significant role in the economies of major nations, and yet despite the supposed value of artists’ contributions, employment is largely precarious (which itself is made to look appealing) and often supported by mundane jobs. The carrot dangled by the world of NFTs is incredibly alluring: let’s all sell something virtually so that we can collectively pretend that it is now owned by someone else.

The Art of Imagined Value

A listing on

The art market has always been about making enough people believe that something has value. It’s also been a shadow banking system that facilitates the movement of large sums of money across borders or hides it from tax inspectors. The value of the artworks that are now being sold as NFTs have acquired value thanks to marketing, FOMO, and a massive pile-on of unwitting minters and buyers trailing eagerly after celebrities and huge brands. Money washes through this system, and as a bubble, it’s unsustainable.

What doesn’t get seen among the flashy websites and occasionally beautiful artworks is the huge volume of minted pieces that do not sell. Selling an NFT is not that different from selling a print: it’s far easier if you have an excitable band of fans keen to part with their cash, and with NFTs, it’s even simpler if those fans are already tech geeks. If you’re a digital artist with a large following, you might do quite well, and it works in your favor if you indulge heavily in the crypto aesthetic. That’s a tiny minority of sellers; the vast majority will only lose money, as minting isn’t free, and you can be sure that someone somewhere is making a tidy profit as a result.

Not Quite a Swap Shop

I was about to mint my first piece when I realised that the cost of putting it on the was going to be more than $70. Many argue that high "gas" fees mean that Ethereum as a currency is not fit for purpose.

Being friendly, supportive people, artists are encouraging fellow artists to buy each other’s art, salvaging egos, and giving you a sense that the money you spent on gas hasn’t been a complete waste. However, gas fees aside, most platforms add a 3% fee to the sum paid by the buyer and then take a 15% cut of that received by the seller: this generous, mutually supportive act of buying each other’s art is doing little more than line the pockets of the millionaires that set up these platforms in the first place. Artists would be far better off simply sending each other checks, posting a photo of the checks on social media, and then just keeping those checks in a drawer.

The Environmental Impact Is Immense

What many artists are conveniently ignoring is that NFTs have a vast carbon footprint. To her horror, one environmentally conscious artist calculated that minting her six tokens was the equivalent to running her studio for two years. There’s plenty of discussion about the precise impact of NFTs (though the platforms seem predictably reluctant to get involved), but any conversation about this marketplace that doesn’t mention its potential environmental impact is massively irresponsible.

Winners Mean Losers

If you don't know what you're buying, don't spend $6,600 on it.

On the surface, the NFT marketplace is made to look like everyone is making money, and while crypto might be rewriting the rules of economics, there is one dictum it cannot escape: for someone to make money, another has to lose money. NFTs do not magically generate wealth from nowhere; they’re taking it from those buying into the idea that everyone who’s getting in early is making a killing. As David Gerard, author of Attack of the 50 Foot Blockchain explains, “NFTs are entirely for the benefit of the crypto grifters. The only purpose the artists serve is as aspiring suckers to pump the concept of crypto — and, of course, to buy cryptocurrency to pay for ‘minting’ NFTs.”

Eventually, this pumping will tail off as the number of people willing to keep plowing money into Ethereum and NFTs will begin to ease. Given that this system relies on constant growth, it seems a safe bet that the value of these "rare" items might start to fall, and those countless investors who spent thousands of dollars on low-res pictures of a puppy might want to get their money out before it collapses completely. Otherwise, what are you going to do with that puppy? Print it and hang it above the toilet?

Prices might not even need to stagnate for people to sell. They just need to stop rising as rapidly, and suddenly, it will seem like a safer option to have dollars in your Chase account rather than Ethereum in a wallet where its value has already been seen to fluctuate by 20% in a single day. Once investors’ confidence is dented, the collapse could happen quite quickly.

Ethereum increases in value when people keep buying Ethereum, and this simulated ownership of supposedly rare digital assets has manufactured demand. Cryptocurrencies are desperate to find a reason for people to swap their dollars for a slightly more imaginary monetary system, and NFTs are the latest solution. When it reaches saturation point, the market will adjust, and it could be messy.

This bubble will burst; it’s just a matter of when.

If you're passionate about taking your photography to the next level but aren't sure where to dive in, check out the Well-Rounded Photographer tutorial where you can learn eight different genres of photography in one place. If you purchase it now, or any of our other tutorials, you can save a 15% by using "ARTICLE" at checkout. 

Andy Day's picture

Andy Day is a British photographer and writer living in France. He began photographing parkour in 2003 and has been doing weird things in the city and elsewhere ever since. He's addicted to climbing and owns a fairly useless dog. He has an MA in Sociology & Photography which often makes him ponder what all of this really means.

Log in or register to post comments

NFTs explained:

Further reading:

How Beeple sold an NFT artwork for $69 million to a business partner and they both stand to make money by splitting up ownership and selling it on:

"What’s interesting is that Beeple, the creator of the artwork, is actually a business partner of Metakovan’s. He owns 2% of all the B20 tokens. I’m sure there is no conflict of interest here."

- Amy Castor.


"NFTs are entirely for the benefit of the crypto grifters. The only purpose the artists serve is as aspiring suckers to pump the concept of crypto — and, of course, to buy cryptocurrency to pay for “minting” NFTs. Sometimes the artist gets some crumbs to keep them pumping the concept of crypto."

"The NFT grift works like this:

1. Tell artists there’s a gusher of free money!
2. They need to buy into crypto to get the gusher of free money.
3. They become crypto advocates, and make excuses for proof-of-work and so on.
4. A few artists really are making life-changing money from this!
5. You probably won’t be one of them."

- David Gerard.


'People Are Stealing Art and Turning It Into NFTs'

Ben Munster -


An excellent thread by one of the directors at Superrare on why I'm wrong:


And my thanks to my friend Scott for offering this take on my thoughts on NFTs 😆:

I'm just glad this article didn't drag out the same 'ol environmental criticism. Some good points were made, and thanks for the twitter links too.
In the end, the rich will almost always be richer than 99.9% of artists but it is that wealth that allows them to purchase art at inflated prices. We've seen this with physical art as well (Mona Lisa ahem) and why would it be different with digital art?
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder so let's let the market decide what the future shall be. But yeah, the entry into this new frontier is fraught with pitfalls that most artists won't bother to risk anyway.

You also have the option to mine crypto and mint NFT's with what you mined. In this scenario, you only spend the cost of electricity used for mining. For example, if you use ravencoin, you only need to mine 500 rvn to mint an NFT, which takes about a couple of weeks on a new gpu, or maybe a month on an older one.

Also, ravencoin isn't owned by anyone, despite the fact that a specific group of people developed it; they deployed ravencoin in the spirit of bitcoin, and the coin is completely transparent (all source code is in a github repository for anyone to examine). Lastly, The creators don't directly profit from people using rvn--outside of what they have either mined themselves or invested their own money in (i.e. they make zero dollars from rvn transactions unless they put the work in to validate like everyone else); If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it.

I'll give you that there are probably charlatans out there, but that's how everything is when it comes to money (none bigger than dominant financial institutions that gamble with tax payer money and then get paid in tax dollars when they lose it). I think it's unfair how so many articles treat crypto-currencies when crypto has such great potential to democratize wealth and also take control away from what I believe are bad people.

Thanks for the heads up but what is an NFT?

Non-Fungible Token whatever that is...I believe that string of words is mentioned once in the article.

There is this really cool trick you can do since you are clearly on the internet.

Human stupidity is infinite...

You ca say that again!

Amen to that Tammie.

Yep I think we can all agree to that indeed.

Human stupidity is infinite...

Here is a quick question. As a fractal artist, I plan only to sell my real art as NFT. Is it possible for me to do so with profit without any investment ?

Open Sea has "lazy minting" which mints on the fly as items are bought. Something Andy failed to research. Now that I have an axe to grind clearly as he does.

Multiple sites have "free gas", but that doesn't help the narrative of negative articles so it's conveniently never mentioned.

This is just a continuation of what's been happening in the art world for decades and decades. This is just the new spin on it. Go watch "Exit through the Gift Shop" and it shows just how you can convince a bunch of people of somethings "worth" just by pretending it's "rare". =P It's a great watch.

It appears you may not know what NFT blockchain actually is.

I personally agree that this art craze using NFT blockchain technology is ridiculous and illogical. Speculative mania.

But to say "NFT's are a pyramid scheme" is a misleading blanket statement. You are talking about a niche within a bigger technological development. NFT blockchain is real and serves an actual purpose. There are many many many real world uses that this can be applied to, successfully and efficiently. You've picked ONE use case and now claim ALL of NFT tech is a pyramid scheme. Which leads me to believe you don't know what the tech is actually about. It goes way further than what you are seeing here. This is a hype train of a niche.

Crytpo has yet to prove it is anything other than a speculative vehicle for the credulous and for those trafficking in the underground economies of the world.

It is not a medium of exchange more than barter is.
Moreover, as governments catch on to the range of opportunity for them and the scope of criminal activity out of their reach, they can shut down the crypto world by Tuesday.

The entire blockchain cheerleading squad puffs up the magical benefits of an "distributed ledger that is immutable". Yes, but with respect to crypto currency not secure in any manner.
Crypto is stolen, wallets hacked, lost or passwords forgotten.
Also paraded is the "no middleman" trope yet at every turn money is paid to effect these desperately slow transactions.

Large institutions getting on the bandwagon is not a declaration of maturity of crypto but the joining of a gravy train that they know they can profit from without owning a single electron.

This will blow up. But only the little guy who bet his retirement on BTC will be hurt.

How is this any different than the stock market? The American dollar? Online banking? Do your research before you go blabbering on about ideas you clearly are ignorant about, it makes your argument worthless.

When I buy a share of a company, I actually own a portion of a company. It has a board of directors, management and employees and actually has a product. If the company goes bust it can be liquidated.

When you buy an NFT or crypto you have nothing other than a digital artifact that gets sold to the next sucker. It has value only when two or more people believe it has value. It cannot be made into anything like gold, nor does it produce anything. It yields no interest and has zero backing by any entity. It is sold to fools who think that since they can click on an app they think they understand crypto, blockchain and gleefully swallow any sort of drivel a crypto -bro feeds you. Pet rocks were the same thing but at least you got a rock.

Maybe you need to learn about the stock market and the financial markets before you start your witless "points". Go ahead, buy your digital tulips. But don't whine at us when the market inevitably turns.

"Grifters." Coming out swinging wow. I get it that minting costs are preposterous but that money isn't going to tech millionaires bro but folks who maintain the network. Secondly, as I mentioned before to the fractal artist trying to monetize his art (the humanity!) that OpenSea has a mint of the fly functionality now so the buyer pays the fees. Yeah is the market a tad frothy yeah. My avatar goes for $30k. It's strange. Yet I don't wish to sell. I like my crypto punk man. And I like the art I've bought and I like meeting the artists I buy from and I like learning about thier process. Your take sounds nuanced but unfortunately hasn't found the signal amongst all the noise and hoopla surrounding NFTs. Which is ok. It's new territory and we're all trying to find our way here, at least I am. Y'all can write it off as a collective hallucination. Fine. I'm not going to say "your loss" or you'll miss out. I don't care for that kind of talk either. Some people believe art can change the world.. technology's just gonna make it happen a little faster. I wish you well but please, don't call me and my homies grifters bro. If anyone wants a safe place to talk NFTs in respect to art and beyond my DMs are open. @kinchasa5000

It seems that the biggest issue none of the hot takes on NFTs are spending much time with, is that the reason art has value to art lovers and collectors, (not speculators,) is the quality and merritt of the art. They want to have it because they believe in it and its creator.

In all my research into NFTs so far, the defining characteristic seems to be that the "art" in question is just tossed off trash that even the artist likely didn't seem to care about (so why would a collector?) The idea of paying for an "authentic" digital artwork is no different from any other art patronage, the issue is that the art here all seems to be entirely an afterthought in an effort to cash in on a novelty and to do so asap. I mean, if you owned an authenticated and "unique" digital Rauschenberg or Warhol, it's value wouldn't be this dubious thing you're describing, because people would care about the art, giving it value, as opposed to caring foremost about its value and just sort of calling it art.

Is there any reason why the art all needs to be stupid .gifs of meaningless nonsense? Can we not use this strategy to create a venue for digital artists of actual merritt to sell their work the same way a painter can, and finally stop being financially penalized for the digital nature of their work? I don't know. All art markets have craven speculators, but can't this art market also have true art lovers and patrons if only any real artists would get on board?

The way this is being talked about (oh my god, rich platform operators are making a killing?!!!,) It's as if you've never heard of an auction house. You think Christies and Southebys don't do the same thing every time some hotel owner decides to offload his Hockney? How is one a grift and the other a classy and established art market? The artist gets absolutely zero from a secondary market sale at an auction house, whereas here they'd at least get that 10% commission in perpetuity.

If for no other reason this feels like a move in the right direction. Don't let the abysmal quality of the art so far on offer (or the fact that the artists, as usual, are the ones making the least money at every transaction) sour the whole idea, because if real art started making the move to NFT, the long-term value to artists could really be a boon.

As a person who has been in the art world for 40+ years now I can state quite confidently that the bulk of the art world is a business pure and simple.
Scarcity is a minimum requirement to make money.

Photography and the mechanical arts have always been the red headed stepchildren until strategies to add scarcity and exclusivity were developed.

Patronage is a conceit. At the back of most "patrons" minds is the expectation of increased value of the works they are buying. Some buy stuff they don't like because the artist is friend or they like the artist on a personal level.

The gallery industry has long had an incestuous relationship with museums as they work together to promote artists that benefit gallery owners and museum donors. They also get lots of tax deductible parties where they can schmooze and preen their cultural cred while maybe getting to date some cute people.

Joy of art is real but largely practiced by those who are not in the art world.

The art world is like the meat industry. Everyone loves to extol the virtue of heirloom pork but will not talk about how the pig is fed slop by undocumented workers who slaughter the animal in an abbatoir smelling of death.

Losing say it aint so..but that maven of social media jack d. Is a big fan..he couldn't endorse a crooked idea he is so level headed and fair and always strives to see both sides of a positive financial bonanza that's in his pocket...we nee to continuously bow to the wisdom Of the social mafia gods they can do no wrong..why woukd they lie...they're words are law ....we need to just follow

Good article. Thanks, Andy.

It's sad to see so many people rushing to get in on the NFT gold rush, scared of missing out on their chance of getting rich, all while choosing to ignore the horrific environmental impact. If you don't know, you're not accountable, right? Cognitive dissonance at its very best.

"I’m not sure anything can be more meta than the simulated ownership of a digital copy of an artwork that describes itself as a tribute to a historical moment of a movement."

This is maybe the best sentence I have ever read. I love it!


Not that I support it ..but you can short FLOW or RARI

I don't think you know the definition of pyramid scheme.

I see Trey Ratcliffe is now advertising one for charity. I'd say he's sniffing potential dollars here. Set an initial value for his work. I see some people saying its not a pyramid scheme but that's what it will end up being. The early adopters could win big but the whole thing will collapse and late arrivers lose their money. It's all based on belief and whether you think the digital art given a unique blockchain stamp retains value. Personally. I don't think it will as the art itself has no intrinsic value. Bitcoin is based on something more substantial but is also only of value as long as people continue to believe or it becomes flawed. I think the lockdown is contributing to all these types of get rich quick schemes.When it comes to virtual assets for some one to gain someone else is losing.

The American dollar also only has value because we all continue to believe it does. Gold has intrinsic value, a dollar bill does not. If the American economy collapses, so does the dollar. Bitcoin is no different.

bitcoin has a total supply cap enforced by immutable code. there can ONLY be 21 million bitcoin EVER. The fed printed TRILLIONS of dollars in the past year backed by nothing. when the american economy collapses, bitcoin will eat the world.

So how are NFTs any different than designer clothes or shoes? Why does one artist command millions while another rakes in hundreds? It's because someone is willing to pay for it. If dumb people want to waste their money on NON FUNGIBLE tokens (it's literally in the name), then why should we care?

NON FUNGIBLE means 'not interchangeable' not non-valuable. a dollar is fungible, a bitcoin is fungible, each one is equally representative of any other. A painting by da vinci is non-fungible. even if he'd painted 2 identical copies, one would've come first and be more valuable,

Does the author understand NFTs can also be used for government identification, land deeds, auto titles, certificates, logistics (in tracking where a package goes), diplomas, collectables, ANY kind of ownership of ANYTHING??? Claiming NFTs are pyramid schemes, just because the medium is used in the selling of overpriced art, is like saying cars are only meant for criminals just because criminals use cars. Totally ignorant.

I don't think author is ignorant of the myriad of uses for NFTs and blockchains in general, he's simply excluded those to support his argument and instead leave unknowing readers ignorant. Also, it was hard to stay interested as soon as I read "neo-liberalism" which is as ridiculous to me as the overstated libertarianism I often run across on these topics.

You could have the honesty to compare how art gallery badly treat young artists.
Many were disgusted, and found in the blockchain a chance to freely continu creating their art.
Nobody is selling dreams and promise you will be a millionaire, but with the blockchain thousands of people can watched your art, I think most people dont understand who are the crypto rich boys, new millionaire are made everyday on the alt market, and that NFT is not just limited to art , it goes far beyond that since you can tokenized everything. Finance did understand that, social community as well, metaverse, gaming industry, so no it is not just a hype, it is something that will changed many area.
As for the network fees, there are other gasless blockchain, marketplace with layer 2 and upcoming rollup solution on ethereum , why didn't you mentioned that ?
Why soon NBA TOP Shot will have exchange for half a billions usd moments

It is just the beginning and people dont get it

Gosh I don't know where to start. Perhaps with opensea and rariable both of which don't charge to mint NFTs though yes you are charged a transaction fee too put the NFT on the blockchain that fee is ever changing and it goes to the miners not big tech. I do agree the fee for minting a NFT on the ethereum main chain is way to high. However it seems to me you haven't looked into things such as enjin, wax, decentraland or the sandbox maker. Allow me to put this into prospective for you. People have been buying and selling items in video games since at least Diablo 2 perhaps earlier. These would be items that are actually owned by Blizzard but people where still buying and selling these items that are reliant on Blizzard servers remaining up without any actual ownership of the item they bought. No here comes enjin it mints NFT items on the blockchain making it available on a large decentralized server. So you can own your game items and eventually move them to other games. Both decentraland and the sandbox maker are creating worlds in which you can buy digital property and create things on which will also allow you to incorporate NFTs into your build. Like oh I got this really awesome hammer in this one game but I don't want to use it in that game so I move it and drop a weapon stand and boom trophy room. Nfts are essentially building blocks for a digital metaverse. Right now some things are way over priced and people are creating some weird NFTs like the guy who sold a fart for $85 is an odd one for sure but I feel that flat out calling all NFTs a scam is an inaccurate disservice. Now if you have a problem with things going digital consider that I'm not reading this article in a newspaper I'm reading it on my phone while watching a show on my laptop and having my digital art tablet I'm use and sitting in front of me. We live in a digital age and while the pandemic may have helped accelerate things some, we were already on this path for a long time now.

Beeple and Metakovan are not business partners, and NFTs are not a pyramid scheme.

The photography market is thriving on it -- see

All this FUD reminds me of newscasters trying to explain the internet in the early 1990s.

Exactly why I don’t read Fstoppers for tech opinions lol. Guy, it’s ok. Not everything is for you. No reason to get mad. Lots of people don’t get it. You’re in the majority opinion. Just let people who want to use them and build with them do so. No need to be pissy because it seems new and scary.

There is way more to a nft than just digital art. I think some early stuff from the last few years and now will be worth money as time goes by. You just may have 4ish years to sit on it. All the other ways to utilize a nft is the real use cases. Nba top shot will be one mixing collecting with game play so it should do ok. The fomo should be to find the ones you think will be valuable due to their significane prob will not be many. Cryptopunks I think will be worth some for awhile. The rest is just desperation plays to get in on the hype. A nft however will be around for awhile. Multiple tokens can be stored in one as lp tokens, houses basically any physical item, in game assets, if you hold a nft you get into a game, concert etc. All decentealized with no middle men. The possibilities are endless.

Hi Guys, I am a digital artist and I try to get into this NFT business. Open Sea says about creating collection for free, but than you have to pay for the first gas fee, as for today 200US... hm....It's not what I would call free or a SMALL gas fee. Could you advice me others where this gas fee is less, or does it changes all the time? Thanks, Vera

I am a enthusiast on this subject. I m from Brasil and in REAL it is much more difficult than dollar. I tried to mint an art I made on Binance ( I am still learning about it ) and I saw it would cost me R$ 1900 reais ( around 411 dollars). So I have to pay this to publish an art with no guarantees of financial return? At rarible site as I have 0 bnb in wallet yet, I couldn't even simulated it. Does is it make any sense pay this amount? In doubt if it's worth it.

Or am I getting something wrong here?

Bullshit articles like this that come from someone that obviously knows SHIT about NFT’s, are a major problem. I don’t understand how you “journalists” figure you can speak on something when it’s obvious you know SHIT about what you’re trying to speak on. You buffoon