I resonate with this take as both a collector and web3 native.
I think Thor is highlighting something important: in this industry, holders don’t just want value creation.
They want visibility, responsiveness and evidence that collecting remains a priority. It’s an easy fix imho
At the same time, it’s worth acknowledging that very few crypto projects have built sustainable business models.
99.9% projects either disappear, survive on perpetual fundraising or burn through venture capital trying to market their way to relevance.
What Azuki appears to be doing is allocating the majority of its resources toward building products and businesses that can stand on their own merits. This is EV.
@AzukiTCG and
@animecom, and other initiatives with the potential to generate durable value beyond any NFT market cycle.
Proof is in the pudding here: both initiatives are booming in their own right. TCG preorders did 1M , few new TCG games can boast that.
Similarly,
Anime.com is growing its audience month on month, shipping new features and building on the gaps that persists in the 33B dollar anime market.
Whether people agree with the strategy or not, there is a deep logic to it.
That doesn’t invalidate the criticism.
A functioning sales bot, better collector infrastructure, OTC services for grails and stronger support for the collecting side of the ecosystem are not unreasonable asks.
In fact, they’re probably some of the highest ROI improvements the team could make for holder sentiment and market health.
The recurring criticism of Azuki has rarely been about a lack of ambition or product quality.
If anything, it’s been about responsiveness. From my perspective, that points less to neglect and more to a bandwidth and capital allocation decision.
The reality is that infrastructure for collectors can be built relatively quickly. Building sustainable revenue streams and category defining products is much harder.
If the latter succeeds, holders ultimately benefit far more than they would from short term optics. Considering Azuki has zero VCs and are 100% community funded.
Every ticket gains more value, be it NFTs or first edition cards as the brand grows.
To add some context, I don’t think rewarding collectors has ever been Azuki’s problem.
The Garden has a long track record of putting the community first.
Between the
$ANIME airdrop, First Edition TCG access and numerous other initiatives over the years, collectors have generated millions in value simply by participating.
The criticism here is less about rewards and more about resource allocation.
It’s about investing more into community facing infrastructure: additional community managers, better collector support, functional sales bots, OTC pathways for grails, stronger communication loops and the countless small things that make collectors feel seen and supported.
The feedback in this post is fair because building the future and taking care of collectors shouldn’t be mutually exclusive goals.
That said, I also know this team has consistently looked for ways to do both.
My read is that much of this comes down to bandwidth and prioritization rather than intent.
As the business side of the ecosystem matures and revenue expands, I would expect holder feedback to translate into more visible action.
The foundation for a collector first culture already exists. The opportunity is to reinforce it with better infrastructure and execution.
I can only imagine how strong Azuki would be when they activate this kinda approach.
Azuki NFTs are extremely underrated at the moment given the track record of this team.
Good time to study and lock in. ⛩️