Skip to main content

Blur runs after OpenSea market share, but its success depends on upcoming governance proposals

Blur’s liquidity heist on OpenSea continues as each project competes in royalties, fees and decentralized governance.

Blur, a NFT marketplace, has seen its trading volumes and total sell-side liquidity skyrocket since conducting an airdrop on Feb. 14, 2023. The reason for the spike could be the start of season 2 airdrops, where 10% of BLUR token’s total supply will be distributed to certain users based on their activity. The team allocated 12% toward an early user airdrop in the first season that ran from the marketplace’s gated launch in March 2022 to February 2023.

Blur trading volumes (in ETH). Source: Dune 

Blur has made a significant dent in OpenSea’s position as the leading marketplace. Analytics from data scientist Hildobby shows that Blur is eating into the market share of OpenSea and other aggregators like X2Y2. Blur's incentive program and advanced NFT trading features are causing users to shift from OpenSea to Blur.

The share of NFT marketplaces by trading volume. Source: Dune

OpenSea feels the heat 

Following Blur’s example, OpenSea discontinued its marketplace fee of 2.5% per sale. The fact that OpenSea LLC was willing to let go a significant chunk of its earnings—close to around $336.8 million for one year—suggests that Blur’s growth threatens it.

The two NFT giants also recently locked horns on the critical issue recently of creator royalties. By restricting the ability to earn full creator royalties on both platforms, creators have to choose between Blur and OpenSea to list collections.

Pacman, the founder of Blur, told Cointelegraph on Feb. 23 that OpenSea started the spat first. They were forced to retaliate with restrictive features like limited royalties on Blur if a collection is also listed on OpenSea as well. However, ideally, he would want both creators to be able to earn their royalties on both platforms without having to choose. It appears that Pacman wants OpenSea to succumb to the competition and instead of fighting Blur, it should accommodate the aggregator progressively.

Blur has also incentivized creators and users through the Blur token. It was also a way to compensate for the earnings creators would have made in missed royalties on the platform when it didn’t support them earlier. NFT traders, on the other hand, receive token rewards for adding liquidity to the platform by listing NFTs. So far, the plan has worked successfully, as Blur’s liquidity has skyrocketed after the token launch.

Blur has also earned the reputation of a “marketplace for pro traders” thanks to its innovative features for experienced NFT traders like sweep optimization, near-instant update of aggregate price, filtering based on rarity score and gas optimization.

Blur’s success is contingent on governance and upgrades

There are two paths that the BLUR token can take from here, either stay a non-yielding token with governance- features like Uniswap (UNI) or shift to allocate value accrual methods to token holders.

In its current state, BLUR token is similar to UNI, which puts it at a disadvantage because the market has moved on to concepts of real yields (for example, GMX and SUSHI) or other innovative value accrual methods (like Curve’s voting escrow model) that encourage buying.

UNI token’s underperformance relative to Bitcoin in the recent January to February 2023 crypto rally is a testament to the fact that the market is discounting non-yielding tokens. UNI rose by 40% in 2023 to the top against Bitcoin’s 50% rise.

BTC/USD and UNI/USD price action. Source: TradingView

Since its inception, Blur has charged zero fees on its platform. Pacman also discussed the potential value accrual to BLUR holders by flipping the “fee switch” and directing rewards toward holders. 

Staking is also a widely implemented feature that protocols use to deter selling by providing inflationary rewards. While this strategy helps retain investors to some extent, without real yields would likely do more harm in the long run through inflation.

Blur’s token performance will be highly contingent on the decisions voted on by the BlueDAO. Until then, Blur’s growth in the NFT marketplace will likely influence BLUR’s price because investors may not want to give up the opportunity of exposure to the niche market leader. However, the overall trajectory could remain on the downside, similar to what DYDX experienced in 2022.

DYDX price chart. Source: CoinGecko

The decentralized derivatives exchange is close to implementing significant changes to its platform, including improved value accrual to DYDX holders. However, while the dYdX team is working toward its V4 launch, platforms like GMX and Gains Network are benefiting from the Ethereum layer-2 liquidity and LP-focused rewards and incentives. 

Since Feb. 14. airdrop, the BLUR’s selling pressure has subsided considerably. Dune data scientist PandaJackson42’s Blur analytics page shows that 76.7% of the BLUR airdrop receivers sold their tokens.

This suggests that selling pressure from airdrop receivers should end soon. However, the token’s vesting schedule risks dilution from investor and team token unlocks starting in June 2023 and the distribution of Season 2 rewards sometime later this year.

BLUR token release schedule. Source: Blur Foundation

Blur is well-positioned to capture a huge market upside, especially considering OpenSea’s last raise in January 2022 valued the company at $13.3 billion. The fully diluted market capitalization of Blur is currently five times less at $2.7 billion. The project can generate significant buying demand for its token by improving the value accrual.

The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the authors’ alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision.



from https://ift.tt/OyPtcdg
https://ift.tt/PotnUyg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

ENS DAO delegates offer perspective on DAO governance and decentralized identity

AlphaWallet CEO and Spruce co-founder talk about their roles as contributors to the Ethereum Name Service following the project's recent airdrop. Earlier this month, the Ethereum Name Service, or ENS, formed a decentralized autonomous organization, or DAO, for the ENS community.  Cointelegraph spoke to two ENS DAO delegates who applied for the opportunity to represent the community and stay involved in the decision making process: Victor Zhang, CEO of AlphaWallet, an open source Ethereum wallet, and Gregory Rocco, co-founder of Spruce, a decentralized ID and data toolkit for developers. Zhang spoke about his experience as an external contributor to ENS and an early supporter since 2018. Zhang initially sought to help ENS by offering Alpha Wallet as a user-friendly tool for  resolving .eth names and cryptocurrency wallet addresses. Essentially, if a user inputs an .eth name in the AlphaWallet, it will show the wallet address, and vice versa using reverse resolution. Alpha...

How Social Platform Chingari is Using Web 3.0 to Transform the Traditional Way We Use Social Media

The world is changing. This isn’t news to anyone, but sometimes it is nice to realize that—contrary to news headlines—not all the change is bad.  In fact, the last decade has seen so much innovation and so many improvements to technology that even 2015 seems like a different world.  Internet speeds, connecting with anyone globally (for free), and our ability to reach large groups of people without a middleman is nothing short of revolutionary. When it comes to technology evolution, this often happens with different iterations.  Once a system is mature, there’s a better idea of what we would like to change and improve.  We go back to the drawing board, target our creative minds at the issues, and create a new version that has evolved to better meet our needs.  The Internet has followed this model since its inception, evolving through three distinct stages.  We are only at the cusp of the third stage, called Web 3.0, with technologies such as blockchain and ...

INX submits bid for Voyager Digital's assets

FTX US won a $1.4-billion bid to purchase Voyager’s assets in September, but with the firm filing for bankruptcy, the funds were once again up for grabs. Trading platform INX has submitted a bid for an undisclosed amount to purchase the assets of crypto brokerage firm Voyager Digital. In a Nov. 30 announcement, INX said it had sent a non-binding letter of intent for Voyager’s assets following the platform filing for bankruptcy in July. According to INX CEO Shy Datika, the bid was aimed at providing “credibility, technology, and unique regulatory positioning” for Voyager users seeking stability in a volatile market. Voyager’s original bankruptcy filing from the Southern District Court of New York suggested the firm could owe between $1 billion to $10 billion to more than 100,000 creditors amid a bear market and exposure to Three Arrows Capital. In September, FTX US won a $1.4-billion bid to purchase Voyager’s assets, but with FTX Group itself filing for bankruptcy in November, th...