►
Description
Chris Cameron, the proposed facilitator of the Maker Portfolio Core Unit, discusses his proposal “to build a portfolio of publicly traded, real-world financial assets that the Maker Protocol can be exposed to.”
Maker Portfolio Core Unit Proposal:
Core Unit Proposal: https://forum.makerdao.com/t/mip39c2-sp16-adding-maker-portfolio-core-unit-mpcu-001/8996
Budget: https://forum.makerdao.com/t/mip40c3-sp15-modify-maker-portfolio-core-unit-budget/8998
Facilitator Onboarding: https://forum.makerdao.com/t/mip41c4-sp13-facilitator-onboarding-maker-portfolio-core-unit/8997
MakerDAO:
Chat - Chat.Makerdao.com
Forum - Forum.MakerDAO.com
Chris Cameron:
Forum - https://forum.makerdao.com/u/paperimperium/summary
Chat - @PaperImperium
Core Unit Proposal - https://forum.makerdao.com/t/mip39c2-sp16-adding-maker-portfolio-core-unit-mpcu-001/8996
Jerry Goldfarb:
LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/jerry-g-188a8a210/
Twitter - @JellyProducer
Forum - https://forum.makerdao.com/u/jerryag/summary
Chat - @Jerry.G
*Disclaimer: This update is assembled by the MakerDAO community. This does and should not serve as financial advice or an inducement to vote in any specific way. This update is purely for informative and for communications purposes exclusively.*
A
Hello,
everyone
thank
you
for
joining
us
for
the
third
ama
today
we
are
joined
by
chris
cameron,
also
known
as
paper
imperium
on
the
forums
and
in
chat,
and
we
are
discussing
the
proposal
chris
posted
on
the
forum
for
the
maker
portfolio
core
unit
and
I'll.
Let
chris
dive
into
that
a
little
bit
before
we
get
into
the
questions.
A
B
So
this
portfolio
maker
portfolio
core
unit
is
being
proposed
in
order
to
administer
the
and
and
create
the
legal
entities
of
the
legal
framework
needed
for
for
maker
to
to
gain
ex
direct
exposure
to
securities,
but
without
an
intermediary.
That
is
a
borrower
who
has
their
own
incentives
and
profit
motives.
B
So
this
is
a
fairly
simple
structure
and
is
probably
not
appropriate
for
maker
to
finance
to
a
third
party,
but
hopefully
can
be
made
into
something:
that's
very
mechanical
and
allows
maker
to
not
only
invest
on
its
own
behalf,
but
also,
at
the
same
time,
give
maker
a
way
to
start
building
real
world
constituencies
by
reaching
more
into
the
real
world.
So
part
of
the
structure
is
that
this
would
be
these.
B
B
There's
this
tension
between
the
size
that,
where
it's
profitable
and
then
the
size
where
it
could
be
materially
risky
to
the
maker
protocol
as
a
whole.
So
how
do
we
get
around
this?
So
the
the
key
way
for
maker
to
invest
in
its
own
behalf
is
to
create
a
charitable
trust
in
the
united
states
probably
domiciled
in
the
state
of
north
dakota.
They
have
very
robust
charitable
trust
laws,
but
there
are
some
other
alternatives.
Should
we
need
to
need
to
explore
others,
but
the
structure
is
fairly
simple.
B
So
the
key
features
of
this
are
that
one
it
is
a
legal
entity,
so
it
can
hold
property
such
as
a
treasury
note
or
a
bond
for
apple
or
johnson,
johnson
or
whatever,
whatever
the
asset
is,
it
can
actually
hold
it.
That
means
that
it
can
engage
in
business
with
financial
custodians
like
vanguard,
fidelity
or
other
brokerages.
B
The
second
key
feature
is
that
it
is
a
tax-exempt
entity.
So
one
of
the
issues
that
is
a
bit
of
a
gray
area
in
in
in
u.s
tax
law
is
is
how
to
treat
crypto.
Crypto
is
currently
classified
as
property.
So
what
happens
when
a
borrower
or
a
trust
permissionlessly
uses
a
maker
vault
while
they
are
rubbing
their
hands
together
and
generating
dye,
which
they
have
a
cost
basis
of
zero
because
they
paid
zero
dollars
for
it?
They
sell
it
on
the
open
market
for
a
dollar.
B
B
Now
a
nimcrut
is
a
vehicle,
that's
typically
used
by
wealthy
individuals
in
the
u.s
that
want
to
donate
an
asset,
perhaps
a
highly
appreciated
asset
that
they
don't
want
to
sell
and
realize
gains
on,
but
still
want
income
from
from
that
from
that
highly
realized
dollar
value
of
that
asset,
so,
typically
a
wealthy
individual
would
maybe
they
have
stock
that
appreciated
five
or
six
times
over.
They
put
it
into
the
trust.
B
The
trust
sells
it
by
some
income
generating
asset
and
the
wealthy
individual
gets
the
income
and,
at
the
end
of
the
life
of
the
trust,
the
the
asset
goes
to
the
charity.
That's
why
it's
tax-exempt,
because
any
remaining
assets
at
the
end
of
the
trust's
life
are
donated
to
a
charity.
Now,
in
maker's
case,
we
can't
really
be
a
beneficiary
of
that
income
stream.
So
we
had
so.
The
next
step
was
to
figure
out.
How
can
the
trust
actually
pay
maker
a
stability
fee?
B
And
the
answer
is
through
our
normal
vaults
right,
because
maker
cannot
be
named
as
a
beneficiary.
In
this
case,
the
trust
would
have
some
small
amount
of
profits
that
would
be
orphaned
inside
of
it,
so
those
will
also
be
donated
to
charity.
Under
this,
the
the
envisioned
model,
though,
that
is
not
strictly
necessary
from
a
legal
standpoint.
It's
just.
B
Why
distribute
it
to
some
taxable
entity?
That's
not
us,
so
might
as
well
spread
the
wealth
right.
So
in
this
case
the
charity
would
get
some
amount
of
interest
rate
spread.
Perhaps
you
we
invest.
These
are
just
making
up
hypothetical
numbers
and
have
the
the
trust
buy.
A
hundred
million
dollars
of
ten
year
treasury
bills,
which
pay
let's
say
one
and
a
half
percent
so
maker,
could
finance
the
the
trust's
purchase
at
let's
say
1.1
percent.
B
The
trust
then
has
point
four
percent
off
of
the
off
of
the
investment
that
they
can
use
to
both
pay
for
the
trustees,
expenses
and
its
operational
expenses,
and
then
any
remainder
is
distributed
to
the
charity.
That
we
name
now.
Part
of
the
other
appeal
of
this
setup
is
that
a
trust
is
easy
to
tightly
bind
to
our
will,
so
it
gives
us
an
effect
maker.
B
The
gets
the
ability
to
create
a
customer
that
it
sets
the
rules
for
and
in
this,
and
these
are
envisioned,
be
very
transactional,
so
one
purchase
of
securities
would
be
one
trust,
and
if
the
next
month
we
want
to
buy
more
treasuries
or
more
bonds
or
more
whatever,
we
create
a
new
trust
so
that
each
one
is
siloed
from
the
other.
It
also
makes
it
easy
and
unambiguous
what
kind
of
operations
the
trust
is
authorized.
B
The
trustee
is
authorized
to
do
in
this
case,
one
set
of
borrowing
from
maker,
one
set
of
maturity
or
one
set
of
purchases
and
then
hold
those
securities
to
maturity
and
just
split
up
the
interest
payments
as
as
dictated
by
by
the
terms
and
so
writing
checks
is,
would
be
in
and
filing
a
tax
return.
So,
even
though
these
are
tax
exempt,
they
do
still
need
to
file
a
tax
return.
This
is
not
an
onerous
expense.
Most
trustee
companies
will
do
so
for
around
twelve
hundred
dollars.
B
So
the
limitations
are
that
these
trusts
can
only
have
a
maximum
lifespan
of
20
years,
so
there
will
be
no
purchasing
30-year
treasuries
or
other
extremely
long-dated
assets
unless
we
were
willing
to
bear
the
interest
rate
risk
of
having
to
liquidate
it
before
maturity,
that's
possible,
but
not
not.
What
I
would
advise
the
next
limitation
is
that
this
is
a
fairly
fairly
rigid
structure.
It's
meant
to
be
simple
to
be
transparent,
so
it
does
not
require
oracles.
B
It
does
not
require
intensive
monitoring
to
make
sure
that
the
borrower
is
complying
with
covenants,
because
it's
it's
very
simple.
They
just
hold
the
securities
for
the
next
x
number
of
years,
but
that
also
means
it's
probably
not
appropriate
for
financing
for
a
trust
to
then
finance
other
projects
that
we
typically
are
already
exploring
through
the
real
world
finance
unit.
So.
C
B
B
The
very
fact
that
we
were
able
to
let
to
get
the
fed
to
come
speak
with
us
earlier
this
week
shows
that
we
are
on
the
radar
of
of
the
centralized
financial
power
that
are
in
the
world.
Some
of
them
would
probably
be
happy
to
work
with
us,
but
we
should
never
leave
ourselves
open
to
politically
motivated
appointees
or
politicians
using
regulation
as
as
a
bludgeon
against
us.
B
So
if
we
are
financing
government
and
distributing
much
of
that
gain
to
real
world
charities
that
we
can
choose
and
we
can
choose
a
different
one
for
every
trust
and
spread
the
wealth
far
and
wide
regular,
regular
financing
of
real
world
needs
that
people
can
point
to
not
speculative
real
estate.
Not
you
know,
projects
that
may
have
political
opponents
either
local
or
federal
level.
Even
something
as
simple
as
solar
power
can
draw
can
draw
criticism
from
certain
parties.
B
This
the
structure
is
meant
to
mint
fresh
dye,
not
use
the
peg
stability
module
usdc,
though
that's
a
possibility,
but
that's
beyond
the
purview
of
this.
This
proposed
unit,
this
proposed
unit,
is
part,
provide
ballast
and
and
higher
qual,
an
ocean
of
high
quality
collateral
to
maker's
balance
sheet.
It's
part
to
provide
us
with
social
outreach
to
help
us
meet
our
mission
of
of
financing,
underserved
communities
and
partly
to
provide
some
level
of
lobbying
power
for
maker.
A
B
Yes,
so
I've
spoken
to
the
head
of
risk
because
I
feel
to
ask
if
they
would
be
willing
to
provide
their
standard
risk
assessments
for
any
collateral
that
was
recommended
by
this
core
unit.
I
should
stress
that
this
core
unit
would
handle
no
money
beyond
its
operating
expenses
and
the
legal
expenses
to
set
up
each
trust,
so
no,
no
millions
or
even
billions
would
be
flowing
through
this
core
unit.
B
We
can
explore
higher
yielding
instruments,
but
I
would
stress
that
we
want
to
hold
things
that
really
have
close
to
no
chance
of
default
and
we
are
already
tied
at
the
hip
to
the
us
dollar.
So
treasuries
make
a
logical
starting
point.
This
is
supposed
to
be
phase
one
of
a
crawl
walk
run.
We
will
we
can
iterate
upon
the
process
afterwards,
but
we
want
something
simple,
something
that
minimizes
the
risks
and
it's
hard
to
go
wrong.
B
So
at
the
moment
to
control
the
peg.
The
psm,
which
is
a
wonderful
real-time
tool
for
for
for
fine-tuning
where
dye's
dollar
peg
stands,
has
accumulated
more
than
3
billion
dollars
in
usdc.
At
the
moment,
if
we
could
make
that
1
billion,
but
with
2
billion
in
treasuries
that
seems
like
it
removed,
it
removes
risk
because
those
usdc
are
ultimately
backed
by
fiat
anyway.
B
C
Understand
why
treasuries
are
a
relatively
safe
investment,
but
when
you
talk
about
avoiding
securities
that
are
politically
contentious
when
you
look
outside
of
like
u.s
treasuries,
how
do
you
think
what's
the
strategy
for
it
seems
like
investments
are
kind
of
inherently
political
to
a
certain
degree?
So
how
do
you?
C
B
Yeah,
so
the
the
universe
of
investable
assets
is
probably
fairly
small
in
terms
of
number
of
assets
simply
because
of
the
high
degree
of
safety
that
we
want
to
have.
Unless
we
decide
we
want
more
risk,
I
don't
advise
it.
I
think
we
have
other
levers.
We
can
pull
for
higher
return.
This
is
meant
to
be
positive
return,
but
one
of
the
main
functions
is
to
have
maker
interacting
with
the
real
world
in
ways
that
are
regular
financing,
businesses
and
governments
and
charities
that
people
are
familiar
with
that
they
can
see
the
impact.
B
So
as
far
as
specific
investments
beyond
treasuries,
I
suspect
we
would
next
look
at
federal
agency
debt
and
and
triple
a
or
near
triple
a
great
bonds.
Those
would
be
things
like
apple
and
johnson
and
johnson
there's
really
not
many
to
choose
from,
but
the
the
good
news
is
that
the
the
depth
of
these
markets
is
vast.
B
So
should
we
choose
to
do
so
as
either
a
means
of
increasing
income,
increasing
charitable
contributions,
relieving
pressure
on
the
psm?
We
have
deep
markets
that
we
can
pretty
much
take
as
much
as
we
want.
I've
set
the
aspirational
goal
for
this
for
this
unit
to
help
maker
on
board
five
percent
of
the
treasury
market
within
five
years.
That
is
an
aggressive
goal.
It
amounts
to
about
a
run
rate
of
30
billion
dollars
a
month
in
treasury
purchases.
B
To
put
that
in
perspective,
the
federal
reserve
currently
is
propping
up
treasuries
to
the
tune
of
80
billion
a
month,
so
we'd
be
doing
about
40
percent
of
of
what
the
federal
reserve
does
now.
If
we
should,
we
decide
that
maker
wants
to
try
to
play
the
decentralized
central
bank
game,
then.
Obviously
this
is
a
tool
we
can
use.
B
Our
expenses,
our
fixed
expenses
for
employees
and
other
operating
expenses,
is
only
growing
and
our
we've
already
seen
a
swing
in
our
profits
of
our
of
our
revenues
from
six
dollars.
A
second
to
two
in
the
last
two
months.
Crypto
is
volatile,
and
this
can
be
a
way
to
to
smooth
out
some
of
that
volatility,
and
it
will
also
mean
that
real
world
finance
is
able
to
perhaps
with
a
more
freehand
deal
with
individual
business
borrowers
that
are
coming
to
us.
B
So
that's
the
way
I
envision
it,
it's
not
we.
If
we,
if
that
becomes
a
sticking
point,
I
suspect
there
are
at
least
for
treasuries.
I
suspect
there
are
ways
that
we
can
arrange
for
the
trust
to
get
short-term
financing.
You
know
for
the
week
or
whatever
it
takes
to
purchase
the
treasuries.
Then
then
meant
the
diet
against
the
treasury
is
already
held
by
the
trust
that
would,
of
course,
you
know,
provide
a
little
more
drag
in
the
cost
structure,
whether
that
be
prohibitive.
B
B
B
B
In
fact,
it
makes
maker
ideal
to
ins
to
become
part
of
the
the
beating
heart
of
the
financial,
the
world
financial
system.
There
is
no
market
deeper
than
u.s
treasuries
and
for
us
to
be
able
to
be
involved
in
it
as
a
way
to
finance
charitable
giving
and
to
steady
our
own
balance
sheet.
At
the
same
time,
it
should
also
steady
world
markets
and
by
by
being
able
to
have
a
a
steady
hand
that
is
able
to
buy
a
a
near
buyer
of
last
resort.
B
D
B
B
The
nem
crut
is
able
to
pass
know
your
customer
anti-money
laundering
hurdles
because
and
and
sign
contracts
and
pursue
its
own
legal
rights.
You
know:
should
some
other
core
unit
decide
to
park
more
risky
assets
that
might
require
a
legal
recourse.
This
may
be
is
a
starting
point
for
them
to
work
from
and
build
out
to
suit
their
own
needs.
So
the
idea
is
that
it's
it's
these.
These
will
be
designed
to
be
very
mechanical.
You
know,
like
I
say,
for
this
core
unit.
B
It
may
or
may
not
be
suitable
for
other
uses,
and
then
the
nem
crud
owns
the
asset
we
want
and
and
loan
and
we
loan
to
them.
So
it's
almost
the
inverse
of
an
asset
originator
who
has
an
asset
they
want
to
borrow
against
and
they
go.
They
create
an
spv,
a
special
purpose
vehicle,
and
that
goes
and
looks
for
financing.
We
have
the
financing
and
we're
looking
for
a
trustworthy
partner
that
can
can
we
can
have
a
long-term
business
low-maintenance
business
relationship
with
that.
D
B
Yeah,
so
the
part
of
the
reason
of
choosing
treasuries
is
because
it's
the
safest
collateral
that
I
could
imagine
and
it
also
the
risks
associated
with
holding
them
are
ones
we
already
asse.
We
already
hold
through
being
pegged
to
the
us
dollar.
If
the
united
states
treasury
defaults,
then
yeah
die
is
not
going
to
do
well
anyway.
B
Absolutely
so
I
would
imagine
doing
a
test
run
of
this
with
you
know
three:
four
million
being
the
the
the
number,
because
we
want
to
have
it
be
a
number
that's
high
enough
that
covers
the
fixed
costs
of
paying
the
truck
paying,
because
the
nem
crud
will
pay
the
corporate
trustee.
Who
doesn't
have
much
to
do
except
you
know,
write
checks
and
and
file
the
tax
return,
but
there
are
some
fixed
costs
involved,
so
it
does
have
to
clear
you
know,
probably
ten
thousand
dollars
a
year
in
profits.
B
D
Side
note,
I
I
think
we
have
to
if
this
ever
passes.
I
think
we
have
to
limit
ourselves
to
to
t
bills
or
treasury
bonds
yeah.
I
I
used
to
work
for
a
triple
a
rated
or
two
triple
a
rated
companies
and
when
I
they
they
both
lost
their
ratings.
The
first
was
abb
and
the
second
was
ge
and
they
had
just
you
know.
A
couple
of
year
passes.
They
one
had
a
disastrous
acquisition
and
the
other
one
was
practically
fraudulent.
B
C
To
to
that
point
I
mean
the
investments
that
you
talked
about,
focusing
on
makes
sense
from
an
investment
standpoint.
But
thinking
about
that
you
know
garnering
goodwill
with
different
types
of
regulators.
Does
it
make
sense
to
apply
the
same
strategy
of
investing
in
treasuries
and
like
other
country
into
other
countries
or
no
or
possibly.
B
So
I
would
yeah
because
the
exchange
rate
risk
fluctuations
over
many
years
could
swamp
any
investment
returns,
so
it
would
have
to
be
dollar-denominated
debt.
It
would
also
be
have
to
be
a
government
that
we
really
felt
strongly
was
going
to
be
a
high-quality
borrower,
we're
kind
of
in
bed
with
treasury
anyway,
so
it
makes
sense
there.
We
would
have
to
do
it's
harder
to
do
due
diligence
on
governments.
B
We
would
do
that
with
this
core
unit,
but
I
feel
very
strongly
that
a
third
party
that
is
not
the
one
proposing
given
collateral
do
a
risk
assessment,
which
is
why
I
reached
out
to
risk
because
there
there
has
to
be
an
objective
person,
not
just
the
an
objective
third-party
assessment
from
within
the
dow
as
well.
We
can't
be
doing
our
own
risk
assessments
for
things
that
we're
proposing
it's.
B
A
B
Yeah
so
there's
multiple
ways:
we
could
probably
go
about
this,
and
so
it
is
flexible.
The
way
we
currently
do
real
world
assets
is
probably
a
good
starting
point
where
a
custom
token
is
created
to
plop
into
the
vault
on
behalf
of
the
borrower.
In
this
case,
the
borrower
is
someone
that
we
created
and
we
very
narrowly
empowered
to
to
perform
certain
actions,
so
it
should
be
fairly
straightforward.
B
The
whole
point
is
to
create
a
borrower,
create
a
a
customer
that
that
has
to
do
things
the
way
we
want
them
to
and
without
a
profit
incentive
to
squeeze
us
once
they
have
the
money.
That's
not
to
say
that
you
should
never
we.
We
should
never
lend
to
profit-seeking
borrowers,
but
this
just
makes
it
removes
a
layer
of
risk.
B
A
B
Yeah,
so
we're
still
working
still
working
for
the
details,
so
I
don't
want
to
give
a
specific
answer
because
it
would
not
be
as
thoughtful
it
needs
to
be.
However,
this
is
a
smaller
hurdle
to
overcome.
I
think
treasuries
in
particular,
the
stream
of
payments
should
be
uninterrupted
by
anything
that
happens
inside
the
crypto
universe.
Also,
unlike
privately
issued
securities
like
we
currently
deal
with
treasuries,
do
not
require
any
accredited
investor
status
to
to
own.
B
So
I
suspect
we
could
find
a
find
or
build
a
keeper
ecosystem
for
this,
particularly
if
we're
making
monthly
purchases
and
perhaps
as
a
way
to
shrink,
die
supply.
We
want
to
liquidate
as
well,
so
I
so
I
don't
have
a
detailed
answer
yet,
but
I
think
that
it
is
probably
not
the
hardest
thing
for
us
to
solve,
because
the
money
should
be
there
and
anyone
can
take
it.
Anyone
can
bid
on
it.
A
B
So
that
would
have
to
be
looked
at
on
a
case-by-case
basis,
because
we're
no
matter
how
big
we
get
we're
still
market
we're
still
price
takers
in
the
market
for
yield,
so
higher
yield
gives
you
a
little
bit
more
safety.
So
I
that's
a
question
that
would
have
to
be
for
later.
This
is,
as
I
say,
at
the
crawl
stage
of
the
crawl
run.
Walk.
I
don't
want
us
to
get
fancy
or
get
out
over
our
skis.
This
is
this
is
meant
to
be
very
conservative.
B
So
great
question,
so
for
the
things
we
had
already
purchased,
they
would
have
no
effect
on
the
payment
schedule
because
we
purchased
them
we're
holding
to
to
maturity.
That
said,
if
we
purchased
and
rates
went
down,
that
would
increase
the
price
of
the
treasuries
we
held
or
that
the
trust
held
as
collateral
and
could
be
sold
for
a
realized
profit.
Obviously
we
would
then,
on
an
ongoing
basis,
have
to
find
some
other
way
to
get
yield
or
just
wait
out.
B
B
Yeah,
so
so
not
quite,
I
guess
so
in
some
ways
it's
semantics,
but
most
dollars
in
circulation
are
not
created
by
the
federal
reserve.
You
know
if
you
have
a
if
you
have
a
bank
account
at
wells
fargo
and
I
have
a
bank
account
at
citigroup
and
you
pay
me,
for
you
know
I
maybe
I
helped
build
the
addition
to
your
house
and
you
paid
me
for
it.
Citibank
does
not
receive
dollars.
It
receives
an
iou
for
dollars
from
wells.
B
Fargo,
which
would
be
your
bank
dye
is
really
no
no
different,
except
for
the
fact
that
we
are
not
under
the
purview
directly
under
the
purview
of
the
federal
reserve
at
the
moment.
But
I
mean
it's
really
no
different
receivable,
it's
it's
it's
an
iou
with
a
face
value
of
of
one
dollar
and
yields
zero.
B
The
last
time
there
was
a
delay
in
payments,
I
believe,
was
in
the
early
70s
and
it
caused
quite
a
stir
and
they
bend
over
backwards
to
pay
pay
creditors
first.
So
if
you
come
after
us
and
we
hold,
you
know
really
any
significant
amount
of
treasury
debt,
then
what
happens
to
that
debt
right
you
so
yeah.
D
B
I
think
our
real
limitation
is
to
be
the
peg
from
a
just
a
technical
standpoint.
I
mean
the
other
day:
180
million
die
were
minted
and
half
of
that
was
actually
the
psm
trying
to
to
devalue
die.
So
on
a
on
a
macro
level.
This
this
could
help
ease
the
the
the
burden
on
the
psm
and
we
always
have
the
psm
that
can
work
in
in
reverse
as
well
yeah.
I
agree
we
will.
This
is
something
we'll
dip.
Our
toes
in
make
sure
the
temperature's
right,
maybe
weighed
out
a
little
yeah.
B
A
C
D
C
B
So
so
the
idea
is
is
that
this
would
be
managed
in
the
same
manner
that
current
real-world
asset
vaults
are
so
in
theory,
they're
permissionless.
But
you
could.
We
could
either
white
list
only
the
address
of
the
trust,
or
only
use
a
token
that
they
have
access
to.
It
should
be
a
one-time
transaction
except
for
repayment,
periodic
repayments,
treasuries
pay
on
a
semi-annual
schedule.
So,
every
six
months
the
trust
should
be
depositing
diet.
Back
in
but
yeah
I
mean
this
core
unit.
B
The
mpcu
maker
portfolio
core
unit
would
not
be
handling
or
custodying
any
assets
or
funds
beyond
what
it
takes
to
pay.
The
legal
fees-
and
perhaps
you
know,
put
a
couple
thousand
dollars
into
a
trust
to
form
it.
The
idea
is
that
this
core
unit
exists
for
the
purpose
of
signing
the
documents
to
be
the
grantor.
To
start,
one
of
these
trusts
pay
the
lawyer
to
draft
the
documents
pay
another
lawyer
to
double
check
it
and
and
and
just
facilitate
the
you
know,
perhaps
report
back
to
the
dow
as
well.
B
A
Okay,
so
that
was
kind
of
my
next
question
in
terms
of
that
part
of
the
process,
like
you
proposed
yourself
as
a
facilitator,
and
no
plan
tires
at
this
point.
But
as
you
start
to
scale,
do
you
foresee
that
there
will
be
enough
going
on
that
you'll
need
to
hire
people,
or
do
you
think
that
these
are
so
set
and
forget
that
you
can
just
kind
of
manage
it.
B
Unless
we
chose
to
use
this
core
unit
to
scale
into
other
assets,
in
which
case,
then
we
would
probably
need
to
onboard
some
folks
for
in-house
research,
but
things
like
legal
like
legal
documents.
Obviously
the
trust
trustee
themselves
would
not
be
us
most.
Things
would
be
outsourced
to
professionals
who
practice
those
skills
full-time.
This.
This
core
unit
is
mostly
in
order
to
pay
the
bills
for
the
lawyers
and
legal
filings
and
and
sign
the
documents.
There's
really
it's
it's,
and-
and
it's
really
should
not
be
very
labor-intensive.
B
A
C
D
B
Oh,
you
mean
the
net
present
value,
so
so
yeah
so
say
we
we
pay
a
dollar
for
something.
That's
supposed
to
pay
us
two
per
cent
right,
so
the
net
yeah.
So
now,
if
interest
rates
rise
to
elsewhere
in
the
economy
or
on
future
issues
of
treasuries
rise
to
say,
five
percent.
Well,
no
one's
going
to
pay
us
a
dollar
for
something
that
only
pays
out
two
cents
a
year
because
they
expect
a
nickel
right.
B
So
in
that
case
on
the
secondary
market,
the
mark
to
market
price
that
it
would
be
sold
at
a
discount
to
the
face
value,
we
would
have
to
sell
it
for
less
than
a
dollar.
Now
we
will
get
around
that
because
if
we
hold
the
maturity,
we
are
not
subject
to
to
that
risk
to
that
market
risk,
which
is
also
why
we
can't
do
extremely
long
dated
maturity,
because
the
the
legal
limitation
on
the
life
of
this
trust
is
only
20
years,
but
yeah.
D
D
D
B
D
D
You
blackbox
you
blackbox
it
and
then
we
there
is
a
another
cu
or
something
anywhere
for
that.
It's
just
picking,
charities
and
they're
not
telling
the
community
about
it.
The
the
charities
are
coded.
So,
like
you,
charity
1165,
that
is
amnesty
international
or
something,
and
then
you
just
lottery
the
thing
mm-hmm.
You
know
I'm
talking
it's
like
an
industrial
scale,
strength
solution,
but
the
minute
the
money
will
get
distributed
to
charities.
C
Yeah,
I
know
what
you're
talking
about,
though
I
definitely
that.
Could
I
see
what
you
mean
about
that
being
a
potential
point
of
contention
I
don't
know
like,
and
it
could
go
in
so
many
different
directions
as
well.
I
mean
the
obvious
thing
is
for
people
to
argue
about
which
charities
it
goes
to,
but
people
will
also
argue
about
whether
or
not.
C
C
Okay,
well,
I
guess
that
yeah
that
takes
a
lot.
It
takes
some
of
the
pain
out
of
it,
but
I
mean
to
you
like
I
I
would
honestly
I
mean
the
advice
I
would
give
would
kind
of
be
the
in
the
opposite
direction
of
just
like
putting
whatever
charity
it's
going
to.
I
don't
have
strong
feelings
about.
I
don't
know
that
much
about
charities,
so
I
don't
have
strong
feelings
about
them.
C
You
know,
like
I,
don't
know,
which
is
the
best
charity
to
give
your
money
to,
but
I
do
think
like
putting
it
back
on
the
community
and
finding
a
way
to
put
it
back
on
the
community
and
let
them
decide
and
like
so
that
you
can
constantly
point
at
it
and
say:
like
hey,
we
put
these
options
up.
The
community
had
the
chance
to
say
which
charities
they
wanted
to
go
to
like
constantly
being
able
to
point
to
it
and
say
the
community
is
deciding
this.
C
I
don't
know.
I
think
that's
one
way
to
avoid
it.
I
you
know,
we're
probably
gonna
disagree
on
that,
but
I
mean,
if
you
can't,
I
don't
know,
that's
sort
of
how
we're
thinking
about
the
mask
like
with
the
mascot
thing.
We've
had
a
few
people
raise
some
potential
issues
around
that
too,
and
I
mean
at
this
point
like
we've
avoided,
saying,
like
the
mascot's,
not
official,
there's
no
official
mascot
to
make
her
doubt
if
the
community
adopts
it
and
likes
it
cool,
but
we're
kind
of
just
pointing
back.
C
You
know
continually
pointing
back
at
it
and
being
like
well,
people
have
been
voting
for
it.
They
like
it
they're
talking
about
it.
This
is
where
the
consensus
seems
to
be
for
now,
so
if
it
shifts
the
other
way,
fine
we'll
drop
it
and
move
on
to
something
more
productive
but
yeah.
You
know
that's
my
two
cents
and
you
know
handle
it.
However,
you
want
to.