This is wrong, rare sats are the original use case for the Ordinals protocol. You may confuse Ordinals with "inscriptions".

I don't really mind the rare sats thing, but as I discussed recently with another supporter of the concept, I believe the long term viability of rare sats as a "collectible business" is quite questionable.

The reason is actually quite simple: If rare sats have any value, people will try to find new types of rare sats all the time, discovering new mathematical properties or declaring some old transaction "legendary". And there will also be, from time to time, new "legendary" transactions. I guess some might for example be on the hunt for the sats from Donald Trump's "first Bitcoin purchase" some days ago.

Also the rules have some arbitrary components. For example it's debatable if, when the sats transferred in a transaction are counted, the fees should be counted before or after the outputs.

All this can lead to a proliferation of lots of new "collectibles" all the time, and as long as no "new blood" of new investors is found all the time, the average rare sat is likely to lose value over time. Other collectibles like stamps or coins deteriorate with time. Rare sats can only get lost if the privkeys are lost, but that will happen relatively seldom (perhaps in 1% of the cases per decade), so you can't really count on that this will make "old" rare sats more rare and thus valuable.