> “If I am a founder, I have to wait until I sell my company to make some money,” says Adamovicz, explaining that the core of their innovation is the ability to make investment money much more tradable. “Our system is making this classically static, illiquid asset liquid. We make this money flow very fast.”

From the article you linked.

I take issue with that. Making it easy for founders to cash out before they sell the company is just going to make it easy for founders to exit on a bad investment while passing the loss off to whoever they can market the loss to. Founders need to stay financially connected to what the found and see it through to a proper sell or eat the cost.

A system like this will just create a ton of companies with "good" ideas where the founders then tokenize their companies, sell them off and then let them fail. Part of being a founder is having risk. If the risk is too much then maybe your idea is bad. If your idea is good, then the risk should not be a problem.

That all being said, still you could do this without blockchain. You could just as easy -- per your example -- reserve 5% of your company to be sold to individuals and not big investors or PEs. You could even still do Newfund without having a blockchain as well. So to me, using a blockchain is just a way to hype of a bad idea.