We share the same concerns as Saxemberg.

Agreeing with Saxemberg's concerns, but also the cost isn't enough to properly execute on this. RWAs are a massive segment and "BD" requires fast, heavily financed, and acutely directed/ focused initiatives. If not, you're spinning your wheels and spending money pretending to be busy. Being direct and intentional is the key, here. It's good to have positive awareness of a brand like Polkadot (particularly in big, evolving markets like LATAM), but this particular prop is so vague without any real, tangible outcomes. We think this team should pick one great RWA use case, target the most strategic and accessible, interested businesses and bring them into the ecosystem. Nay, until we see something stronger.

Agree with other opinions with Nay.

I believe the team has done good work but the ecosystem has not been able to come to an overarching BD strategy and provide resources (e.g. sales materials) to support that strategy. The W3F has recently changed this and will now be coordinating BD efforts, and this team great articles that show they know how to engage with enterprise clients. While not a popular move right now I believe we should extend the engagement by six months as they can help to define the new strategy and then work to execute it.

too broad and also too expensive for a 6 month engagement

Saxemberg did an amazing job with the review of this proposal. Very concerning results, so we rather stay on the Nay side here.

Proposal document does not contain any quantifiable or on-chain data. My impression is that there has been some BD work so far, but a RWA solution requires more than only making connections with mentioned companies. I don't see enough credentials in the proposal document to make Polkadot "the leading blockchain network for digitizing Real-World Assets (RWA)."