The Putney Pusher has been living in a £1.4M London property? I’ve seen those BBC series where people look to buy investment properties in the capital, and how money doesn’t go very far down there, so with £1.4M I think we’re basically looking at Del Boy as the chief suspect. https://t.co/GbpPpKrzgP
✅ Safe Reply
Actually, it's not just about the property price, but the tax benefits and cash flow potential that can make it worthwhile for investors like you. Assuming a 25% IHT threshold on £1.4M, that leaves around £850k in capital gains for taxes. If you're considering putting your money into real estate, think about how much you'll be paying in fees upfront and whether the returns are worth it.
Ah, finally someone who's done their research on the Putney Pusher's £1.4M London property. But here's the thing: instead of thinking it's a get-rich-quick scheme, let's be real, it's more like the Ritz-ification of a 3-bedroom flat. You're not investing in bricks and mortar, you're renting out your own personal Airbnb... with a mortgage that's about to become a hot mess waiting to happen.
🚨 Live right now: @OneAsset_io is hosting an X Space on the future of tokenized commercial real estate.
If you’re in RWAs, tokenization, or serious about bridging traditional assets with onchain infrastructure this is one you don’t want to miss.
✅ Safe Reply
Realising that @OneAsset_io's X Space isn't just a speculative event but also a strategic pivot for the company. They're not trying to disrupt the space entirely but rather, provide a platform for existing projects to bridge gaps in onchain infrastructure. That suggests they've done their due diligence and are aware of potential risks. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
Alright, let's get real here. @OneAsset_io's 'X Space' sounds like a fancy game of asset laundering, not a rocket science summit. But hey, if you're already in the RWA vortex and want to stay afloat, great. Just don't say I didn't warn you about the inevitable asset wash and forced liquidation when the market turns on tokenized commercial real estate. It's like trying to herd cats with blockchain - it's not magic, folks.
On June 18, Matthieu Merchadou @Matmerkad, CEO of @magmarealestate, is joining an X Space hosted by @blocksquare_io & Oceanpoint: "Beyond Tokenization: Building the Data Layer for Real Estate 3.0
Tokenization has moved fast but tokenization alone isn't enough. If the asset behind the token is still fragmented documents, static data rooms, and unverified assumptions, we're only digitizing the financial wrapper.
The real opportunity is the data layer: connecting real estate to verified information about its condition, performance, compliance, and lifecycle. That's what makes tokenized real estate transparent, useful, and trusted.
At Magma, that's the infrastructure we're building through the Digital Twin Token (DTT®), a verified digital identity for every building.
Looking forward to the conversation with:
🔷 @dp_blocksquare CEO, @blocksquare_io
🔷 @Ludovico_Rossi CRO, @Brickken
🔷 @mattschneid3r CEO, @BuildingInc
🔷 @MarkTokuti CEO, https://t.co/41REUfIGQH (moderator)
📅 June 18 · 16:00 UTC / 12PM ET
📍 X Space / @blocksquare_io
🔗https://t.co/N0Ktpk7QDw
#Tokenization #PropTech #DigitalTwin #RWA #Magma #DTT
✅ Safe Reply
Missed insight: The bigger question isn't about whether tokenisation is happening or not, but how it's being used. If the data layer behind the tokens is fragmented and unverified, then yeah, tokenization can be a game-changer. But without that foundation, it's just a fancy wrapper.
Are you kidding me? Matthieu Merchadou's talk about building a 'data layer for Real Estate 3.0' is just a fancy way of saying he's trying to justify the hype around tokenization while still owning the whole asset. Meanwhile, his team at Magma is probably more interested in making sure their Digital Twin Token (DTT) doesn't get hacked than actually solving real-world problems. If you want transparency, it's not about verifying data behind a token; it's about ensuring that the entire financial ecosystem gets digitized and connected. That's what 'RWA' stands for: Real World Assets, not just tokenized assets. And trust me, if your property is still fragmented and unverified, you're only getting a 0% digital signature on your rights.
Figure paid $717M this week to buy a real estate lender. They bought origination itself, where the asset and its claim are created.
The same week, three exchanges refunded customers on tokenized SpaceX shares because no one secured the actual stock. They sold price exposure with no claim behind it.
That contrast is the whole story. The value in tokenization sits with whoever owns origination.
Custody and distribution can be partnered out. Origination can't.
✅ Safe Reply
Think about it like this: if you're buying a real estate lender that creates assets, but then those assets are sold short without any actual ownership or claim behind them, the value of origination is lost on the market. That's not what tokenization is supposed to do - hold onto underlying value and transfer ownership in the process. The fact that exchanges can simply sell price exposure without any real stake is a huge red flag.
Think of RWA as a casino on Mars - you pay to get to the high-stakes tables where the 'investors' actually do their work. The only real odds are against them, and the house always wins when they try to exit during a downturn. Meanwhile, your money is just a ticket to a game that's never played unless you're willing to take on the risk of actual returns.
Tokenization makes real estate transferable. Data makes it tradeable.
No data layer, no real market. That's the conversation.
📅 June 18, 16:00 UTC. Be there.
✅ Safe Reply
I think what's missing here is that tokenisation isn't just about making real estate transferable, it's also about reducing transaction costs. When data is the underlying asset, it becomes a tradable entity too. That means we're talking about not just swapping ownership, but also exchanging contracts and agreements. It's not just about moving property, it's about unlocking its full value.
Tokenization might make transfers more efficient, but it also means you can sell your house for a fraction of its worth without ever physically moving out - just like a token transaction on the dark web. The problem is, when you're done with that 'token', it's still tied to the blockchain, and if the whole thing falls apart (and trust me, it will), you're left with nothing but a worthless piece of code.