Why does Adam Back say Justin Bieber’s $1.3 million Bored Ape NFT has negative value?

Adam Back argues that celebrity-backed NFTs like Justin Bieber’s Bored Ape carry 'negative value' because they represent illiquid liabilities that lack the fundamental scarcity of Bitcoin. This critique highlights a 2026 market shift prioritizing functional utility and decentralized security over speculative celebrity endorsements.
Why does Adam Back say Justin Bieber’s $1.3 million Bored Ape NFT has negative value?

Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, recently asserted that Justin Bieber’s Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) NFT, famously purchased for $1.3 million, currently holds 'negative' value. Back’s assessment stems from the asset’s lack of intrinsic utility and the reputational cost of holding a depreciating symbol of speculative excess. While the NFT's market price has plummeted since its 2022 peak, Back emphasizes that unlike Bitcoin, which maintains value through decentralized proof-of-work, these digital collectibles often become liabilities once social hype evaporates.

The discussion comes at a time in 2026 when the NFT market has matured significantly, moving away from the 'profile picture' (PFP) craze of the early 2020s. Bieber’s acquisition of BAYC #3001 has become a case study for analysts comparing hype-driven assets to hard digital currency. Back specifically spared Bitcoin from this 'negative' verdict, reinforcing the narrative that BTC remains a distinct asset class decoupled from the volatility and experimental nature of the broader NFT ecosystem.

From a regulatory and tax perspective, the 'negative value' comment reflects a broader trend in 2026 where investors are reassessing the long-term viability of legacy NFT projects. With US authorities tightening rules on how digital assets are appraised for tax losses, high-net-worth individuals are facing the reality that illiquid assets can incur holding costs—such as security and insurance—without providing a path to recovery.

Investors should watch for how legacy NFT projects attempt to integrate into new metaverse or gaming protocols to escape this 'negative value' trap. As the industry moves further into 2026, the contrast between Bitcoin’s institutional adoption and the struggle of 2021-era collectibles will likely drive capital toward assets with clear regulatory standing and technological utility.

Editorial method

This report is based on the linked source and is labeled with its publication date, provider, category and market-impact assessment. Market interpretation is informational, not investment advice.