Waiting To Be Signed · interviews on generative art, on-chain
← Index
Interview // JUN 2026

McLlama

Title: Turning Pokemon Cards into fx(hash) Grails
Role: Generative artist
Platform: fx(hash)
Duration: 58m
Hosts: Will & Trinity
Listen on Spotify Guest on X Download MP3
#082 · Turning Pokemon Cards into fx(hash) Grails
Self-hosted audio // press play
58m
MP3 ↓

Spot an error? Highlight the words or lines you want to fix — an “edit” button appears, and the panel opens with your selection ready to edit.

Will: All right. Hello and welcome, everyone, to another episode of Waiting to Be Signed. We've got a special interview episode for you today — a collector interview. We're joined by McLlama, who you might know from the fx(hash) sales feed, and also his Twitter account, which I should have had open, because your handle isn't @McLlama on Twitter, but we'll plug that in a moment. Hey man, thanks for coming on the show.

McLlama: Thanks for having me, it's an honor. I've been going back through some episodes I missed in recent months, and you've interviewed my favorite artists and some really cool collectors. So happy to be here.

Will: What stood out to you on the artist side?

McLlama: Erik Swahn and Zancan, for sure — my favorite artists. I'd already listened to the Erik Swahn one, but the Zancan interview was more recent, so it was good to catch up on that.

Will: Recent in terms of episode numbers, anyway — we've slowed down a lot, so it's probably not that far back. Let's kick this off. Introduce yourself however you like, and tell us about your background in collecting and how you came to NFTs and generative art in particular.

McLlama: I work in a data engineer type role, so I'm on the computer all the time, which works out well for collecting — I can keep tabs on things easily. As far as getting into NFT art, I have no formal art background whatsoever. It was all through crypto, as I'm sure is a common story. I got into crypto around 2017, bought the top of that first cycle, and have been through full market cycles since. Same with my collecting generally — from Pokémon to NFTs, I've been through market cycles my whole life. I used to trade high-end basketball cards too, so I've felt the pain of selling grails too early, many times over. That's a big part of my conviction with collecting these days.

NFTs just feel like a natural extension of that. Even collecting physical things, you're on the computer constantly, browsing eBay, browsing social media — so it all feels of a piece. It's been a really fun time, and it's one of those collectible categories I don't see myself ever leaving. I might sell off physical trading cards and step away from that for a while, but I'll never be able to sell all my NFTs. I'm here for the long haul.

Will: If you look at the offers on fx(hash), you might think there's some stuff you're definitely never going to be able to sell. I did a little selling recently myself — small stuff, 3 tez, 5 tez here and there, just to clear out the wallet. It's pretty dire out there. As for your path in — did you come in through PFPs and then cross into art through Art Blocks?

McLlama: Pretty much the typical path. I started out minting hype PFPs I saw on my Twitter feed, almost all of which are completely dead at this point. I dabbled with Art Blocks, but I think I was late to it — minting factory stuff, and I didn't really have the funds to collect anything serious at the time, despite that being the peak of the bull run when I had the most crypto of my life. Like most collectors, you tend to come in at the top. That's what happened to me.

Will: Let me ask about your collecting philosophy. Actually, let's start here: I feel like the cohort of people still here collecting art — myself included — didn't come into crypto expecting to get this interested in art. For me it was accidental: I found Tezos through someone I knew, found Hic Et Nunc, minted a few things because I had some tez and didn't know what else to do with it, thought it was cool, and then fx(hash) came along and I got swept up in the Discord, the community, staying up all night for mints back in 2021. For you, what was it about generative art — and art in general — that struck a chord and got you collecting beyond just speculation?

McLlama: Starting on Hic Et Nunc, it felt raw. There was a certain aesthetic to it — really basic, just browsing a feed of random art — and something about that was really enjoyable. I found myself gravitating toward certain collections I kept running into, and eventually became one of the biggest collectors of a few artists there. Then when fx(hash) came out, that's when the addictive part of my personality kicked in. It was like ripping packs of Pokémon cards — you don't know what you're gonna get. I still love that.

At first I was doing the "mint two, sell one, cover my cost basis" thing. That works for a while, but then you realize what you missed out on when it comes to the real grails, and I learned a lot through that. It was months to a year after that initial fx(hash) rush that I really started connecting with the projects. Farbteiler, for example — I kept coming back to it and realized I wanted to hoard these, that it wasn't enough to just have a few. I developed real connections to certain projects, and from there my feed became purely art. It went from crypto Twitter meme-posting to — wow, most of my followers are artists and art collectors now. It was a lot of content to take in, but over time I've realized I genuinely connect with certain projects and artists, and it's more than just making a trade.

Farbteiler — Erik Swahn

Will: Have you gone as far as getting prints and plots made, arranging stuff around the house? When we talked to Erik, I tried to suss out whether Farbteiler was plottable — he said he'd done some experiments he never sold. For someone like you, who owns so much of his work, do you have anything from Erik on the wall, or from other artists?

McLlama: As far as prints and plots go, I really value having that gated by the artist — I want the signed print, I don't want to print it myself. That's not a knock on anyone who prints stuff they own; that's awesome too. It's just, for me, as someone who's historically collected physical things, there's real value in that physical connection — it's an additional layer to the collection.

I have a really cool plotted piece by Joanie Lemercier — and by the way, apologies in advance if I mispronounce any artist or collector names. All of this lives in my head from this online world; I don't talk to people about it in real life much. I also have a print of one of my KGMs from Zancan and Yazid — a giant piece in my living room — and a signed Ganbrood piece too, which is rare, since he doesn't do many of those. A few random plots here and there, but my physical collection is still pretty small. Especially with my recent pickups, I'm interested in growing that side of things. You can tell my room here is pretty barren — that's intentional, since I take work calls in this spot, and I'd rather not open myself up to conversation with random colleagues and acquaintances about it. But yeah, I definitely want to keep growing the physical side.

Will: Right on. What's your philosophy now? All of us who came into NFTs did so with some level of speculation, hype, hopes and dreams for where it might go. Maybe you still hold that long view. I'm honestly undecided myself these days, given how challenging the market is. But for you as a collector — how do you value the projects and artists you collect beyond pure aesthetics? There used to be a lot of discussion about being in the first hundred fx(hash) projects, the importance of that legacy, and the same with early Art Blocks. A lot of the early Art Blocks work, aside from the big grails like Ringers, doesn't hold up visually anymore — some of it looks pretty bad now. But there was a time, and maybe there still are completionists, who feel you need to own those first however-many projects. Do you subscribe to any rules like that? With Pokémon, vintage matters beyond just playability. How do you think about it?

McLlama: I wouldn't say I have hard rules. Sometimes I'm just browsing historic collections and think, "wow, this is one of the first hundred projects, this is really cool, I need to buy this" — but it's not an intentional mindset. Obviously it's easy to look at all-time volume as a shorthand for what the most important projects are. So it's a combination: historic volume plus how deeply I connect with the art. It's not exactly a hot take to say Garden, Monoliths is a grail — anyone could tell you that. But really sitting with a collection, appreciating the depth of the outputs, getting into it — that's something I've enjoyed doing over the years. It's not just historical pricing and volume, but genuine appreciation. I'd say I collect intuitively, or like to think so, in terms of market cycles — though we honestly haven't had a real market cycle with these pieces yet. So really, it just comes down to what I want to collect.

Will: How do you feel about the long term? There were so many narratives — auction houses adopting NFTs, which happened to a small degree; institutions adopting them, with some high-profile donations and the odd museum purchase — but none of that turned out to be the inciting event the community expected back in 2021. Do you hold out hope for crossing into the mainstream, either toward traditional art institutions or in the other direction — forget those institutions, crypto just scales 100x from here, and these collectibles become interesting in their own right once there are that many more people who want to collect this stuff?

Farbteiler — Erik Swahn

McLlama: I could see it being a combination of those, ideally. I'd love to see more institutional adoption, but that's a really long-term horizon, and I don't think institutional investors have that kind of patience right now. A lot of the crypto market has shorter-term horizons, and that's why everyone is so frustrated waiting for the NFT bull run this cycle. I don't know exactly how it'll play out, but I see a lot of opportunity in this price action, as horrible and illiquid as it is. As just a normal person, you can acquire pieces that two or three years ago would have been absolutely impossible to buy. The pink GM I bought a month or so ago, for example, would have been unfathomable just two years ago. I see it as an opportunity to make your place in the history of whatever plays out. I can't tell you what's going to happen, but it's been really fun.

Will: It was probably about two and a half years ago that Le Random acquired their pink GM, and it was a big deal. I can't remember the USD equivalent, but it was certainly tens of thousands of dollars. Quite expensive.

McLlama: You might want to fact-check me, but I think it was over $100K.

Will: I know they timed it very closely with the purchase of RGB #1 too. So they made their mark, grabbing two keystone pieces from fx(hash) history. Anyone who was building a collection two and a half years ago has got to be looking now and thinking, imagine what we could have had. I've browsed your collection a bit -- you're very Erik Swahn heavy, and a lot of that increase has come from recent activity, as we've seen so many longtime collectors, for whatever reason, starting to divest, at least from fx(hash) if not across all chains. Did you see this trend and decide now's the time to jump in because we're down 90% on this stuff? Or have you been slowly acquiring along the way? What inspired you to jump in now, in all of this chaos?

RGB — ciphrd

McLlama: I've been collecting the Farbs pretty heavily for the last few years, so that's just a constant. I could keep buying them, but at a certain point it gets ridiculous. More recently I've been focused on the grails -- the Garden, Monoliths pieces, the dragons, and so on. Part of it is what you said: prices are down so much that it's very appealing to buy right now. But it's also the timing of another market I've been participating in. I actually bought quite a few vintage Pokémon cards around 2024 -- more than I was buying NFTs at the time -- and they did really, really well early this year. So I started selling some of them, and that's been funding my grail purchases on fx(hash). Life handed me this opportunity and the timing just made sense. I like the price of the art right now, and I've got liquidity to tap into. It's a combination of things. And honestly, the fact that people are even listing these grails at all is fortunate too.

Will: Do you give any thought to the viability of chains? For as long as we've been collecting on Tezos, there's been FUD around it being a ghost chain, a lot of ill will toward the founders, the way they handled the ICO -- people kind of forgot about it, but the stink never really went away. There's this constant expectation that the chain will fail despite having been around for years. You'd think the whole "Lindy effect" idea would apply -- Tezos has been around a long time -- but it never seems to earn that credit. At the same time, we're seeing people turn on ETH now too. I'm sure you follow a lot of these Ethereum people, but even the Bankless folks have finally turned on ETH and sold all of it. There's FUD around the foundation and how they've handled the L2s, cannibalizing their own fees. So maybe a better way to phrase this: have you thought recently about preservation -- what happens if a chain goes down, or if a platform like fx(hash) goes down? What's your approach to that?

McLlama: I'll start with the Tezos FUD. As someone who's been in crypto since 2017, I can tell you a lot of the crypto OGs hating on Tezos right now used to absolutely love it. In 2019 and 2020, Tezos was all the hype, and people treated it as a real investment. A lot of people got burned by the price action. Fundamentally, it's a really great blockchain, in some ways superior to Ethereum, and I have no problem using it as a basic user -- I love it. But it left a bad taste in those OGs' opinions, and that carried through the NFT cycle. Then everyone made millions of dollars on ETH and Art Blocks, and it became, "well, look at Tezos, the price just keeps going down, why would I collect there?" It's elitist psychology combined with the fact that they did genuinely like the chain at one time -- now it's an emotional thing for a lot of people. Do I fear the blockchain will ever shut down? Not in the foreseeable future.

To your next question: preservation has become extremely important, especially with the impending -- if you want to call it that -- shutdown of fx(hash). We don't know for sure, but I wasn't expecting that to happen so suddenly. There was this several-week period where bad news was lurking in the air, but no one knew what was going on, and there was no communication from the team. It can happen suddenly, and you need to be ready for that. Have I done anything about it myself? No, but I've thought about it. Raster came out immediately after and said, sign up, create an account, and we'll back up your art for you -- they're not pinning the IPFS for you, so it's not complete redundancy, but people have been thinking about this seriously for years, and that gives me hope that nothing is going to completely disappear.

Will: I noticed that Raster thing and thought it was brilliant. I'd connected to Raster a while ago, so I don't know if they'd already backed things up for me, but it was awesome to see that 90-plus percent of my NFTs were covered -- a few corner cases from defunct platforms like Versum weren't, but still. We haven't battle-tested it, though -- if I ever lose access to my fx(hash) account, I have no idea what the experience will actually be like. Someone we've always talked about having on the show is Regina Harsanyi -- I've probably mangled her name -- she works in digital preservation. There are great videos of her on YouTube talking about the challenges of it, not just for NFTs but going back to digital art from the '80s and '70s, and how hard it is to make sure a piece still exists and lives the way the artist intended -- not just "oh, we still have the file," but displayed on the right machines, with colors that actually match. Things we'd never have thought about in 2021 when collecting on fx(hash) or Art Blocks.

McLlama: Right. It's more fragile than I thought. Even some of the on-chain stuff on fx(hash) sounds like more of a headache than the IPFS projects, from conversations I've seen. So it's definitely concerning. Am I panicking? No, definitely not.

Dragons — William Mapan

Will: I have my fingers crossed that no matter what goes down, Ciphrd won't leave us completely screwed. He still seems to be plugging away, and if they're ever put in a position to shut down the platform, I hope -- and maybe even expect -- that he'll come up with something to make sure things still function in some fashion. Let's talk about fx(hash), though, because it's been such a crazy few months, and honestly a crazy two years for a show that's primarily covered it, trying to track everything going on with them and all their pivots. I shared some notes with you in advance: they moved to ETH, then Base, announced a curated program called Vertex that had one release and then nothing, and then things like fx(params) and OpenForm and the fx(hash) token. You've been here the whole time, collecting and engaging. What's your holistic take on the platform's history? Start wherever you want -- the tokens, or further back.

McLlama: Over-engineering has been one of my fears for the platform for the last couple of years -- not just the recent art coin thing. I feel like creating novelty was prioritized over a more curated approach, over getting big projects to mint there. We had the big grails, and then the artists who really succeeded moved on to different platforms and blockchains. So I feared the over-engineering thing for a while. More recently, I felt it was a bit much to drop art coins and OpenForm at the same time. It was Ciphrd's project -- the OpenForm project -- that unveiled the whole art coin thing.

Will: Genomes, right?

McLlama: No, this was after Genomes. This was Generations.

Will: Generations. Okay.

McLlama: Right. It was fully open form, meaning an unlimited number of iterations -- you could evolve your outputs, mutate them, create new outputs after minting. Technology-wise and art-wise, that's cool, but as a collector I think it totally removes the scarcity and value of the work. Why would I put any significant money into minting something I can change after I mint it, when there's an unlimited number of outputs?

Dragons — William Mapan

So I thought it was really cool, but it removes the financial aspect completely. And simultaneously, you're dropping art coins, which have nothing to do with art -- it's all financial, all about community and cult followings. That combination didn't quite land for me. If they'd paired art coins with, say -- just as an example -- Zancan dropping a really cool project the same day, it could have generated a lot of buzz. Instead the release fell flat.

There was a period where I still believed in the concept -- the fx(hash) token in particular was promising. I actually took note that the Zora token hit a $450 million market cap, while fx(hash) peaked at $15 million. The potential for the fx(hash) token was so great -- I genuinely thought it could go to $100 million. For a while I really believed that. It just didn't happen, and that was disappointing. After that there was no momentum -- crypto was starting the bear market from the highs, and NFTs were doing no better. The window of opportunity was that six-month period when Base memes and Zora were pumping and fx(hash) seemed like a natural fit, and it just didn't happen. That's my take on how it all played out.

Will: My only answer is that fx(hash) made the mistake of launching with too much of a product and actually saying, no, you're going to come here and collect real art and explore it — it's not just going to be you clicking a link on Twitter to some meme, YOLO-ing into it, and selling two hours later. They were actually trying to create something, and that was too hard in both senses of the word. It was a hard use case, but also hard to use compared to other options. If you're going to speculate on coins, why go through all the trouble of understanding the art and the artist? You can just follow big meme accounts or however people find whatever they're going to buy.

McLlama: I think ultimately they found that the people interested in using the platform weren't speculative investors — they actually wanted to mint cool art. There was this disconnect the entire time where the user experience kept getting worse because the art coins complicated things, and whatever cabal overlords there are decided not to pump the tokens. It just didn't work out.

Will: I don't know if you listened to the episode we did with Ciphrd around that time — it was obviously such a big moment for them, and they were very candid: if this doesn't work, the platform's in a lot of trouble. This is it. I kind of suspected that, but was surprised they'd actually admit it on the episode. It made sense to me from a career perspective for an artist, though. Thinking back — if someone like Zancan had launched an art coin like this in 2021 or late 2020, the idea of a career coin where the supply constantly goes down every time you release something, not necessarily tied to OpenForm, kind of makes sense if you could go back in time and launch it then. But as a Hail Mary move for a platform, and also expecting artists to pair it with OpenForm — this brand-new discipline — very few of the artists who released that way really pulled it off well.

It just felt tough. And when you don't have a follow-up quickly, you see the price action and volume stagnate on those tokens, because once all the natural minting is done, all that's left is to buy and sell the token and do nothing else with it. You're just waiting and waiting. I think we only saw one or two artists ever create a follow-up project using their same coin — it's a thing that needed years to prove itself out, and crypto doesn't have time for that. Neither did the platform.

Dragons — William Mapan

McLlama: That's the risk you take getting into that territory. Within a bull run, many cycles happen really fast, and once you lose that momentum, it's kind of over.

Will: What do you think about their more recent ideas around opening up the platform, doing a DAO? Are you fully out of $fxh? I'm sure you got a decent chunk in the airdrop.

McLlama: I sold a little bit of my allocation at first but held most of it — I think what I have now is worth like $100 or $200. I've never really seen the DAO thing play out, so I don't have much of an opinion on it. Assuming there's no miracle funding coming in — though there might be, they've been talking about something — I'd like to see them pivot toward preserving the art and enabling the marketplace to persist. That maintains the legacy. fx(hash) is such a significant chapter of generative art, and maintaining that platform in some degree, no matter what, is what I want to see. I don't know about the technical details of what that would require, but it seems like they need to trim their infrastructure costs quite a bit for anything to be possible.

Will: It would be awesome if the platform could persist in some way. I think they were floating the idea of keeping secondary going, since that's probably the only place they're really making revenue these days, if any. And maybe doing some curated releases — one, two, or three a year — which keeps their costs down since they're not constantly hosting new drops.

McLlama: That's what Art Blocks is doing right now, right? If I understand correctly, just a few releases, having encapsulated those 500 projects and really focusing on preserving them as best as possible.

Will: Art Blocks is in such a weird place. They're not really doing formal curated stuff, but then they have whatever their new version of Playground is — in theory anyone who's worked on those contracts before can, without permission, come publish work there. But without the prestige of being curated, or even the tier just below curated —

Dragons — William Mapan

McLlama: Art Blocks Presents.

Will: Right, whatever their second tier of curation was — when it got reduced to "this is an open platform, but just for artists who've been picked before," they weren't selling out. Some things sold, but some really didn't perform well. It's the exact same problem fx(hash) had: the whole community, artists and collectors alike, turned toward wanting curation — not even necessarily the marketing behind it. I don't think someone buys a release from Verse because the marketing is so good. I think they buy it because they like the artist, and because the platform is staking its reputation on them, saying "this is good, come buy this." That's why it's priced where it is, and why it gets all this space. You've collected on Verse — how do you feel about them being one of the last really curated experiences out there?

McLlama: All I can say is I've really enjoyed the projects Verse has put out. I'm an Erik Swahn fan, and there have been several great releases there. I love how they bridge the gap between the digital and the physical. You'd maybe suggested this is turning more toward traditional art galleries and less decentralized, but I don't think that's it. I think platforms like Verse that do both are great for onboarding new collectors and giving more legitimacy to what we're doing. If real people are showing up and viewing this digital artwork, that's awesome. I don't see it as a long-term shift toward traditional art — I see it as a cool way to release cool art, and they've done a great job with that.

Will: I've thought about it two ways. I feel like there should be an open platform somewhere — for someone like me, who decides they want to get into coding and makes a project that's not amazing, but wants to put it up and say "I published something." Verse was never going to do that, and I've never been on Art Blocks, and I don't have the technical chops to run my own website and spin up my own contract. So there's a use case for something like the old Hic Et Nunc — a punk, DIY platform where anyone can publish. But it doesn't feel economically viable now unless you accept it's a one-person operation, where some months you make $100 and some months $10,000 — a hobby with upside, basically.

McLlama: A few thoughts. One, Verse had an announcement recently about going fully open.

Will: They did.

Dragons — William Mapan

McLlama: I have no idea what's going on there, but they seem to be moving that way. And there are other little platforms popping up, like Bootloader — kind of like early fx(hash) in terms of functionality. So I don't think that opportunity is gone for someone who just wants to dabble and mint something and see what happens.

Will: I don't understand Verse. They've been expanding their contracts out to more galleries, going through branding and rebranding — "we're the gallery," then "Solos is the gallery," then there are other curators, then those curators aren't part of us anymore, but they can still... Lonli's no longer there, but he's spun up his new thing, the garden, and his first project is of course on Verse with their contracts. Their whole identity and role has been all over the place. We've interviewed Jamie probably three times over the course of this show, and I feel like he's always been skeptical of the open-platform idea, because you want your brand to have some kind of premium, some prestige. The second you let anyone jump on the platform and muck it up with random sketches, you run into the same problem fx(hash) struggled with: how do you let anyone publish, but also elevate and curate the projects you think will actually make money? OBJKT has gone through that too — people salty about never being on the front page after publishing there for three years. The whole politics of who gets front-page notoriety.

I have no idea what their plan is. I'm super curious to see how it plays out.

McLlama: I want to shout out OBJKT, because in the midst of a potential fx(hash) shutdown, having that extra layer of security in terms of preservation is really reassuring. They've done an excellent job — I like using the platform more than OpenSea, honestly. They do a combination of things, like drops with Casey Reas — long-form generative art dropped on OBJKT. The more options and stable platforms we have, the better. OBJKT has been really reassuring throughout this turmoil.

Will: Bootloader is a side project from them too, and they finally added p5 and JavaScript support — it was originally just SVG and native HTML stuff. It's cool that they're around, but they're still Tezos-only. One reason artists left fx(hash) for other platforms is they felt collector demand to put their art on ETH, or they'd been blessed with an Art Blocks curation and now had this whole ETH collector base. You can't drag them back to Tezos, not in great enough numbers. So fx(hash) probably thought, we need to support this other chain — and I don't imagine Bootloader or OBJKT will ever cross over.

McLlama: That'd be wild. I don't fault fx(hash) for wanting to move toward ETH and Base — that's how they got that Coinbase venture funding. It's unfortunate there wasn't a breakthrough moment where a big project generated a lot of hype. But it's also kind of funny, as someone who loves Tezos and Tezos art, to see that pretty much all the volume now is Tezos legacy grails — partially thanks to people like me.

Dragons — William Mapan

Will: I'm so tempted to talk to you about Pokémon because of my history with it. But I also want to ask, since you've been in the crypto space for so long — this last cycle felt so weak. Not just that it never really shifted to NFTs, which sucked for all of my art, but I held Bitcoin and ETH since 2020 and missed the window to sell in 2021. Then I just held. I finally got out close enough-ish to the top this cycle, but still nowhere near what anyone doing the charts and cycle theory would have predicted. You've been here one cycle longer than me, maybe one and a half. What do you feel about the space in general — how PvP it's become, how we keep getting these shallower and shallower cycles? Do you hold out hope for the tech, or as a speculative asset at all?

McLlama: Longer term, I'm always a long-term Bitcoin bull. All I hold right now is Bitcoin and NFTs — I've completely liquidated all my meme tokens, whatever you want to call them. I don't hold any ETH, I don't hold any Tezos long term. Bitcoin is digital gold, and that thesis still holds up.

I think it actually makes sense to see shorter, less explosive market cycles as the market matures — it's just completely different now. We have ETFs and so many ways to invest in Bitcoin, and naturally it's going to get less volatile as it matures. That said, we did see some crazy subcycles — the Solana meme token trading was pretty insane, rivaling anything I've ever been a part of in crypto. It was short-lived, of course.

For another NFT cycle to happen requires a convergence of a lot of different factors timed correctly within the crypto market cycle, global politics, all of it. I can't say what's going to happen, and it is disappointing not to see a real NFT bull run. But I still think if you're buying quality art with historical value, you'll do fine in the long run.

Will: How much more buying do you think you'll personally do — Erik Swahn aside? Are there other things you're still targeting, or just watching and putting in offers? We've moved down probably 90% twice on a lot of these projects, so there's always the potential to go down again — what's $30 today could be $15 in a year. Your Farbteiler collection is pretty complete — you've got all your monos, so many awesome ones. I was actually looking at your stuff because I minted a mono myself, and I was disappointed, so I flipped it — I loved the project, loved the colors, but got this weird mono piece. I wondered if you'd incidentally ended up with mine, but it wasn't — I think I had a green one. There's probably more stuff on Verse you could still get from him or other artists. Is there a point where you'll say, I've got enough of the old stuff — or if it goes down 90% again, are you straight back in the Farbteiler zone?

Farbteiler — Erik Swahn

McLlama: If it goes down 90% again, I'll be buying more Garden, Monoliths. But yeah, I still have a few goals with the Farbs. Obviously I'm extremely happy with what I have, but I've got a couple more specific targets. I have the primary and secondary color wheel for mono outputs — I'm just a few away from getting all 12 colors, including tertiary.

Will: Oh, okay. I didn't know you were going to say that.

McLlama: That's one goal. It'll require some outreach, since these wallets are hard to track down and there are really only a couple mono outputs for each color. It might happen. It would be incredible — the fact that the algorithm produced mono outputs across all 12 colors is already amazing, and to be able to collect all of them would be pretty insane.

I'm still interested in more Dragons and Garden, Monoliths, to be honest. They're the top dogs, and the more grail hunting I do, the more laser-focused I've become on those collections. And to go back to the Pokémon cards — I've been trimming my collection down. Obviously I love these cards, but do I love them more than a Garden, Monolith? Usually the answer is no. So I'll be selling more Pokémon cards regardless of whether that market has topped. I enjoy setting off the sales bot in the Discord, and I think it'll happen a few more times. I don't want to say too much, since there are some specific pieces I have my eye on.

Dragons — William Mapan

Will: No, don't —

McLlama: What do you think of that anonymous wallet that's been scooping up dragons and gardens for high prices?

Will: I've noticed it — I think there was a 15K Tez sale of a dragon that wasn't even—

McLlama: It was a nice dragon, but not that nice, to be fair.

Will: Right, not a paper one or a gold one or any of the other really rare, scarce ones. I think you got your gold one for like 4K or 5K Tez?

McLlama: 6K Tez. The one I call the ancient dragon I got for, I think, 5.5. It's interesting — I actually looked into their wallet. They'd just been holding around 40,000 Tez for a year or two, did nothing with it, then suddenly started buying.

Dragons — William Mapan

Will: Did they have any other art, or was it just a dormant Tez-only wallet?

McLlama: They sent Tezos from Bybit, collected staking rewards, and did absolutely nothing else until recently.

Will: Maybe someone who lost their keys for an extended period. Who knows.

McLlama: I like the pieces they've selected. It almost seems like they're making a statement — like these prices are all a joke.

Will: Let me see what else they have. Their fx(hash) wallet is only two dragons and two Garden, Monoliths.

Dragons — William Mapan

McLlama: They did also buy a rare tezard.

Will: Interesting — definitely a wallet to keep track of, see if they keep buying. I do want to ask you about some Pokémon stuff. Aside from collecting when I was young, I'm much closer to Magic: The Gathering on the TCG side. Magic's been around since 1991, '92, huge history. I don't know if you play, but I'm sure you know what a Black Lotus is just from being a CCG collector.

McLlama: I've heard of it, yeah.

Will: Right, everyone just knows it — these iconic cards that have escaped their core collector base. What drives value in Magic, almost exclusively besides rarity and age, is playability — is the card actually good, is it used in decks that can win? Historically it's not about, oh, this is a foil version of that. My impression from all the Pokémon content I get on TikTok now is that it's driven far more by aesthetics — the various tiers of rarity, foiling, and alternate art. So what's your background in Pokémon? I assume you played back in the day, and I'm guessing we're similarly aged. How do you approach collecting — do you trust your eye to spot a cool card that people are going to want? What's the driving thing behind that?

McLlama: Entirely aesthetics, for me. The Pokémon cards I bought in 2024 were almost exclusively vintage Japanese cards — partly because they're so much cheaper than the American first editions, like 100 times cheaper, and the holographic quality is actually better. They're less scarce and easier to grade, so naturally they're less valuable. My thesis was simple: I love these, I think they look better than the American versions, and I'm just going to hoard them. It played out well — the vintage Japanese cards went up about 5 to 10x over a matter of weeks earlier in the year.

So for me it's all about aesthetics and rarity. I do keep track of the pop report — I also collect PSA 10 graded cards, so that population report is really helpful information when you're collecting. It has nothing to do with playability. I dabbled with that as a kid, going to Toys "R" Us, battling kids, trading and whatnot.

Dragons — William Mapan

Will: Does playability even matter in the high-end collector hobby? So many of these cards, it seems like people are either sitting on sealed product or cracking packs and grading them. It feels like a nightmare scenario if a genuinely desirable card is also competitively good — more of them end up in slabs than in decks. Do the designers have some awareness of this, making sure the chase cards aren't the playable ones, so people can actually still play?

McLlama: Good question. For the modern stuff, I don't know. The modern cards have crazy designs, very busy artwork and textures — cool, but as far as value goes, I don't think playability is strongly associated with value from what I can tell.

Will: Gotcha. The pop report thing is such a fascinating collector metric to latch onto. I've seen people say the Japanese 10s are almost worth less because the population is too high — the cards are better made, condition is better, so ironically it's harder to stand out, versus the "trashier" US cards where it's harder to get a 10 because they're misaligned or have edge wear right out of the pack. It's interesting that these core platforms own and control this information, and often they're the ones doing the grading too — there's so much grading paranoia and conspiracy around it. Did you buy those Japanese cards raw and grade them yourself, or buy them already graded?

McLlama: Always graded, on eBay. That's really the only resource I use for buying and selling.

Will: Do you buy into any of the skepticism around the grading companies? I'm sure you've seen those videos where someone cracks a card, resubmits it, and it comes back two grades higher. What's your take on that?

McLlama: There's been some pretty crazy situations. I don't look too much into it. There's a bias toward newer certifications — cards graded more recently tend to face more stringent standards than those graded years ago. So there's a real bias there, but I don't dig too deep into it, honestly. If it's a 10, it's a 10, and the Pokémon market is actually fairly liquid — you can move these things in a matter of days if you want to. The PSA 10 is respected despite the inconsistencies people point out. That's just going to happen. It's impossible to avoid entirely — there are some egregious examples for sure, but I don't look too much into it.

Dragons — William Mapan

Will: Gotcha — you got in last year, already 10x'd, and you're just selling and buying art without following the controversy. Do you see yourself continuing with the hobby, or will you keep the ones you like and call it there?

McLlama: I have a binder full of graded PSA 10 cards, and I've been trimming it down as the price goes up, trying to decide what the core collection is that I actually care about. I'm getting closer to that. At a certain point I'll have to decide whether I keep selling or stop, and I think we're reaching that point. But the 30th anniversary set is coming out soon, and that might generate more buzz and another vintage pump. Who knows? If things go really crazy, I'll sell almost everything for sure.

Will: Did you play as a kid? Was there nostalgia for you, or did you get in for other reasons?

McLlama: I mostly collected. I wasn't much of a player, as far as decks and whatnot — mostly just collected for fun.

Will: When you decided to jump in in 2024, was it purely the arbitrage thing you noticed between Japanese and American markets? Just, "this is too wide of a gap, there's too much potential"?

McLlama: There was a lot of buzz around Pokémon in general — it all came full circle. I did start buying the modern cards, but that felt kind of corny. Then I started looking at the prices of cards that were legendary to me as a kid, and they were so cheap. It wasn't a calculation of "this will be a 10x" — it was just, wow, these are cheap and I want to buy them. And it played out really well.

Dragons — William Mapan

Will: What you just said is one of the things that informed my more recent collecting of vinyl records. I got back into collecting vinyl in a real way about two and a half years ago. I'd go on Discogs, the main site for trading vinyl records — it's also the database of everything — and find a record I wanted. You'd see the original pressing and all the subsequent represses, and on some of these, the price difference between an original '70s pressing and a 2025 repress is only about $20.

That didn't make sense to me as a lifelong collector of various things. Sure, there were points in history when they were printing huge quantities of records because it was basically the only format people could get music on. But that's when I decided to start collecting only first pressings, because if I want my collection to hold value moving forward, I can't just be buying represses at Walmart and Target — even if the music sounds mostly the same.

There's a disconnect in the hobby. And of course, it became a way for me to spend a lot more money in some cases — but that's always how it is.

McLlama: When you find that lane — something undervalued that you also appreciate and enjoy looking at, or in your case, whatever the aesthetic value is to you — that's a good collecting opportunity. It's apparent when you're in that situation.

Will: I do play them, though there's some I probably shouldn't. The whole slabbing thing hasn't come over to records in a big way yet, partly because so much of the hobby for people is also about their system, fidelity, and sound quality — I don't have the space or money for that. For a lot of those folks, owning an original pressing and putting it under plastic means you can't play the record, and you can't demonstrate it's a nice copy. How else do you show it's in mint condition?

But I have seen people like Steve Aoki slabbing music media they collect, so there are people on the edge of it starting to do that. I'd be curious what the hobby looks like in five or ten years. There's one label or distributor now that, in addition to retail, sells pre-graded copies on their website — like fifty slabbed 10s of the new Taylor Swift album. Getting a 10 in the wild is probably difficult. It's funny to see — it's the Pokémon-ification of other hobbies. They see the premium out there and know it could come over. It'll be an interesting day when that happens.

Dragons — William Mapan

I want to jump back to Verse real quick. We talked a bit about their curated stuff and how they might be changing the platform — you've collected some of their most recent release, the Brainrot stuff. It's been interesting seeing them succeed in the PFP space by hybridizing it with art, between that and the Tabor PFP. I minted a few of the Tabor ones because they were free to me, given how they dripped those out, but I didn't mint any of the Brainrot ones. It's clearly attracted a lot of new people to their platform who are more than happy to come in and complain in the Discord.

McLlama: Oh, the Discord was a mess.

Will: Yeah, lots of green-leaf users complaining. But is this the game now — do you need the candy to support the platform?

McLlama: I don't know. For both of those projects, I was just so excited to see a 10K PFP project mint out. That's such a foreign concept — that many editions. I haven't witnessed that in so long. I also love long-form AI, which is a whole separate topic I could talk about for thirty minutes. It was just fun to mint, cool to see it succeed and the floor price go up. The Human Resources project in particular has some very devoted collectors doing the full role-playing thing. When I see those opportunities, I'm still a crypto degen at the end of the day — I'm going to spam the mint button regardless of what I think of the art specifically. But yeah, really cool to see.

Will: Did you ever collect on Emprops?

McLlama: Yes — and actually, I dropped a few projects of my own on Emprops.

Dragons — William Mapan

Will: Oh, did you?

McLlama: That's how into it I got. It's not something I expect people to notice, but having done that with AI — prompting, inputting images, then seeing the results after people mint and thinking, "that wasn't quite random enough, those weren't quite the outputs I wanted" — it gave me more respect for generative artists and other types of artists too. It's hard to get a set of outputs as diverse as you want within your parameters. I don't know if Emprops is still up and running, but yeah.

Will: It was a very interesting platform. I collected a little off there and tried to figure out how to use their tools to create something myself — every time I see something new I try to figure it out and see if I can release something. I was never able to get their syntax working in a way that made sense to me, and then I had a baby, so I gave up on it. But I thought it was really cool, and we talked to those guys when it launched.

McLlama: I think that platform was revolutionary. It may have just been a little early in the bear market, but long-form AI is such a cool topic.

Will: The Brainrots really weren't interesting to me aesthetically or thematically, but I know artists who've dabbled in it and their feedback was, "it's just so well done" — to do 10,000 of those and have them all look —

McLlama: Ten thousand is a lot.

Dragons — William Mapan

Will: Right. So there must be a lot of craft to that, even if I think they're just kind of goofy.

McLlama: I can't say they resonate with me super well, but still really fun.

Will: I think the Human Resources one is pretty interesting. I was skeptical until I listened to Tabor talk about it more. I've just been holding the ones I've got — I know he's an artist they're betting big on long-term with the platform.

McLlama: So hey, it's my PFP on Twitter. I found the one I like and I'm supporting it.

Will: Is there anything else you want to touch on before we wrap up? Anything we missed?

McLlama: We touched on everything — long-form AI, Pokémon, my obsessiveness with Zancan and Erik Swahn and those collections.

Dragons — William Mapan

Will: I feel like we got through a lot. It's been great chopping it up with another collector and talking about the space. I hope we get some good news from fx(hash) at some point — that would be ideal.

McLlama: Just to add on to that — if fx(hash) were to shut down, I don't know if OBJKT would perpetuate the existing listings or not. But if they don't, I think that would actually be really interesting: clear the order books, have a fresh supply and demand. Not necessarily a bad thing in the long run.

Will: You'd have to think a lot of the listings on fx(hash) haven't been touched in years.

McLlama: Some of the ones that got bought recently were actually listed years ago.

Will: Back when Tezos might have been a much different price.

McLlama: Yeah, it's interesting.

Dragons — William Mapan

Will: Well, we're still here, still watching and lurking and making these episodes from time to time. Thankful to folks like you who are still happy to come on and talk with us.

McLlama: Thanks for having me. I hope my rambling was somewhat entertaining.

Will: It's great. Best of luck with your continued collecting and the Pokémon stuff — and if you ever get into records, hit me up, I'll give you some ideas of where to start. That was McLlama, everyone. Let me plug your Twitter real quick.

McLlama: My tag is Pompous LL.

Will: Pompous LL. Wait, maybe we should close on this — where'd the McLlama name come from?

McLlama: Great question. Back in 2017, everyone on crypto Twitter was basically some sort of animal — you had Wassis, some unidentified animal-creature things. I started out as the Pompous Llama; that's how I created the account. It was a real-life nickname someone had passively given me, and I thought it was funny. It was too long to type as a Twitter tag, so it became Pompous LL instead of Pompous Llama. Then the bear market happened and people started putting McDonald's hats on their PFPs — the joke being that we're all going to need a job flipping burgers — and I turned into McLlama. That's how it started, and it's just the name people know me by.

Dragons — William Mapan

Will: Throw him a follow @PompousLL — we'll put that down below, and we'll link to your Raster collection too so people can browse it and see all the Farbteilers and the other great stuff you've collected. I scrolled through, and you've got stuff from all eras of fx(hash), plus a bunch of A.I. and other digital art. I saw some Culture Hacker in there too.

McLlama: Yeah, I like glitch art as well.

Will: And some John Gerard stuff. You've definitely been around for a minute collecting all this. That's it for this one, everyone. I hope you enjoyed it. Big thanks to McLlama for coming on and talking to us about art.

McLlama: And thanks to everyone who's still active on fx(hash). I see all of you in the Discord reacting to purchases — everyone who's still active right now is a legend.

Will: Legendary status achieved. Well, thanks again for coming on. We'll be back soon-ish with another episode. Later, everyone.

McLlama: Thanks again for having me.

Farbteiler — Erik Swahn

Change log // 1 edit

  • 2026-07-12Removed extraneous closing line — Will
  • Initial transcript — auto-transcribed (AssemblyAI) and readability-edited.