I used to think getting a private security onchain was the hard part.
Then I read Dusk’s latest piece and realized I was quietly combining two different problems.
Tokenization can coordinate the ownership record, investor eligibility, transfers and settlement. But Dusk is pretty explicit about what it doesn't solve: buyers, sellers, pricing or market depth.
Dusk That distinction caught me because the security can be perfectly ready to trade while the market around it is still thin.
So the interesting part isn't really “can this security move onchain?”
It's whether there is actually a market waiting for it when it does.
And that makes tokenization feel less like the creation of liquidity and more like the removal of friction after liquidity already exists.
I hadn't separated those two things before.
#dusk @Dusk $DUSK #DUSKARMY.
Then I read Dusk’s latest piece and realized I was quietly combining two different problems.
Tokenization can coordinate the ownership record, investor eligibility, transfers and settlement. But Dusk is pretty explicit about what it doesn't solve: buyers, sellers, pricing or market depth.
Dusk That distinction caught me because the security can be perfectly ready to trade while the market around it is still thin.
So the interesting part isn't really “can this security move onchain?”
It's whether there is actually a market waiting for it when it does.
And that makes tokenization feel less like the creation of liquidity and more like the removal of friction after liquidity already exists.
I hadn't separated those two things before.
#dusk @Dusk $DUSK #DUSKARMY.