The piece argues that the market misprices "ownership coins" due to a lack of understanding about their treasury value. Ownership coins differ from governance and meme tokens because they provide a legitimate claim to the underlying assets and cash flows of the protocols. The author highlights recent market behaviors, using examples like $LIGHT and the liquidation of MTN Capital, to illustrate how ownership claims can influence token valuations. When tokens trade below their treasury value, they represent a potential investment opportunity, as liquidation can yield profits. Two main scenarios present opportunities: first, tokens trading under treasury value act like "free" call options. The author suggests that significant discounting beyond a certain point creates pressure for proposals that can lead to liquidation, benefiting investors. Second, when a token's treasury constitutes a large part of its market cap, the conventional valuation methods used for traditional businesses suggest that the treasury should be factored into the overall worth. The analysis includes specific tokens, such as $AVICI and $UMBRA, which don't show much change in implied enterprise value due to small treasuries, while $LOYAL and $PAYS are highlighted for trading below their treasury value, indicating a possible asymmetric opportunity. The author expresses particular interest in $SOLO, which, despite not trading under its treasury, shows a significant change in valuation when treasury value is deducted. The concluding remarks acknowledge that while no valuation model is flawless, ownership coins are a new asset class that the market has yet to price efficiently.