P2P Lending / NFT Lending Forum

nothing yet from what I can tell.

Is there any reason that nobody has turned phone numbers into NFTs?

You wouldn't have to tokenize all phone numbers and tokenization wouldn't have to be permanent. Owners could on- or off-ramp their asset with the chain at their own desire. Such a feature is already being rolled out with domain names on 3DNS. There is a precedent for it. I wrote a bit about tokenizing phone numbers here and why it's not such a crazy idea.

https://decashed.eth.loan/2023/09/its-time-to-tokenize-phone-numbers/

I thought it was going to go live on September 20th but it looks like there is some delay. Their last post was 3 days ago. Maybe we'll find out more tomorrow?

Yeah I guess you're right. In my defense I will say that my theory for lending against regular domain names was centered around ones with websites already built that are already being used by companies in the normal course of their business. But I can see myself also selling a regular old domain name too because there's a more established usecase for them than trying to sell the world on why they need to buy a .eth. So it's possible I'd be okay with trying to liquidate the domain names. I guess we'll find out when domain names are on chain finally.

Maybe this is another discussion altogether but .eth name speculators are not builders. If you tell them they can make money by selling the names, they will buy them and try to sell them. If you tell them that if they work hard they can use the utility features of names to make money, they won't do it, doesn't matter how much money. It could be a million dollars and they won't do it. It's not their style. This isn't a criticism, just an observation. They'd rather say "well if YOU do the work, then YOU could make a million dollars and therefore, YOU should buy this name from ME for $100,000."

They view the hustle of trying to convince other people to buy stuff for more than they paid for it as a business itself. Again, just an observation.

Enter the "borrower" in most .eth loan transactions. The borrower understands .eth names to be things they can sell to other people to get money. The most popular type of .eth loan on Teller, for example, is 3-digit and 4-digit .eth names, not because they have more utility or because they're being used in a club or for identity, but because there is a wide perception that they can fetch more money. A typical borrower is borrowing against a numeric name because they want to use the funds to buy another numeric name. The end game being that they repay the loan and then have TWO numeric names to try and sell. That's the hustle, a financial investment, not for use.

Hence if you are a lender looking to make .eth loans for the purpose of earning interest instead of foreclosing on collateral, then the borrower for the most part has to be:

1. An operational revenue generating e-commerce business that would be putting up their brand name as collateral

2. Someone generating revenue with the name itself (though decentralized websites and so forth)

I'm sure there's plenty of other viable examples, but I think it helps me to kind of hash this all out.

.eth speculators don't want loans. They want to sell their inventory for money and nothing more.

So everyone's seen how many .eth loans I've had go bad and I've heard all kinds of suggestions and criticisms about my approach, namely:

1. I loaned against bad names that nobody wants
2. The loan amounts were too small
3. I should only lend against grails or digits or something "liquid"

So on the one hand I totally agree that loans of like .05 eth are relatively pointless, at least on an individual level because what is someone seriously going to do with like $80?

A company that was lending against .coms believed the smallest loan size that made sense was $5,000 which I get when the borrower is a business borrower. 

But I don't think that increasing the loan size itself increases the seriousness of the borrower. What I'm seeing so far is that "borrowers" see themselves only as sellers, which is why there's 7,000 names listed on Teller right now. They think it's an alternative selling platform to ENS Vision.

If anything, people are showing that they're willing to walk away from names for as little as $80. The names are only owned for the purpose of selling, not for long term investing or holding or community. It's not like a Bored Ape where you can go all around town and be like "look at me I'm in the Bored Ape Yacht Club."  If they own grail.eth, their only goal is to get rid of it and sell it.

Update from 3DNS:

"We have our product ready to launch and will be pushing the beta live next Wednesday. We will announce our rebate program on Wednesday as well."

If I reach out to them, I'll let you know. Also, not sure if you saw my post on X about it but I shared a link to how the first ever domain name loan supposedly happened. It was for software.com in 2005 and led to the founding of Domain Capital. See: https://x.com/amiller325gd/status/1558798150579757057?s=20

Ok.... well this is weird, I know Lendvo! I worked with them a little bit through deBanked. Totally forgot they did domain name loans. I should probably reach out to them. I can't believe how small a world it is.

have not heard anything new.

I think that's basically how it works. The proof will be in trying it out ourselves!

If there's a catch, it's in the fact that the domain could be taken out of NFT circulation. For example, if someone transfers a .com from Godaddy to 3DNS, and the domain changes owners 20 times by selling and reselling the NFT, at some point the current owner could opt to move the domain off of 3DNS and over to Namecheap or Dynadot or something and it would no longer be a tradeable NFT. Which, I suppose is how it should be. A domain owner should be allowed to disable the web3 aspect of a domain. But for as long as the domain lives on 3DNS, NFT possession dictates ownership, including the right to take the domain out of NFT circulation.

Quote from: sean3.eth on September 12, 2023, 10:16:13 PMMore info about it here. https://decashed.eth.loan/2023/09/the-nft-lending-platform-that-made-the-first-ens-loan/

There wasn't any room to put it but the idea first actually came about from Validator.eth at ENS Labs back n 2019! https://x.com/ValidatorEth/status/1210363315999952896?s=20

More info about here. https://decashed.eth.loan/2023/09/the-nft-lending-platform-that-made-the-first-ens-loan/

There wasn't any room to put it but the idea first actually came about from Validator.eth at ENS Labs back n 2019! https://x.com/ValidatorEth/status/1210363315999952896?s=20

I had never considered when the first loan to ever be made a .eth occurred but today I learned anyway. It was against brantly.eth on April 14, 2020. Proof: https://medium.com/@brantly.eth/the-worlds-first-ens-backed-loan-with-rocket-lp-dao-f24dc4b4019

At the time, Brantly wrote:

"I received the world's first ENS-backed NFT loan this week.

Rocket LP DAO issued the loan, and I sent the ENS name brantly.eth to the DAO's multisig wallet as collateral — while maintaining the ability to still use the name."

The loan was for 6.5 eth over 3 months.

This was his thought process on why he'd repay at the time:

"As I mentioned earlier, I put up the ENS name brantly.eth as collateral. Brantly is my first name and has great personal value to me, so I have a strong incentive to repay the loan; and first names are generally valuable .ETH names since they're short, and there can only be one owner per name."

Quote from: domainer on September 03, 2023, 09:28:38 PMHear anything from 3dns lately about the progress?

About a half hour ago they tweeted this: "we're still in our waitlist phase and haven't integrated all TLDs just yet

Keep an eye out this week for a big announcement tho"

The NFTs will be on Optimism, an Ethereum L2.