In 2019, Simon Enwia described a proposed digital-share model tied to real estate. The promise centered on faster settlement, broader trading access, and fewer costly handoffs. He also drew a firm boundary around the idea: it was not a cryptocurrency or an initial coin offering, and the shares still had to operate inside a regulated real-estate structure.
The speed claim cannot be separated from the rules around the asset. A transfer is only useful when the participant, ownership interest, settlement condition, and legal record can be verified.
Faster settlement was a proposal to be tested
Simon Enwia said digitized shares could reduce the time between a transaction and settlement. He also described lower intermediary fees and less time spent completing diligence and contracts as intended benefits.
The company and technology were still being developed in 2019. Simon said the team had a roadmap and had completed some testing, while additional funding was expected to help finish the technology and prepare it for enterprise use. The proposed benefits therefore remained goals, not results from a completed system.
That distinction changes the question from whether a transfer can move faster to what must be verified before the transfer is allowed.
Compliance shapes the transaction
Simon Enwia discussed regulated exchanges, investor qualification, and the operating rules of a REIT. He summarized the company's position directly: “since day one, we've followed the path of compliance.”
For Simon, compliance was not a later feature. It determined who could participate, where the shares could be listed, and which checks had to occur. Those regulatory details belonged to his 2019 operating environment and are not current legal guidance.
A digital record does not remove every trusted role
Simon Enwia also rejected the idea that blockchain would immediately remove title companies. Legacy deeds and county records did not all exist in a digital form, and title work still protected a buyer when the ownership history was disputed.
Simon expected the role to change as records changed, but the need for verification remained. The more useful review is to name what each participant contributes. One participant may verify identity, another may carry regulatory responsibility, another may confirm title, and another may manage settlement.
Review the whole operating model
A prospective pilot can be reviewed as a chain of permissions, not only as a technology test. Lay out participant approval, ownership verification, and settlement. Then compare the proposed system with those responsibilities.
The technology can then be evaluated against a real process. Liquidity is not created by a digital label. It depends on a system that can establish who may participate, what they own, and which rules allow the transaction to move.
