I watched a real estate deal in Ho Chi Minh City fall apart last month because three parties couldn't agree on how to split ownership of a $2M office building. Each wanted a different percentage, but the property's title transfer rules meant they either had to do 100% ownership transfers or nothing. By the time they figured out they could have just tokenized it into 1 million tokens and distributed them proportionally, the deal momentum was dead. This is tokenization's real superpower—not the blockchain hype, but solving the boring, structural problems that make deals unnecessarily complicated.
The Unglamorous Truth About Current Asset Ownership
Here's what nobody wants to admit: our current system for tracking who owns what is genuinely terrible. Land titles are physical documents locked in government offices. Real estate ownership takes 60-90 days to transfer. Stock ownership is mediated through brokers and clearing houses that add 2-3 days of settlement time. If you want to own 0.5% of a commercial property with nine other investors, you need lawyers, escrow agreements, and trust documents that cost $15K-$30K just to structure.
Tokenization essentially asks: what if we just... made ownership divisible and transferable like digital files?
A token is a unit representing ownership, value, or access rights. On blockchain, tokens are immutable records of who owns what. The elegance is that a single building could be represented as 10,000 tokens, with different owners holding different amounts. No lawyers. No escrow. Just cryptographic proof of ownership recorded on a distributed ledger.
The global tokenization market was valued at around $2.5 billion in 2023 and is projected to hit $10+ billion by 2028—not because of speculation, but because enterprises are genuinely solving real problems.
Why This Matters More Than You Think
The real breakthrough isn't that blockchain is decentralized or immutable. It's that tokenization fragments ownership into programmable units.
Consider Vietnamese real estate. According to CBRE, Vietnam's commercial property market saw $5.2 billion in transactions in 2023. Most deals involved single buyers or small consortiums. But what if middle-class investors could buy $5K worth of tokens representing 0.01% of a premium office building in District 1, receive quarterly rental income as dividend tokens, and sell their position in minutes if needed? That's not hypothetical—it's already happening in Singapore and Dubai. Vietnam's market hasn't moved there yet because of regulatory uncertainty, but the demand is obvious.
Share this post
Related Posts
Need technology consulting?
The Idflow team is always ready to support your digital transformation journey.
The same logic applies to fine art, intellectual property, and equipment leasing. A manufacturing business in Can Tho could tokenize their industrial machinery, sell 30% as tokens to investors, and use the capital for expansion without giving up complete ownership. The investors get predictable returns from machinery utilization. The business keeps operational control. Everyone wins in a way the current debt/equity binary doesn't allow.
The Actual Technical Challenges Nobody Discusses
Here's where the story gets honest: tokenization is not just a blockchain problem. It's an integration problem.
Oracle dependency: A tokenized building only works if the blockchain reliably knows how much rent it generates monthly. You need trusted data feeds—price feeds, income reports, legal status updates—flowing into smart contracts. This requires oracle infrastructure (like Chainlink, Band Protocol) that costs real money and introduces a single point of failure if the oracle is compromised.
Custody and regulatory mess: If you own tokens representing a physical asset, who actually holds the underlying asset? In most cases, a qualified custodian—a bank or licensed firm—still physically controls the property. Your token is a claim on their custody. This adds layers of trust and regulatory burden that blockchain doesn't solve.
Liquidity that doesn't exist: Tokenizing an asset is one thing. Having an actual market where your tokens trade is another. Most tokenized assets suffer from terrible liquidity. You might own tokens worth $500K, but the bid-ask spread is 15% and finding a buyer takes weeks. This is why the most successful tokenized assets so far have been either extremely divisible (fractional ETFs, yield-bearing tokens) or have massive underlying ecosystems (Uniswap tokens, Aave).
I've seen three tokenization projects collapse because the teams assumed "put it on blockchain" automatically meant "investors will trade it." It doesn't. You need market makers, secondary markets, and probably regulatory clarity in your jurisdiction.
Where Tokenization Actually Works Today
The wins aren't in the sexy areas. They're in boring infrastructure:
Commodity-backed tokens: Tokenized gold (Paxos, Tether Gold) works because gold is fungible, standardized, and has deep global markets. The token adds instant settlement and programmability.
Yield-bearing protocols: Tokens that represent claims on cash flows (Curve, Compound) work because the underlying contracts are transparent and automated. Staking rewards, lending yields—these are native to blockchain.
Supply chain tokenization: Tracking goods through global supply chains using tokens tied to IoT sensors and smart contracts reduces fraud. This is especially valuable in Vietnam for seafood and agricultural exports where provenance matters for premium markets.
Carbon credits: Even carbon offsets, traditionally messy and prone to double-counting, become more transparent and tradeable through tokenization.
The Vietnam Opportunity (And Why It's Complicated)
Vietnam's regulatory framework hasn't explicitly embraced tokenization yet. The State Bank has been cautious about cryptocurrencies generally. But there's a backdoor opportunity: use cases that don't touch the currency question.
Vietnamese exporters lose roughly 3-5% of margins to financing friction in international trade. Blockchain-based supply chain tokens that represent goods in transit—showing authentic documentation, payment terms, and shipment status—could legitimately save $500M+ annually across the sector. Companies like Viettel and major trading houses have the infrastructure to implement this without needing central bank blessing.
Real estate tokenization, once regulators clarify (expected within 2-3 years), could unlock billions in trapped capital. You'd see retirement-age property owners tokenizing buildings, receiving steady token-based income while younger investors gain exposure to real estate.
Practical Reality
Tokenization is not a get-rich-quick scheme. It's infrastructure for ownership that's locked in slow, expensive systems. The winners will be boring: companies that tokenize trade finance, manufacturers that tokenize equipment, pension funds that tokenize real estate.
We're in the phase where most tokenization projects are still proofs-of-concept. The ones that survive will be embedded so deeply into business processes that nobody will even call them "blockchain" anymore.
At Idflow Technology, we're working with businesses to understand where tokenization actually solves problems versus where it's just technological theater. The real question isn't "should we tokenize?" but "what ownership or cash flow problem would tokenization actually fix that nothing else can?"
