Sotheby's & Christie's can be good for NFTs.
I am seeing a lot of people discussing the topic of Christie's, Sotheby's & other legacy institutions from the art world entering the space. Many of the points range from ‘this is bad’ and ‘we don’t need approval from these legacy guys’ to ‘they are just here to collect fees’ — essentially I am seeing a lot of negative sentiment around it.
I felt compelled to write something short on this because, while some of these points above may or may not be valid, I do think overall it is a net positive for the space to have these types of institutions involved- especially in the short term.
For me it comes down to a few simple reasons:
- Institutions like Sotheby's are essentially ‘influencers’ in the traditional art world, their involvement continues to expand the NFT market sphere of legitimacy.
- They will bring in new collectors
- They will bring in new creators.
- They are not dictators in tastemaking but they can help contribute to building the culture.
- If they want to compete in the space long term they will have to adapt their model. Disruption = good!
Institutions like Sotheby's are essentially ‘influencers’ in the traditional art world, this continues to expand the sphere of legitimacy.
In the same way that a high profile or well-trusted account in the crypto space lending their name to a project, or buying into a project, can be seen as positive social signaling, the same can be said for businesses like Christie’s with NFTs. The reality is that not everyone is as comfortable experimenting on the edges as so of us may be, having a name like Christie’s associated with the space will bring a lot more interest from people who feel more confident entering the space because a name they trust has vouched for it. I think of these things as spheres of legitimacy. Most of us in the crypto space view NFTs as an absolutely valid platform of artistic expression, and one that can be interacted with safely but many others may find it intimidating, or worse they have heard stories of scams and fakes and think it is an illegitimate Wild West. These institutions have the power to restore or give confidence to people that this space is legitimate and they can enter the arena safely.
They will bring in new collectors
Their involvement will bring in a whole group of collectors who appreciate art & creativity and can now explore a whole new medium that may have taken them years to get to otherwise. For example, Heni and their launch of The Currency with Damien Hirst has certainly given many art collectors, some of who I know, who were not in the NFT space before the confidence to begin collecting. All of a sudden they are asking me how to use Opensea & Metamask because they have found another artist whose pieces they really like. It can be a virtuous cycle. These institutions are the gateway for many collectors, the first dip of the toe.
They will bring in new creators.
Similarly, having some legacy institutions involved will encourage other creators to enter the space. Perhaps before they hadn’t even heard of NFTs, let alone had a chance to dismiss them. Large brands have a powerful reach and their opinion matters to a significant amount of people. The more great creators that enter this space the better. We will continue to see great experimentation and novel creations in the space but this can only serve to accelerate the quality and variety. This is not to say great creators don’t enter via other means, but simply that this adds to the funnel.
They are not dictators in tastemaking but they can help contribute to building the culture.
These galleries and auctions house have some incredibly talented and experienced curators. Some of these are people who are forward-thinking but also appreciate art history, s/o Noah Davis @ Christies. People can argue against curation, I have opinions that it is good in the right context, but there is no doubt in my mind it is a net positive to have more people who have a deep knowledge and appreciation of art enter the space. Plus this is currently accepted on ArtBlocks with their curation board (who do a great job) which I believe shows there is a need for curation and that it can be well received by the community. I know Snowfro has long-term plans for this as he is a decentralization nut but for now it is an important part :). The point being, these are intelligent people who love art and creativity. They can be a great asset to the new culture and medium of expression we are building. Some of these people will make the jump to the NFT space full-time and bring a wealth of experience with them. We should want them here.
If they want to compete in the space long term they will have to adapt their model. Disruption = good!
My last point is around the fees and business structure. If they want to be here long term they will simply have to adapt and change their model in my opinion. Places like Opensea already offer a severely cheaper platform, they may not have the same brand recognition in the traditional world yet, but that will change, and as more people get onboarded into the space they will look farther afield for different or better options. By actually participating in the space they will be forced to adapt or die- and in the meantime, they will bring new people on board.
I see the involvement of these legacy institutions as an overall positive. I don’t think there is anything wrong with respecting their opinions while recognizing they won’t get everything right. They can add to the conversation and to the building of the space. Like anything in life, it is about nuance. There are pros and cons. I just wanted to focus on some of the pros. :)
