A couple of add ons here, specific to the POP Process and the Credit Group:
As Centrifuge’s brand, platform, and size continues to grow – more diligence needs to be given to the types of credit that is being financed through the protocol. Even for highly qualified counterparties, if they’re financing assets that perhaps have a negative view in the broader press, could have a negative impact on the brand of Centrifuge.
I greatly support the initiative to focus the POP Process’ impact on Open Pools – or those Pools that are open to investors, be they retail or otherwise. This begins to address the problem of the Centrifuge brand vs the brand of Individual Issuers. Often times, those two get co-mingled (whether rightly or wrongly), and that can lead to unforeseen impacts on Centrifuge, the community, and the mission we’re all rallying behind.
For the POP itself, asking the community of CFG token holders, to review, diligence, and asses the quality of potential Pools coming to the protocol, without some base level understanding, would be unfair. The Centrifuge Community is not made of experts in underwriting, credit assessment, and understanding the nature of the debt markets. Undoubtedly, some are, but not all.
It’s essential to use the Credit Group, a nascent yet growing group of individuals, that exist to serve the community’s needs – specifically to review and report on potential Open Pools as they approach the protocol to launch. Although not perfect or complete by any means, even the existence of such a group, and creating this hurdle and potential friction, serves as a means to filter and ironically attract Pools and Issuers that will be of a quality the Community could be excited about.
For the Credit Group Members themselves, I’ve seen great demand from traditional credit folks interested in this group and fulfilling the role of reviewing and reporting on POPs. It resonates. Undoubtedly, the traditional credit person is not into the very public nature of DAOs, there are concerns around public association and compliance/confidentially with current employers, and the economics of potentially being compensates to provide analysis, reporting, and reviews of potential Pools and Issuers.
A final thought – I think the Credit Group is still very young – we haven’t yet seen what it can become. The individuals within the Credit Group are quite experienced, and their networks are large into the traditional circles. Today, that group focuses on the review and report of POPs, which is the best first step and mission critical piece of Open Pools. However, the Credit Group shouldn’t be limited to this. There’s many other functions this group could begin to expand into and offer over time including ongoing monitoring, broader credit/debt market analysis (outside of Centrifuge), cap intros and fundraising, etc…