A GameStop crypto dividend will NOT be an NFT. Misinformation and incorrect terminology is running rampant, let's clear it up.
==============================================================================================================================

| Author       | Source       | 
| :-------------: |:-------------:|
|  [u/GooseG17](https://www.reddit.com/user/GooseG17/) | [Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ocnofw/a_gamestop_crypto_dividend_will_not_be_an_nft/) | 

---

[Education 👨‍🏫 | Data 🔢](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/search?q=flair_name%3A%22Education%20%F0%9F%91%A8%E2%80%8D%F0%9F%8F%AB%20%7C%20Data%20%F0%9F%94%A2%22&restrict_sr=1)

I'm sorry for the condescending title. I promise I'm friendly, just stupid af.

Edit: This post assumes at least basic understanding of these technologies. Please read my linked post if you do not have that understanding yet.

I made a [post](https://old.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/oc7ji4/clarifying_nfts_what_they_are_good_for_and_what/) yesterday explaining blockchain, tokens and NFT's, but there are still posts hitting the front page that refer to "NFT dividends" surprised Pikachu, so let's make this nice and simple.

1.  Overstock was the first to issue a crypto dividend. Their dividend token is *not* an NFT.

2.  Dividends are usually cash or a security. Both are fungible, so a *non-fungible* token may not be considered a valid dividend (IANAL), while Overstock has shown that a *fungible* token will hold up in court.\
    Edit: Dividends can also be other forms of property, which likely invalidates my thoughts on validity. This point is flawed, but I'll leave it here for my deserved criticisms.

3.  Giving shareholders, who all hold *identical shares* crypto rewards that are *not* identical would be unfair to shareholders. How would it be determined who gets the first token? Or 69, 420 or any other fun number? I think avoiding the issue entirely is the best course of action.

4.  Transactions involving NFT's are *many times* more expensive than standard tokens due to their significantly greater complexity. Using them unnecessarily is wasteful at best, downright stupid at worst.

5.  Using *non-fungible* tokens would mean that they can only be traded in whole increments, which is a limitation that makes no sense for this use case. For example, Overstock issued 0.1 tokens per share, which would not be possible with an NFT.

6.  Trading NFT's isn't as simple as trading a standard token. We're already struggling with blockchain concepts, we don't need added complexity. It makes more sense to use a token that works exactly as you would expect a currency to work.

7.  A fungible dividend could have more functional use, such as being directly usable as currency when shopping at GameStop. Indivisible tokens (NFT's) wouldn't work for this. What if all prices were multiples of $10? A more flexible option is necessary.

    1.  Imagine a GameStop cryptocurrency that can be used in an NFT marketplace (in-game items, etc.) or in-store. A dividend issuing that currency could give a massive boost in adoption.

8.  The initial issuing of NFT's is *much* more expensive. I'm talking orders of magnitude. Each individual token will incur a large transaction fee, while a normal token can be one small transaction fee *per shareholder*. Sending three NFT's looks like this:\
    Send token 1 to x address\
    Send token 2 to x address\
    Send token 3 to x address

A normal token is always one transaction, no matter how many tokens are sent:\
Send 3 tokens to x address

Making NFT minting more efficient is possible, but is not a native feature at this time. I don't think GameStop will waste money on unnecessary fees.

* * * * *

Seeing this sub, which is a bastion of truth in a world of lies, ignite with misinformation on a topic simpler than the complexities of the behind-the-scenes of the financial systems we are used to is a bit surprising. Let's make an effort to gain some wrinkles on blockchain and related topics, since it seems to be a major part of GameStop's plans for the future.

Smooth-brain summary:\
There are many use cases for NFT's that GameStop can capitalize on, but I argue that a dividend is not one of them. A crypto dividend would make the most sense as an old-school, fungible token.

Edit: Added mention of securities as dividends. Thanks [u/fubar95](https://www.reddit.com/u/fubar95/)!

Edit 2: Property dividends were brought to my attention. My statements about legality are probably invalid. Thanks [/u/chickeni3oo](https://www.reddit.com/u/chickeni3oo/)!

Edit 3: To be perfectly clear, I am arguing that a dividend would not be an NFT, not that there will or will not be a dividend. Dividend talks are entirely speculation, and I am merely trying to clear up misunderstandings on what NFT's are good for.

Edit 4: Expanded point 3

Edit 5: Added point 7

Edit 6: Added point 7.1

Edit 7: Added point 8
