NFT (Non-Fungible Token): another grotesque speculative mania or a groundbreaking tool that will ensure the rise of Internet 3.0?


Chris Dixon is a partner of Andreessen Horowitz, one of the world’s most respected venture capital firms. It plays a key role in the company’s investments in enterprises in the cryptocurrency segment. He was responsible, among other things, for the Andreessen Horowitz Foundation’s investments in the Coinbase cryptocurrency exchange. An investment included in the ranking of the best investments of venture capital funds in history.

Is this the moment? Are we at the top? The market is in a very interesting place – inflation, decline, epidemic … Whether we meet remotely or stationary, we want to present our perspective and vision of reality through the prism of psychology, fundamental analysis and technical analysis. We invite you to a series of 4 pandemic lectures.

Download the posts

Not surprisingly, Dixon is optimistic about the entire cryptocurrency ecosystem

He sees it as the core of Internet 3.0. It is more decentralized and user-friendly than the currently available web version. Dixon sees NFT (non-exchangeable tokens) as one of the tools to enable Internet 3.0. Therefore, the investor is optimistic about the NFT segment and sees real value here for users and creators (artists, but not only).

Readers interested in Dixon’s ideas can find much to say. I chose three of them: from February, July and September 2021.

An optimistic view of the NFT segment is not the same as a belief that the segment’s assessments are attractive. I will emphasize this difference.

At the same time, there are many investors, commentators and journalists who view the NFT segment as an example of grotesque speculative mania for assets that have almost no value or usefulness, but no meaning. Some commentators seem to be convinced that their behavior is correct.

The material is posted on the portal with the permission of


So I decided to offer a cognitive shortcut, which I have been using for several years. It can be summarized as follows: if I have a strong opinion on a particular market issue that is beyond my direct competence, and at the same time I can easily find people whose professional achievements show that they are experts in this field. I have to think seriously in a certain area that has opposing views:

  • reconsider the issue
  • it drastically reduces my confidence in the correctness of my opinion
  • Switch to the “I don’t know what to think about this” position

In the case of NFT, this may seem so

Suppose I am an investor who is almost exclusively focused on the stock market, I know as much about the NFT segment as I can from texts in the financial media, and I have a strong opinion that this is the next edition of the 21st century. tulipomania version. At the same time, people who have been working in the cryptocurrency segment for ten years and have considerable professional success claim that the NFT segment has great potential in many areas, such as gaming. How important is his opinion? I don’t think so.

Keep in mind that my goal is not to argue that there is no speculative mania in the NFT segment, or even that the NFT segment will realize its potential. I either have no idea on either point, or I care too little to share.

My goal is to claim that the “strong ideas, free-thinking” approach in the investment sector is within the authority of the investor or manager. A better approach outside the realm of skills is, in my opinion, a “weak mind, free will” attitude.

I think it is worth raising this issue at a time when some Polish investors, with a market capitalization of tens of billions of dollars, still consider the entire market ecosystem of cryptocurrencies as meaningless speculative mania.

We are talking about a market:

  • $ 2 trillion capitalization
  • 200 million users
  • $ 17 billion in venture capital investments in the first half of 2021

I know that the cognitive abbreviation I propose will cause a lot of controversy, because in fact it is a form of delegation. This is a weak form of delegation. It is not a matter of accepting the opinions of selected experts (this is difficult in most market issues, because experts have different opinions). It’s about re-thinking your mind and maybe using a special signal to reduce your confidence in your mind (I have a different opinion from the hooded insiders that are understood as people in the industry).

Some readers may also point out that the proposed heuristic contradicts my skeptical approach to the usefulness of media experts.

Therefore, it should be noted that I am not currently writing about specific investment decisions: to open a certain position, at a certain time, at a certain level. I believe that differences in the investment horizon, risk aversion and investment approach make it difficult to directly use the views of experienced insiders. This is true even of Chris Dixon’s far-sighted assumptions in January 2014 that bitcoin could be worth $ 100,000. Today, it deals with market thinking at a higher general level.

The second, I see the difference between “professional market experts” (who spend most of their time in the media and have hundreds of opinions on dozens of topics) and “casual market experts” (who are experienced in a particular industry and speak on directly related topics). professional activity). The latter type can be a useful source of knowledge for experts, especially for investors who are new to the issue.

You can get acquainted with the original article at this link. Do you want more? See the latest articles on


The opinions, assumptions and forecasts expressed in the material belong to the author of the publication and should not reflect the views of the DM BOŚ SA. investment decision. They should not be taken as a recommendation to invest in any financial instrument or form of investment advice. DM BOŚ SA does not guarantee the accuracy, timeliness and completeness of this information. It is recommended that the information in this material be reviewed independently.

Leave a Comment