What about using NFTs as currency reserve?

I have been thinking after reading some ideas of how to increase reserves and stability of Luna-UST and terra platform in general.
USD was backed by Gold in the old days a real physical asset. This is no longer the case and many blame the current monetary issues because of the decoupling of USD-Gold.

One interesting element about Gold is that is actually less known for this physical materialization but its aesthetic value in art and jewelry to name two - you see it on crowns, necklaces, church crosses. Sure it was shiny but you didn’t really think about its oz of weight. My point is that Gold had become such a valuable commodity because it was a beautiful jewelry on a KING’s head.

If I am correct than the art element is important and NFTs can replace this easily.
Furthermore, NFTs are not real and I think this is the opportunity. If we sold a Terra-Luna NFT real reproduction of an online NFT and we ship its physical art out too, we would have move “Luna” of the web into the real world. As it is an art, it is as valuable as ppl see it. (if you send out a physical Luna or UST token it will be shut down instantly…)
I was looking into tokens that had Gold asset link and yes they do exist, PAXG is one of several.
However Gold, Silver, Diamonds etc are already centralised.

Imagine we have a real Terra-Luna mini sculpture art work and you can find Millions around the globe and you could trade it down in your local jewelry or arts dealer for what every price it fetches.

this is how far I got with my idea… funnily today I saw Thorchain (rune) announcing something similar in a real thing being send out.
what you guys think?

I dont see how this improves “reserves or stability” and the problem with NFts is they are not scarce or liquid . Ie not a good reserve.

There’s no need for currency reserve as long as the Luna-usd-ust triangle arbitrage can freely go on. So the core to stability is establishing a well-functioning market so that the arbitrage can go on freely.

1 Like

Nft are scarce if created so. If there are 10k and they are limited you get the same as BTC. To connect coins to real world assets even part art/ part thing, I thought to be a desirable connection.

@joh_Ott - NFTs are incredibly illiquid - while there is a chance of boosting reserves through an accrual in value, I disagree in its ability to improve stability.

I also deny that we are in a stage of crypto adoption that users are buying (and using) a stablecoin because it is backed by something with artistic appeal or “aesthetic value”. Seems ludicrous.

Besides their listing on secondary markets, few NFT collections are truly decentralized:

Perhaps ludicrous as u put it but too much thinking is just based on the old thinking. If defi is to bring a better system, and many believe this can be done then defi new ideas are needed.
Unless it is really just profit greed transfer then we are well on our way to really go down.
Anyway, I merely try to introduce new ideas to old thinking. So nft would bring a real object plus off the ethereal web and a shut down of web which of course is impossible (many want to believe) this might be just help secure it even more… Maybe not.

That’s a common misconception with NFTs, being limited is different from being scarce, NFTs try and create fake scarcity but being limited in numbers doesn’t make something scarce. If I have one rock, the only damn rock in the entire world, it’s only scarce if other people want it, otherwise it’s just junk. The Bored Ape can be considered scarce right now, as the demand is high, not because they’re limited but because everyone wants to be part of the club.

If I create an NFT series of 100, would you pay me 1M$ for it? I mean, there’s only 100!

well, scarcity as you said correctly isn’t quantity thing primarily but could enforce it. it is the supply/demand, or the “want” that has been created for it that defines it. Apple isn’t a better phone but the image or symbolism around it has made it a something.
While my idea probably needs a lot of review, I think it has definite merit. Take art, a Picasso, Monet, Some of the paintings that fetch a lot of money. the value has been created, it is just a canvas with a few colors. those who appreciate it, do so mostly because they own it, so NOBODY else can own it - plus the value tends to go up historically speaking. If we define art, as original communication that is still understandable than a child;s drawing has often more “art” in it that Dali’s compositions.

My point is that Terra would be very unique as it has a tangible thing that can even be traded as a real object. The reason why I suggest art or NFT art forms with physical counterpart, because if you do anything else it could be interpreted as an actual currency.
I am also looking at how to bring “crypto” alive and to the real world out there. if this becomes popular out there, this will just attract more ppl who may feel crypto is too esoteric or ethereal .

I like the idea that you may own a piece of Terra and display it on your mantlepiece, if you want imagine this or similar.

Most crypto has as its basic foundation the USD, it is related to it in quantitative form. I think unless you find a different thing, doesn’t have to be NFT you wouldn’t be able to get away from USD. This I do not know if it is a bad or a good thing but worth discussing