likely best to avoid thinking that primary use of NFT / smart contracting is for robo-traded-ramping of badly done cartoons of apes and such
For fun I ’Thunking’ out loud but by keyboard, some plausible examples
(1) A corporate (car-maker) decides to blockchain inhouse inventory, bill of materials, to final products for whatever reasons to do with planning, monitoring and control => own-volition private / permission-ed blockchain solution vs traditional system, in order to transition to the vague future, as opposed to replacing what traditional already works well with something newfangled blockchain protocol
(2) A corporate (car-maker) decides to extend inhouse finished goods inventory, logistics process to its distributors for whatever reasons to do with management and forward planning => enforced private / permission-ed blockchain solution on distributors beholden to the principal at the core
(3) A corporate (car-maker, airline, whatever) decides to further extend inhouse blockchain protocol to final consumers, for purposes of after sales services, ownership provenance, insurance sales for 3rd parties, battery maintenance, consumer loyalty programs => enforced private / permission-ed blockchain chain solution can still work, until …
(4) A corporate (car-maker, airline, insurance co, whatever) decides to offer consumer loyalty points that can be traded publicly for goods and services of other corporates (a/k/a private money requiring public acceptance) and that such points might be made time-sensitive, or created at the get-go as persistent goodies points, but all meant to be traceable => public / permission less blockchain solution, full stop.
(5) A corporate (insurance company, vacation-destination / experience broker, airline, whatever) decides to monetise an otherwise inhouse asset and open its marketing / management core to outside capital on an on-going basis => public / permissionless blockchain connecting into own private / permission-ed blockchain process.
For example, insurance company markets, sells, services auto-insurance that sports an annual yield of 26%, that normally would result in capture of premium payment, monitoring / servicing (actuarial, sales, claims adjustment, claims payment, etc), and at end of contract, booking of profit resulting from any particular insurance contract.
Such a company, having been particularly streamlined in work, resulting in sustainable advantages, but would be constrained by its capital base (state by state, domain by domain regulatory complications) can offer for sale slices, dices, slivers, and plops of such standardised insurance contracts to institutional investors (first) at, say 13% indicated yield, to free up own capital to do more, and earn more, fully leveraging own advantages.
Such contracts, in groupings that reduces risk, and yielding 13%, might be repackaged as statistically-sound collateral-good money-good backing for [… drum roll …] stable coins, which in turn can be … whatever
Whichever insurance company gets to the holy grail first wins big.
But, as in big-however, forget about centralised private / permission-ed solution, for no one would trust such implementation especially if across borders, and insurance is regulatory- ‘across borders’ even between the states and provinces of any particular domain.
For the corporates refusing to engage with above progression of blockchain implementation, or better / more effective solutions, slow, toxic, existential, sunset outcome.
(6) Think back on the IBM PC, when it first came out circa 1982, sporting 64K RAM and single dual floppy disc drives, a fancy toy left unused by top executives of Fortune 100 companies.
In a few short quarters, the PC was everywhere in the organisation, and per network effect, became indispensable.
Pity the companies that refused to go along to get along. They refuse no more if they even ever existed.
(6-i) E-mail
(6-ii) Web page
(6-iii) Social media
(6-iv) Blockchain
Wild premise, a btw guess, that some vectors have similar waypoints. |
