Lately I've been thinking again about PFPs and memberships—are they truly "long-term branding" or just "short-term attention"? My current feeling is: it depends on whether they've written "rights" onto the chain or if they're just stuck at profile pictures and storytelling. To put it simply, memberships with only secondary liquidity but no use cases, once the hype fades, are like cache misses—they need to bring in new people to keep them alive.

I used to think that as long as the community around a PFP was active enough, it could grow into a brand. But when the market cools down, people's first reaction isn't "co-creation," but rather "Can this thing still be sold?"… It's quite realistic. On the other hand, those that turn memberships into verifiable tickets, capable of hosting events, sharing revenue, offering discounts, or even competing with on-chain revenue products, tend to have stronger stickiness.

Recently, comparing RWA, US bond yields, and on-chain earnings has been quite interesting: when "returns" have a reference point, memberships driven purely by emotion become even harder to tell a story about. Right now, I prefer to treat memberships as small hedging positions: keep them if they're useful, but if not, recognize that they're just attention assets—don't get too attached.