[RFC] CP172 Should Protect All CFG Holders — Including Those Holding Through Exchanges (A Dual-Track Proposal) Dear Centrifuge Community and Foundation Team

​If the true objective of CP172 is to maximize long-term CFG value and establish Centrifuge as the leading institutional RWA financial infrastructure, one critical issue must be addressed: the representation and protection of all CFG holders.

​1. The Off-Chain Governance Blindspot: Exchange Holders

A significant portion of retail investors hold CFG on centralized exchanges (CEXs). These holders bear identical economic risks and share a direct stake in Centrifuge’s long-term success. However, due to technical and custodial limitations, they are structurally excluded from Snapshot voting.

​Restoring the DAO or conducting Snapshot votes alone does not fully represent the broader CFG community. Addressing this is not an opposition to CP172’s direction, but a necessary step to ensure its legitimate success.

​2. A Pragmatic Solution: The Dual-Track Framework

Attracting institutional capital and developing an equity structure is a logical step for growth. However, this should not come at the expense of existing CFG token utility and market liquidity. We strongly propose evaluating a Dual-Track Structure:

​Track 1 — Equity (For Institutional / Accredited Holders): Provide an voluntary option for eligible CFG holders to convert tokens to equity under transparent, pre-disclosed terms.

​Track 2 — CFG Token (For Liquid / Retail Holders): Preserve the token’s economic value, utility, and liquidity within the Centrifuge ecosystem for those who choose not to convert.

​Institutional capital + Equity and CFG token + Liquidity do not need to be a zero-sum trade-off. They can and should operate as complementary dual engines.

​3. Actionable Steps for Fair Governance

To bridge the gap for exchange holders and protect community trust, future structural transitions should incorporate:

​Exchange Cooperation: Explore preliminary sentiment polls or advisory votes in partnership with major exchanges.

​Community-Wide Surveys: Conduct non-binding, off-chain sentiment checks targeting global retail holders.

​Full Disclosure: Clearly publish Cap Table disclosures, Conversion Ratios, and Lock-up conditions prior to final execution windows.

​Conclusion

CP172 must not leave holders asking: “The company’s future looks bright, but what happens to my token?”

​Centrifuge can deliver a powerful message to the market:

​"Centrifuge is building institutional-grade equity infrastructure WITHOUT abandoning the CFG token and its holders."

​Give holders a choice. Preserve the token. Build the equity structure. Let both tracks grow together.

4 Likes

For full transparency, I’ve been following CFG for some time, and the move toward corporatization is what initially sparked my interest.

At the same time, I wouldn’t want Centrifuge to move entirely away from the crypto-native model that helped it reach this point, particularly its emphasis on decentralization and governance. Projects such as Uniswap and Hyperliquid have explored different ways for token holders to benefit from the economic activity generated by their ecosystems, so I believe it is still worth considering whether Centrifuge could preserve some form of value accrual or utility for CFG holders alongside the equity structure.

That said, I’m not technical enough to fully understand the legal, regulatory, or structural challenges involved in maintaining both models, so I’m actively researching the possible answers.

Ultimately, I think clarity about what this transition means for global retail CFG holders is essential, and I hope the Foundation takes that into consideration as the process develops.

The train has left the station, if you want to have input you’ll have to buy a few million CFG, convert and hope you get voting rights.