The POP Workshop: What’s next for the Pool Onboarding Proposal?

Announcements
13

I wanted to circle back and summarize feedback from the POP Workshop a couple weeks back, as well as attach this video summarizing the hour we spent:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kt2LhqRHJo

I found it informative as we had a good mix of Issuers, Community members, and ambassadors.

The POP V1 I believe has been successful to the extent that it’s created a template by which the community can now improve on the original template, debate / discuss what V2 should look like, and finally bring the POP through governance and be voted on-chain as a process going forward that the community relies on for onboarding new RWAs through Centrifuge.

This workshop uncovered a couple of major points:

  • Better set expectations around capital funding, how capital flows into Pools, and what Issuers should include in their POP.
  • Create a simpler process, with far fewer asks to the Community, to ensure they can understand and engage with the POP in a meaningful way
  • Generate a higher level of conversation on the Forum where people can begin to engage with information about RWAs and share insights / knowledge
  • FAQs and documentation can still be improved and be more insightful for the general public and those unfamiliar with the Centrifuge brand / community

Here’s some more granular feedback and insights from folks that attended the Workshop.

Feedback on Question: What did we learn over the last 6 months through Version 1 of the POP.

Feedback

  • Not enough engagement
  • Criteria could be improved
    • We should be thinking about how we weight them
    • In order for a POP to pass the first stage, need to be more clear
  • Process - too many votes
    • Eliminate the number of polls
  • Hard to know if it’s a go or no-go on specific Pools

Feedback

  • Quite disappointed in the level of engagement; Not enough folks giving enough feedback; Good example: if it’s an asset class I don’t understand, then I don’t want to speak on it, I don’t understand it
  • Structure is incredibly easy to understand (of POPs), written standard is quite good

Feedback

  • Unclear on certain criteria what the POP was looking for
    • Origination fees, reasonable proposal to put here…POPs cannot finalize cash flow model because they couldn’t calculate NAV or cost of senior capital
  • Not a clear point of contact on the POP
    • Where does Q&A exist
    • POP Ambassador may be needed?
  • Tools & Utilities
    • Rate calculator for costs / benefits
    • Borrower’s perspective on what they’re trying to achieve

Feedback

  • Still unclear about process, a guide, with each step clearly drawn out of a simplified version for following the POP for Issuers
  • Community participation - high subject matter expertise - different asset classes, how would that work?

Outstanding Questions

  • How do we get the Community more engaged?
  • How do we help Issuers be better prepared for when they submit a POP?
  • How do we make the Forum THE place for RWAs discussion in DeFi?

Miscellaneous Feedback

  • Breaking down the barrier between institutional and retail is difficult, which seems to be the current setup - user friendly investment/yield product for individuals, supplied by institutional managers/originators.

  • To get large reliable capital investment in senior tranches (which is what originators need l when committing to relying on a capital source) you need institutional buyers/investors (of tranches)

  • I think that FAQ will be very useful for all. I noticed that the community and potential issuers/investors don’t understand some of the aspects like: Who could launch the pool? When should they do this or maybe they should contact already existing pools and provide assets in the pool? Min requirement, Fees, And etc…

  • Maybe it would be useful to have a community call where you take one company that went through POP 6 months ago and all other steps in launching a pool. and we wiil look what numbers they set in POP and what they achieve – then the numbers will become vivid and more understandable

  • We don’t need everyone to participate in the Forum. We need people to participate in snapshot voting. We want the community to have dialogue and vote, once subject matter experts have given their input.

  • As a recent POP submitter, having the opportunity for a Q&A with a previous successful issuer would be much welcomed, especially to help understanding best practices, lessons learnt etc

3 Likes