On January 27, 2026, Eastern Standard Time, the social NFT platform Rodeo announced that it would terminate operations in a phased manner, entering a shutdown countdown that will last until March 10. When this news broke, Cointelegraph labeled it as "the second NFT platform to announce its closure this week," which stood out amid the persistently sluggish market sentiment. Over a longer timeline, Ethereum's monthly NFT trading volume has plummeted from approximately $5 billion in early 2022 to $159 million in January 2026, leaving only about 3% of its peak. Against this backdrop, an NFT platform that overlays the Farcaster social graph and focuses on social relationships and content expression still chooses to shut down, raising the core question: why has the narrative of social NFTs failed to lead this sector out of a prolonged bear market and business predicament?
From High-Frequency On-Chain to Read-Only Shutdown Countdown
● Phased shutdown timeline: According to the official announcement, Rodeo will enter an orderly shutdown process starting from January 27, maintaining normal operations from January 27 to February 10. After that, from February 10, it will switch to a "read-only mode" where users can browse but cannot post or trade, until it completely shuts down its front-end access and interaction functions on March 10. This clear three-stage arrangement transforms the "farewell" from a one-time outage into a predictable countdown, providing users with a window to organize their assets and content.
● Insufficient scale and sustainability: Rodeo co-founder and CEO Kayvon Tehranian candidly stated in a public explanation that although the product "resonated with the core community," the platform "failed to achieve the scale necessary for long-term sustainable operations." This statement condenses the reasons for the shutdown into two keywords: scale and sustainability. In this round of NFT winter, platforms without sufficient user volume and revenue support, even with high-frequency positive feedback in product design and community culture, struggle to withstand the long-term fixed costs and continuous iteration pressures.
● Disconnection between community resonance and mass diffusion: Feedback from the Farcaster ecosystem and crypto-native communities indicates that Rodeo is not lacking recognition within its "core circle"—its design, which deeply binds social dynamics, creator expression, and NFT minting, has formed a certain resonance in content and identity. However, the briefing did not provide broader user data, and the facts show that it has never penetrated this layer of homogeneity to spread to a wider audience of crypto users or even Web2 content creators. The social narrative is highly praised within a small circle, but that does not equate to generating cross-circle product increments.
● The significance of an orderly shutdown for user assets: Unlike many projects that abruptly go offline and interrupt contract interactions, Rodeo chose to announce in advance and "decelerate" in phases, meaning users still have time to download data, migrate NFTs, and adjust their social and content layouts. The platform's path from "normal operation → read-only → complete shutdown" concentrates asset risks mainly on liquidity exhaustion and interaction interruption, rather than sudden access failure or abnormal on-chain calls. For creators and deeply engaged participants, this orderliness provides a buffer in both emotional and actual losses.
Social Graph Support Cannot Stop the NFT Downturn
● The conceptual advantages of the Farcaster social graph: Rodeo was born on the Farcaster ecosystem, relying on a decentralized social graph and identity system to unify users' social accounts, follow relationships, content streams, and NFT assets. Theoretically, this underlying structure allows creators to "migrate with relationships," seamlessly distributing their works and identity markers across multiple applications, and can give NFTs more context around content and interaction scenarios, rather than just one-time minting and trading events.
● The cliff from $5 billion to $159 million: However, the highlights of the tech stack cannot rewrite the macro environment. According to data relayed by wublock, Ethereum's monthly NFT trading volume was approximately $5 billion in early 2022, but by January 2026, this number had dwindled to only $159 million, a reduction of nearly 97%. This indicates that the active capital pool and willingness to participate in the entire NFT market have severely shrunk, with traffic entry points, secondary market transactions, and even speculative sentiment remaining at long-term lows.
● Customer acquisition and monetization challenges at 3% of peak: When the overall trading volume is only about 3% of its peak, the primary challenge facing social NFT platforms is no longer "how to steal users from leading platforms," but rather "how to find enough new users and willingness to pay in an extremely contracted market." Under the Rodeo model, creators need to continuously produce content, maintain social relationships, and add NFT minting and trading behaviors, but in a cycle where both funding and sentiment are dry, the economic returns from this high participation threshold are limited, further amplifying customer acquisition costs and retention difficulties.
● Structural disconnection between technological innovation and commercial scale: Rodeo's deep integration of the Farcaster social graph with NFTs indeed represents a step forward at the architectural level, but both the briefing and the CEO's statements point to the same conclusion: this innovation has not successfully translated into a sufficiently large user scale and revenue volume. In other words, there is a structural disconnection between technical feasibility and commercial sustainability—even if the product is half a step ahead in design and concept, if it cannot support the long-term costs of R&D, operations, and ecosystem incentives, it is still difficult to escape the fate of accelerated liquidation in a bear market.
Two Closures in One Week: The Mirror of Rodeo and Nifty Gateway
● Continuous closure signals in the same week: Cointelegraph referred to Rodeo as "the second NFT platform to announce its closure this week," pointing to the earlier announcement of the cessation of operations by Nifty Gateway. This phrasing places the two platforms within the same news narrative: not isolated cases, but a chain of contraction signals appearing within the same week, allowing the outside world to more intuitively feel that the NFT platform sector has entered a new round of active balance sheet reduction and passive clearing phase.
● Comparison of positioning, target users, and models: Nifty Gateway leans more towards a traditional "showcase + trading" platform, targeting a broad audience of NFT collectors and art users, emphasizing curation, sales, and secondary transactions; Rodeo, on the other hand, focuses more on social and content narratives, packaging creators' daily expressions with NFT minting, with its core audience closer to crypto-native communities like Farcaster. The two differ in product language as "exchange-type" and "social-type," but share the common goal of trying to continue to extract commercial space from existing users amid peak traffic and slowing user education.
● Common dilemma of user growth and revenue pressure: Whether it is Nifty Gateway, which focuses on curation and sales, or Rodeo, which leverages the Farcaster graph, both face the same set of real constraints: slowing new user growth, declining transaction frequency among old users, and platform fees and value-added service revenues insufficient to offset operational and development costs. In an environment where overall trading volume is only 3% of its peak, relying solely on platform fees, occasional large sales, or limited membership benefits is insufficient to support sustained expansion or even maintain existing scale.
● From individual cases to a phase of sector contraction: The differences between Rodeo and Nifty Gateway in product routes and target groups highlight a clearer conclusion: even with completely different approaches, NFT platforms are collectively under pressure in a bear market. This makes the closures of the two no longer just stories of individual commercial misjudgments, but rather an inevitable result of the entire sector transitioning from disorderly expansion to rational contraction. For the remaining platforms, the survival logic is shifting from "telling a more dazzling narrative" to "proving more solid cash flow."
Migration to Arweave: Assets Remain, Relationships Hard to Keep
● Migration to Arweave as a follow-up plan: In the shutdown announcement, Rodeo provided a plan to migrate assets to Arweave as one of the main follow-up arrangements. Users can use the asset migration tool to transfer content stored or associated with the platform to Arweave, ensuring that works and data can still be indexed and accessed on-chain or in decentralized storage networks after the front end is closed. This means that the shutdown does not equate to the works "disappearing," but rather retreating from a social product front end back to the underlying storage layer.
● The value of persistent storage for users: Arweave's core selling point is "long-term storage," and its one-time payment, long-term proof model is suitable for housing creators' works, snapshots of social content, and metadata related to NFTs. After Rodeo exits the stage, choosing to migrate to Arweave means that creators, after undergoing a round of platform experimentation, can at least preserve the historical trajectory of "works and data"—this is the minimum guarantee of digital asset continuity for creators hoping to embark on the next cycle.
● Content retention does not equate to scene continuation: It is important to emphasize that this migration plan primarily addresses the issue of "whether content and data can be found," rather than "whether social relationships and interaction scenes can be continued." Even if all works' metadata successfully migrates to Arweave, Rodeo's original timelines, comments, shares, social interaction networks, and algorithmic distribution logic are difficult to restore without a front end and active users. Creators can prove "I once wrote and minted here," but it is challenging to replicate the community atmosphere and dissemination paths of that time.
● Rational expectations amid a lack of security information: The briefing did not provide any information regarding whether the asset migration assistant's smart contracts have been audited, the auditing agency, or its conclusions, making it impossible to provide security endorsements or technical detail extrapolations based on this. In the absence of this information, users can only view it as an optional tool rather than a zero-risk solution. For potential contract risks, operational errors, or future changes in access methods during the migration process, a rational approach is to acknowledge uncertainty rather than fill in the missing security details with imagination.
The Double Blow to Social NFTs: A Quiet Market and Difficult Business Models
● Industry-wide commonality of user growth bottlenecks: From a broader industry perspective, Rodeo is not the only social NFT platform facing growth bottlenecks. As the early "avatar + hype" model recedes, users' understanding of NFTs has gradually returned to calm, and the scale of people willing to pay long-term for "social narratives + identity expression + collectible attributes" is far smaller than imagined during the bull market. Social platforms must compete for both content and relationships while also accommodating NFTs, which are relatively niche and highly volatile asset carriers, making it increasingly difficult to expand new users under dual thresholds.
● Contraction of diverse revenue paths in a bear market: Theoretically, social NFT platforms can achieve revenue through multiple paths such as advertising, platform fees, and value-added services (like advanced creator tools, paid communities, and data insights). However, in a bear market context, tightening advertising budgets, sharply declining transaction volumes, and reduced willingness to pay for additional features have caused these paths to simultaneously "shrink." Platforms aiming to extract rent from both content and finance find that the ceiling for each path is much lower than expected.
● The gap between core communities and mainstream markets: Rodeo's experience highlights another layer of contradiction: core communities are highly supportive, while the mainstream market remains indifferent. Within crypto-native circles like Farcaster, social NFTs are seen as extensions of culture and identity, with many willing to participate in experiments; however, when expanded to a broader Web3 and even Web2 user base, "minting a dynamic" or "paying for a post" remains a behavior with high understanding and psychological thresholds. The reputation of core communities does not automatically translate into large-scale user growth, thereby dragging down revenue and the formation of a commercial loop.
● Rodeo is just a front-row sample of the elimination round: Under this dual pressure logic, Rodeo's choice resembles an "early submission" rather than an isolated incident. Lacking clear cash flow support and struggling to penetrate small circles, social NFT platforms are destined to undergo a deep screening in this bear market. Rodeo is one of the earlier ones to provide an answer, and more projects will be forced to downsize, merge, or even completely shut down under similar pressures in the future. For the entire sector, this is a survival of the fittest that is bound to happen sooner or later, just with different rhythms.
Where Will NFT Social Go After the Bear Market Liquidation
The shutdown of Rodeo marks the end of the first round of social NFT experiments based on new-generation decentralized social graphs like Farcaster, having completed a full cycle. From soaring expectations to calm trial and error, and then to proactive product-level contraction, the market has indeed provided a phased conclusion: relying solely on technical narratives and resonance within small circles is insufficient to support the independent survival of platforms in a prolonged bear market. Future projects that wish to avoid repeating past mistakes need to find a new balance between user scale, revenue structure, and technical narrative—acknowledging the hard constraints of the macro environment on scale while embedding business model design into product iterations earlier, rather than playing catch-up afterward.
For underlying social graphs like Farcaster, this round of platform clearing does not signify a failure of the route; rather, it provides a reflective sample for the evolution of the next cycle: how identities and relationships can be reused across applications, how creators can migrate without loss between different front ends, and how protocol layers can leave greater commercial imagination space for upper-layer applications will all become questions that need to be answered in the next stage. For investors and developers, beyond focusing on short-term fluctuations, what deserves long-term attention is asset portability and continuity of social relationships: the former determines whether works and data can transcend the platform lifecycle, while the latter concerns whether communities and influence can continue to grow through successive product iterations. These two lines may be the underlying variables that truly possess cyclical value when the next round of NFTs and social integration occurs.
Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
