Why the slow, unglamorous parts of tokenisation matter most, and why TriParty turns down so many of the assets it is offered.
Rules written for digital assets are a useful starting point for these Shane Murphy Bahamas notes, because they point at the same question every tokenisation project has to answer first: what is really behind the token?
I write about The Bahamas as an outside observer. Neither I nor my companies operate there, and nothing here suggests otherwise. My home page lists the companies and roles I do hold. This piece is about TriParty Tokenisation, where I am a co-founder and partner, and about the three habits that matter most in our work: custody, independent reports and the willingness to say no.
Why regulators focus on what sits underneath
The Bahamas passed the Digital Assets and Registered Exchanges Act 2024, known as the DARE Act 2024. It updated the country’s earlier digital-asset law from 2020, and the Securities Commission of The Bahamas, the regulator for digital-asset businesses there, announced its enactment. The country has a long-established international financial services sector and has been working to position itself as a digital-assets and fintech hub.
I raise it as an example, not as a description of any regulatory status of ours. What I take from any serious digital-asset framework is a simple principle: a token is only as trustworthy as the arrangements behind it. That principle shapes every stage of how TriParty works.
Custody: ownership does not move
At TriParty, ownership of the asset does not move. The structure uses custody agreements.
That one choice answers a question many asset owners are nervous about. They are not handing their bonds, metals or project interests to us, or to anyone else, in exchange for a token. The asset is held under agreed custody terms, and the token is issued against it.
Custody also makes the structure easier to check. Before anything is issued, the custody arrangement has to be in place and documented, so the token never runs ahead of the paperwork. When a reader asks where the asset is and who holds it, there is a clear answer on paper, rather than a vague promise.
Shane Murphy Bahamas notes on independent reports
Before any work begins, we review the documents and the independent assay or inspection reports. I want to explain why the word “independent” carries so much weight.
An owner’s own description of an asset is a starting point, not evidence. An independent assay report on precious metals, or an inspection report on a vault-held commodity or a project interest, is evidence produced by someone with no stake in the result. If the owner’s account and the independent report disagree, the report wins.
Here is what we look for when the paperwork arrives:
- Documents that clearly identify the asset and who owns it.
- An independent assay or inspection report relevant to that asset.
- Consistency between the documents and the report, with no unexplained gaps.
- A clear picture of where the asset is held, so custody can be arranged.
- An asset that is substantial: bonds, medium-term notes, bank paper, precious metals, vault-held commodities, or interests in property and mining projects.
If any of these is missing or does not line up, the work does not start.
Why we say no so often
Many submissions are turned down. I say that openly because it is one of the most useful things a coordinator can tell an asset owner.
Saying no early protects everyone. It protects the owner from spending time and money on a project that will not hold up. It protects the trading counterparties who would otherwise be asked to take tokens on weak foundations. And it protects the structure itself, which only works if each token is clearly tied to a real, checked asset.
It also keeps the model honest. TriParty works on one asset, one smart contract and one token issuance, with no pooling. Without pooling, there is nowhere for a weak asset to hide behind stronger ones. Each one has to stand up by itself.
I learned a version of this lesson long before tokenisation, working in British telecoms at BT and at CAE, a boxxe Group company. Problems that are cheap to fix at the start become expensive once customers depend on them. A rejected submission costs a conversation. A weak token, once issued, costs far more, and not only to us.
What we never promise
Custody and inspection reduce uncertainty. They do not remove it. So the limits are stated just as plainly as the process:
- No guaranteed returns.
- No guaranteed liquidity. Tokens are placed with nominated trading counterparties under definitive agreements, and we have access to more than one desk, but placement is not a promise of a sale.
- The tokens are not stablecoins.
- The asset owner deals with one team throughout, which keeps the process clear, but clarity is not the same as a guaranteed outcome.
The same discipline runs through Global Secure, the app I founded, which is coming in 2027 and is not live; pre-registration is open at www.globalsecureapp.com. Its planned profit share is a share of net profit, not a guaranteed return. Longer pieces on both companies are in the articles section.
Questions people ask
Does TriParty operate in The Bahamas?
No. I write about The Bahamas as an outside observer. I use the DARE Act 2024 only as an example of why frameworks focus on what lies behind a token.
What happens if my inspection report is out of date or missing?
The work does not begin until the documents and an independent assay or inspection report have been reviewed. Many submissions are turned down at this stage.
Why not pool assets to spread the risk?
Because pooling hides the detail. One asset, one smart contract, one token issuance means every token can be traced back to one checked asset.
Those are my Shane Murphy Bahamas notes on the slow parts of tokenisation. Custody, independent reports and a willingness to say no are not exciting, but as Shane Ian Murphy I would rather be known for them than for promises nobody can keep.
*Shane Ian Murphy is the founder of Global Secure (www.globalsecureapp.com) and a co-founder and partner of TriParty Tokenisation (www.tripartytokenisation.com). Official site: shaneianmurphy.com*
shaneianmurphy.com | shanemurphy.co.uk | globalsecureapp.com | LinkedIn
Leave a Reply