I "convinced" one of my friends to get into Splinterlands today - though he will get in when the open sale on packs starts, likely having me buy for him and transfer, just to make it easier. The reason is that after having a look at the game, he thinks his son will enjoy it, which I think so too, and if not, *he can always rent.
It is no secret (this is an open blockchain after all) that I have been extending my Splinterlands holdings over the last weeks and even maxed my first gold card recently. Today, I bought another already maxed gold and I think this is what I am going to do when I can, because I think that they hold a decent value. Also, the one today (Sand Worm) is one I normally have to rent and I tend to play it a lot. Being a neutral, it will see more usage than a specific splinter card, so it will earn a little more DEC, a little more often. While not particularly rare, it is a useful card.
It wasn't cheap - I paid $1461 for it already maxed. I thought this was a "pretty good deal" considering that a maxed regular is just under $900 and has about a quarter the collection power. Not only that, while not "particularly rare" as far as gold cards go (5077 in circulation), I noticed that there aren't many on the market, which means that if someone does want to buy a maxed gold Sand Worm, it is going to currently cost them:
There are only a total of 29 cards on the market, which means that if someone was to max one at that price (double what I paid) right now, there would only be 3 gold Sandworms available. That makes it pretty market scarce, which is likely because it is so often played. Maxed gold cards are going to be very valuable (I think) for the future high-end players. Also, this card carries 1925 CP, so it should rent pretty well at the end of the season too. Currently, it is renting out for about 200 DEC, which is 54% yROA (yearly return on asset), towards the end of the season I might get double or more on that.
These are of course wholly unnecessary purchases, but if the Splinterlands world continues to grow even moderately, there should be a decent return on cards in general and, I am already technically "up" on my total expenditure so far anyway. Not only that, the short-term losses are able to be clawed back over time through various yield mechanisms, so an individual purchase might run a loss, but long term, the total package of cards might be well in profit. For me, what this means is that I am able to add key cards that I play, whilst still mitigating the risks by having a range of other cards.
In some way, a Splinterlands deck is like a personal index fund, where the owner (me in this case) is the fund manager responsible for making sure it performs adequately. Since it is my deck, I don't need to maximize (don't hire me as a fund manager!), as there are other values available and to come that I will be able to use my assets to draw value from. Yes, splinterlands is a game to be played, but the most compelling part for me are the dynamics between the players, community, assets and of course, the economy if it as a whole. It is more fun than the game.
And I told my friend this too. While he will likely have fun playing, as will his son, I think what will be the most interesting part for them is being part of the economic mechanics of it, as well as seeing their crypto in use. I reckon that this will be incredibly valuable for his son especially, because he will be able to learn a whole range of things that most adults don't know about financial dynamics.
This is something that is also going to be interesting to track into the future with play-to-earn gaming, as while children aren't allowed to legally work (in most countries), they will be able to earn on their activity still. This makes them economic contributors from a young age and also, gives them the experience of taking control of their personal finance in ways that most adults struggle with. This is far more valuable than a school economics class, or a university one for that matter - I know, I did both.
Practical experience with skin in the game beats theoretical concepts every time as an educator, and with something like Splinterlands, while there is a cost to enter, that cost is on par with many other things that a person might buy. For example, a Playstation 5 game is 75€ ($85US) and that is not going to increase in value, and it is likely to suck more "no-return" time. That buys about 20 packs, 100 cards. If looking to maximize on Splinterlands, there will be a playing limitation based on the capture rate and then, most of the time will be spent in the economy of the game, learning strategy, engaging with the community - not actually playing.
Which game provides more value to the individual? It is not just the potential to earn that is on offer, it is the potential to be in a very real economic situation and learn from experience. As I have always said, the more you learn, the more you earn - but what is learnt, matters.
Having said this, I am not condoning or suggesting going out and dropping life savings on Splinterlands, because that is likely to end in tears, as "all-in" often does. But what I do think people should do is consider how, where and most importantly why they generate value. For me, I don't want to have to keep chasing new projects in order to make a buck in a high-risk environment, I want to be able to develop a foundation of assets using industry leaders and have longevity of yield, and earn residual income on prior activity.
I did a lot of work to be able to buy this card today, literally hundreds of hours depending on when it was earned. But, I don't value that work at the point I earned it, as I want my work to keep paying dividends well into the future. This means that the work in the past gets to compound its value into the future, keeping on returning much longer than for example, the closing of a post reward window.
I think this is something that a lot of people have missed on Hive. They think the value of a post is set at the point of payout, but that is not the case at all. My first posts on Hive are still earning today, because I collected those cents and dollars, powered them up, used them to earn curation, support other users, build presence, develop my social capital and reputation and also recently, invest some portions of it into assets that I think are going to keep earning into the future. The value of my post only stops earning when what was earned originally is no longer generating value for me, which is when I sell into something that has a diminishing value. A lot of people sold their future yields for consumer items, rather than invested in assets - I chose to invest into what others will consume.
The future of the crypto industry is going to quite quickly move away from random token price and more readily focus on the value of the project behind the token, which will inform the price. If that happened today, 95% of the tokens out there would be wiped out of existence, because most have nothing behind them at all and are promise- and vapor- ware - some not even that.
This card is about the price of a mid-range TV in Finland, but a year from now, what is the difference in value between the two "assets"? The TV will be lucky to hold 25% of purchase price, this card might have paid 75% of its purchase price off and still appreciated in value at the same time, taking no wear and tear and only becoming more scarce as some people combine what they can.
I just checked the Sand Worm Gold market again:
I already have a TV.
Learn to play with the economy, not be played by it.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
