It’s an interesting thought exercise to consider what would happen to NFT collections if they existed fully as fungible tokens. Take Punks, for example. If individual Punks did not exist, I do not think a fungible representation would be worth more than the market cap of the NFTs. That’s not to say Punks are overvalued, rather I just think they derive a lot of their value from their individuality and holders’ attachment to their Punks. And yes, their historical significance, but it’s significance more as an NFT collection than a brand. But if a brand, could trade higher as a fungible token, what does that say about the NFTs? I think of all the collections out there, @ChimpersHQ is the most undervalued by this metric. For all the team has accomplished and for as much traction as the IP has received, I think it’s very likely a Chimpers token would trade multiples higher than the NFT collection does today. Reminds me a lot of $REKT in many ways, which is of course an awesome benchmark to aim for. Now that’s not to say I think Chimpers should focus on a token. I just think it’s interesting to consider how brand value can accrue to different vehicles in different ways. And either I’m right and Chimpers are incredibly undervalued or I’m wrong and Chimpers are incredibly undervalued. !chimp