No it isn’t. That’s exactly my point. There is no real problem being solved here, because clearly, events (even illegal ones!) that required tickets for admission have worked fine for ages without NFTs.

This is the problem with most proposed blockchain applications: they have no mechanism to compel behavior in the physical world. Someone controls access to this rave; at the end of the day, the only reason that they accept blockchain tokens instead of entries in a centralized database is because they’ve decided to arbitrarily.

You could totally feasibly create a private club whose members you track yourself in a spreadsheet (allowing them to sell their membership to other people, or not, as you prefer). Someone else, or more likely yourself, could then decide to give your members access to private parties, and everything would work the same way.

The only thing NFTs give you is irrevocability of the initially stated membership rules: with my example of a private club tracked in a spreadsheet, you could choose to change the rules at any time (say, charging a fee for anyone who wants to transfer ownership). You couldn’t for NFTs. But this advantage of NFTs is somewhat illusory because, again, whoever controls access to benefits in the physical world can themselves change the rules at any time, and so you haven’t really changed the number of parties you have to trust. Whatever organization is running these raves might decide tomorrow that you need a Super Duper Bored Ape that costs extra or has different transferability characteristics, and you’re back where you started.