Shane Ian Murphy on Triparty Tokenisation: Transferability Does Not Establish Liquidity

One of the distinctions I want to keep clear in conversations about tokenisation is the difference between transferring a record and finding someone willing to buy the associated interest. A digital instrument may be technically movable while a sale remains slow, restricted or unavailable. As cofounder of Triparty Tokenisation, I think that distinction belongs near the beginning of the explanation. Participants should not have to discover the limits of a market only when they want to leave it.

Transferability concerns the conditions under which an instrument can pass from one holder to another. Liquidity concerns the practical ability to transact, including the availability of counterparties and the terms they are willing to accept. Those questions overlap, but neither answers the other. An efficient transfer process does not create demand. A large stated asset value does not establish a sale price. A digital representation can improve administration without changing the commercial realities that determine whether a buyer appears.

My proposed approach is to describe each dependency separately. Does a transfer require consent? Must the next holder meet eligibility conditions? Is there an identified place where potential buyers and sellers can meet? Who, if anyone, has responsibility for administering that process? What happens when there is no suitable counterparty? The answers would depend on the particular arrangement. I would rather make an unknown explicit than let a familiar word such as marketplace imply an active market that has not been demonstrated.

Price deserves similar discipline. An estimate of the underlying asset’s value, a previous transaction price and a current executable offer are different pieces of information. Presenting them without context can encourage a reader to treat them as substitutes. I would want a valuation statement to explain what it represents and when it was produced. If there is no current offer to buy, the presentation should not create the impression that the stated figure is a price available to a holder today.

The size of a holding can also affect the experience of selling it. A smaller unit may reduce the amount a buyer needs to commit, but it does not automatically resolve eligibility, information or demand constraints. Fractional representation is therefore something I would discuss as a structural possibility, with its own costs and limitations. It should not be used as a shortcut to claims about access or ease of exit. The actual design and the circumstances of participants still matter.

Exit routes need plain descriptions. A contractual redemption mechanism, a sale to another participant and a distribution following disposal of an underlying asset are distinct possibilities. Each depends on its own conditions. I would want communications to avoid treating them as one general promise that a holder can always get money back. If a route depends on timing, available funds, approvals or an external event, those dependencies belong in the explanation alongside the route itself, where the reader can assess them.

These are principles I am putting forward from within Triparty Tokenisation, not independent conclusions about the performance of any product. I am not claiming that we have created a liquid market or that technology can guarantee an exit. What interests me is how a more precise explanation can improve decisions before participation. When people understand the difference between a technical feature and a commercial outcome, they can ask better questions and judge a proposal against their own needs more realistically. A candid account of the available evidence also gives a prospective participant a better basis for seeking further advice.

I believe tokenisation discussions become more useful when we reduce the distance between language and evidence. If a system makes transfers easier to administer, explain that benefit clearly. If a market has limitations, describe them with equal care. That balance is the approach I want to encourage as a founder. It gives the technology credit for what it can support while keeping the holder’s practical experience in view. Company information: https://www.tripartytokenisation.com/ . My personal background and additional writing: https://shanemurphy.co.uk/ .