A big part of why NFT's exist is specifically to enable stuff like this-- money pass transactions, illiquid trades booked at arbitrary values, etc. This crap about art is really 90% cover for money laundering, graft, and pump and dumps.
This is one of the most common criticisms of NFTs, but is there actually any data to back it? I don't mess much with Ethereum-hosted NFTs as the data that makes them unique and gives them value is often stored on private servers (as opposed to decentralized ones), but the collectors I know who are into digital collectibles are in it for the value, and because they see potential in it. A far more realistic problem is people selling NFTs back and forth to themselves in order to create artificial value.
What's struck me is odd is that bitcoiners criticize NFTs for the exact same reasons nocoiners criticize bitcoin:
"Anybody can make one." ✓
"It's a bubble and a fad that will never catch on." ✓
"It's a highly illiquid market, or else it's all wash trading." ✓
"Its only used by money launderers and criminals." ✓
What am I forgetting?