One of the ways that you can turn a traditional real estate company into more of a web3 company is talk about how you're going to tokenize the ownership of real assets. But what does that even mean and how would it work?

Here is one example that I recently discovered (but of course there are countless others and I'm not suggesting that you should use their product). Bricknest is a startup that is focused on buying vacation apartments in popular tourist destinations. They then split the ownership into 365 non-fungible tokens that live on the Solana blockchain.

Each token is intended to correspond to a day. And so if you own 1 token, you own 1/365 of the asset and you get 1 day. You can choose to either use it yourself on this day, or rent it out and get the rental income sent directly to your crypto wallet. If you own all 365 tokens, then it would be similar to you just owning 100% of the asset.

The obvious question is how is this different from, say, fractional ownership, which can be similarly found in high-demand vacation spots? And the dumb answer is that, well, tokens exist on a blockchain and fractional ownership shares do not. So I guess the real question is whether or not tokens will make this ownership model any different.

There is a long history of trying to democratize the ownership of real estate. In fact, this was the general idea behind REITs when they were created in the 1960s. So again, we are back to the question of whether tokenization will be any different from what we already have.

But I think that most people are asking this same question of crypto/web3 in general -- why does all of this matter? And a big part of the problem is that crypto is generally hard to explain. One of the best explanations that I have come across is this one here by Albert Wenger.

Simply put, most internet companies today can be thought of as large privately controlled databases. Instagram, for example, is a database of all of our photos (among other things). But because it's Instagram's database, they get to decide what can be done with it. And naturally they are going to do what it takes to maintain their economic moat.

Blockchains are similarly databases. And right now they're not particularly good databases. However, the key differences are that (1) they are public, (2) they are not controlled by a single entity, and (3) anyone can read and/or write to them. And so they directly attack the thing that gives many companies today their economic advantage.

Does this mean that tokenized real estate is the future? Does it make a difference that rental contracts can be programmed into the blockchain so that distributions are automatic? It still feels too early to tell. But I do think that most people are underestimating how disruptive a seemingly small change like this might be.

There are a number of home equity startups in the marketplace today.

A few years ago I wrote about an alternative product to HELOCs or home equity loans, called Point. And earlier this year, I wrote about a startup, called Landed, that is helping "essential professionals," such as teachers, with their down payments. They'll contribute up to 10% of the value of a home in exchange for a share in any future gains, or losses.

Today, another startup in the space -- Patch Homes -- announced a $5mm Series A round. From what I can tell, it appears to be similar to Point in that it involves the fractional sale of home equity. Though, to be clear, the model is distinct from the fractional homeownership that is popular in many high demand vacation destinations. Here's a bit more on how the product works (source):

The Patch model enables homeowners to “tap into” their home equity by selling 20–40% to Patch’s affiliate, Patch Capital, which shares in both the upside and downside. The homeowner remains in control of her or his home for the life of the relationship and exits via a sale or refinances in 7–10 years.

While this product is not for all homeowners, it provides a new and important financing option. The Fed estimates that home equity ownership in the US is $15 Trillion. It makes no sense that the only financing options are additional debt or a complete sale of the property. Patch gives homeowners the option to de-lever their personal balance sheet or otherwise raise cash. Clients have used Patch proceeds for numerous reasons, the most popular of which are to pay off debt, increase liquid savings and finance home improvements.

I am not surprised to see this gaining momentum. The biggest benefit is that it gives you partial liquidity (i.e. cash up to $250,000), without having to sell your property or take on additional debt service payments. It's equity, not debt. Fred Wilson, an investor in the company, calls it fractionalizing home equity.

Back in 2008, I toured the then new Mondrian Hotel Residences in Miami. At the time, the condo units were starting at around $700 per square foot. They came furnished (design by Marcel Wanders). And you had the option of putting it in the hotel pool so that you could earn revenue on it when you weren't using it. I can't remember what sort of ROI was being quoted at the time.

After reading this WSJ article today on fractional second home ownership, I decided to pull some listings in the Mondrian to see how values have fared over the last 11 years (even though the business models are different). Here is one: a 694 square foot 1 bedroom on the market for $295,000 (or about $425 psf). The HOA fee is $1,260 per month and, according to Zillow, the last recorded sale was on September 25, 2007. It sold for $630,400 (or about $908 psf).

Most people probably like the idea of owning a second home that makes money when they're not using it and that requires absolutely no work or effort. But frankly, I have yet to come across a highly successful condo-hotel project (where the units come and go from a hotel pool) and I have yet to see any data supporting fractional ownership (or private residence clubs) as a solid long-term investment.

If you disagree, feel free to prove me wrong in the comment section below.