Why Slonks NFTs Surged 60x—and How Burns Shape Their Value

The key metric is the NFT’s slop value. Sources describe slop as the number of pixels where the generated Slonk differs from its source Punk; because the canvas contains 576 pixels, the score can range from 0 to 576 ^[2][5]. That makes the collection easy to understand at a glance: the closer the image is to the original, the lower the slop; the more the AI gets wrong, the higher the slop.

That inversion is the product hook. In many AI-art projects, clean output is the goal. In Slonks, wrongness becomes measurable, tradable, and strategically useful.

Why the launch moved so fast

Several forces stacked together during the first week.

• A low entry price and a visible repricing. The collection was reported to have minted below 0.004 ETH and reached a 0.123 ETH floor roughly six days later; TechFlow characterized the move as about 60x, while Moomoo repeated the same launch-week framing ^[3][10].
• CryptoPunks adjacency. Slonks are reconstructed from CryptoPunks source material, giving traders an instantly recognizable visual reference and cultural anchor ^[2][4].
• A simple meme with a score attached. The slop score made AI imperfection legible: buyers could compare pieces by how wrong, or how faithful, the model’s reconstruction was ^[1][2].
• Supply destruction from the start. Merge and void mechanics meant some NFTs could leave normal circulation instead of simply sitting in wallets ^[4][12].
• Token optionality. Reports describe SLOP as tied to a Slonk’s slop value when it is sent into the void, so each NFT carried both collectible value and a possible token-conversion angle ^[5][6].

That combination made Slonks feel less like a normal mint and more like a live strategy game: buy a cheap Punk-like AI reconstruction, decide whether it is better held, merged, or voided, and watch supply change in public.

How the burn mechanics work

Slonks’ economy centers on two destructive actions: merging and voiding.

Merge: burn one NFT to change another

Phemex describes merging as a mechanism where holders can combine Slonks by permanently destroying one NFT to enhance another ^[4]. Some reports say merging can increase the surviving Slonk’s slop value, which may matter later if that Slonk is voided for SLOP ^[7][13].

In other words, merge does not simply reduce supply. It can also change the surviving NFT’s future token-output profile, at the cost of permanently losing another Slonk.

Void: destroy the NFT for SLOP

The void mechanism is described as sending a Slonk into a void contract that mints SLOP in proportion to the NFT’s current slop value ^[5][6]. PANews gives simple examples: a Slonk with slop 15 would mint 15 SLOP, while one with slop 400 would mint 400 SLOP ^[6].

The reported token cap is 5,760,000 SLOP, calculated as 10,000 Slonks multiplied by the maximum possible slop score of 576 ^[6][8]. Sources also describe the SLOP scheme as still being developed, so token-linked value should be treated as conditional on execution and future demand rather than guaranteed ^[2][5].

Some reports also mention a Revival mechanism, where SLOP can be used to bring NFTs back from the void, adding another loop between NFTs and tokens ^[1][11]. That makes the system more complex than a simple one-way burn model.

What burns do to Slonks’ value

Burn mechanics can affect value in three main ways, but none of them automatically guarantees a higher floor price.

1. Burns reduce visible NFT supply

When a Slonk is merged or voided, it leaves the regular circulating NFT market. Early reports agree that burns happened quickly, though the exact count varies by timing and source. Phemex reported more than 500 Slonks burned in the first five days, reducing supply to 9,505 from 10,012 ^[4][12]. TechFlow reported 1,348 permanently burned by roughly day six, leaving 8,642 in circulation ^[3].

That early destruction strengthened the scarcity narrative. Still, scarcity only supports price when demand remains. A smaller supply can make surviving NFTs rarer, but it cannot by itself make buyers keep paying higher prices.

2. Burns give high-slop NFTs an embedded token angle

Because voiding is described as minting SLOP according to slop value, high-slop NFTs can be valued as potential token claims ^[5][6]. That changes how buyers may rank the collection.

Low-slop Slonks can appeal because they are cleaner reconstructions of iconic source Punks. High-slop Slonks can appeal because they may produce more SLOP if voided. MarsBit describes this as a dual valuation logic: visual scarcity for low-slop pieces versus voiding value for high-slop pieces ^[13].

That leaves mid-slop NFTs in a more complicated position. They may be neither especially faithful as collectibles nor especially productive as token-redemption candidates.

3. Burns create game theory, not risk-free value

The most important effect of Slonks’ burn mechanics is strategic pressure. Holders must decide whether a Slonk is worth more as an NFT, as a merge input, or as a future SLOP claim.

Some reports describe cases where merging two low-output Slonks could create a surviving Slonk with much higher later void output, while permanently destroying the other NFT ^[7][8][13]. That kind of mechanism can make the collection engaging, but it also shifts attention away from pure art demand and toward token economics.

If traders start pricing Slonks mainly by expected SLOP output, NFT prices become more dependent on the credibility of the token design, demand for SLOP, and whether holders keep finding profitable merge-or-void paths ^[5][13].

The bottom line

Slonks surged because it packaged several crypto-native hooks into one simple narrative: a cheap mint, CryptoPunks familiarity, on-chain AI generation, measurable mistakes, shrinking NFT supply, and a token-linked burn system ^[1][3][4][5].

The burn mechanics can support value by reducing circulating supply and giving high-slop NFTs a possible token-linked floor. But they also make the collection more speculative. The more the market cares about void output, the more Slonks behaves like a tokenomics game rather than a straightforward NFT art project.