{"version":"1.0","type":"rich","provider_name":"Acast","provider_url":"https://acast.com","height":250,"width":700,"html":"<iframe src=\"https://embed.acast.com/$/611d14fa9d5f470014bbc7b3/63ca80c5fc40ca0011347ecb?\" frameBorder=\"0\" width=\"700\" height=\"250\"></iframe>","title":"Is tokenisation of privately managed assets a dynamo, a diversion or a dead-end?","thumbnail_width":200,"thumbnail_height":200,"thumbnail_url":"https://open-images.acast.com/shows/611d14fa9d5f470014bbc7b3/1632309665646-60818a3436d73e6db6a24ce5a6bc0d88.jpeg?height=200","description":"<p>Privately managed assets have become the default choice for tokenisation enthusiasts. The reasoning behind their choice is hard to fault. The advertised benefits of tokenisation apply a fortiori to the asset class. Privately managed assets – especially hedge funds and real estate, but also equity issuers that might previously have used the private placement or crowd-funding markets to raise capital – account for a disproportionate share of token issues so far. But are the enthusiasts and the pioneering issuers missing the point of tokenisation?</p>","author_name":"Future of Finance"}