Tokenized equity has a definition problem Most “tokenized equity” today isn’t really equity onchain. It’s a token that points to equity somewhere else. In our system, the ownership lives onchain. In today’s world, legal ownership record lives with a transfer agent, or worse - buried in a spreadsheet no one has attested to - That distinction matters. Because if transferring the token doesn’t change the actual ownership record, we haven’t moved ownership onchain. We’ve created a digital representation of an offchain system. The more interesting model is: The ownership position itself becomes an onchain object. - Who owns it. - How much they own. - When they acquired it. - What rights attach to it. - What happens when ownership changes. All of that becomes a programmable state. That’s the direction we’re taking with Fish Network. Not simply tokenizing private assets. Building infrastructure for private market ownership itself to exist onchain. And once you look at tokenization this way, the most important piece of infrastructure isn’t actually the token. It’s the cap table.
- The article argues that most 'tokenized equity' today is merely a digital representation of off-chain ownership, not true on-chain equity.
- The author proposes a model where ownership itself becomes an on-chain programmable object, with the cap table being the critical infrastructure.
- Fish Network is presented as an example of building infrastructure for private market ownership to exist directly on-chain.
Topics: Asset types, Infrastructure providers, Private market, Alternative assets, Tokenization platforms, Private equity vc
Tags: #tokenizedequity #onchainownership #captable #fishnetwork #privatemarkets #programmablestate #transferagent #digitalrepresentation
No comments:
Post a Comment