>This type of investing has long been done on paper, but the blockchain makes it much more liquid.
Being digital makes it much more liquid. There's literally nothing about fractional real estate ownership that needs distributed consensus.
>Another advantage is that it doesn't matter if the facilitator goes out of business, because all the ownership records are on a public blockchain instead of their secret central database.
You could solve that problem by only working with companies that have publicly readable centralized databases? Again no need for distributed consensus.
I’m a crypto fence sitter, and I mostly think these things are scams.
But I think that the distributed-public-database thing has real value. Companies come and companies go, and opening up data to the scrutiny of daylight is sorta a prisoner’s dilemma problem much of the time. Building a long-lived business on top of a by-design-public data store seems like a really cool thing.
Sure, any company could decide to host a Postgres instance on AWS with world-readable creds. But does that happen? And what happens when the company goes under? Who keeps paying the AWS bills?
Being digital makes it much more liquid. There's literally nothing about fractional real estate ownership that needs distributed consensus.
>Another advantage is that it doesn't matter if the facilitator goes out of business, because all the ownership records are on a public blockchain instead of their secret central database.
You could solve that problem by only working with companies that have publicly readable centralized databases? Again no need for distributed consensus.