I strongly disagree with the PoV expressed in this video
If we follow the numbers, what emerges ?
IOHK 2.4B, EMURGO ~2B, BINANCE~1.5B (worst case). That is already almost 6B ada.
There won’t be 100% of circulating supply staked, so let’s be positive and take Tezos for a reference with their 75% staked. That gives 23B staked ada at cruise speed. These 6B represent 25% of the staked ada, and I believe these three entities won’t forget to do their job and stake.
That means at least 25 private pools, not even accounting yet for the delegator attraction a big exchange might trigger by putting a 0% fee. So with a optimum pool number of a 100, anywhere between 25 to 30 will be private pools, maxing out their returns. The rest is left to 70-75 players, a perfect set up for further consolidation. Once only a few actors are in place, and enough people left the pool operator ecosystem, their pledge will go down. No one has any interest in locking up that much assets. Up to the point where figuring out the differences between an army of exogenous ASICs miner and the implementation of PoS will be a uncomfortable discussion to have.
I fear that gatekeeping the pool operator role with such parameters for Cardano is a call for well funded mercenaries. That leads to another important point : community interests might decay. In that case, who is then relaying, spending time to read, discuss and help forging a set of divergent opinions regarding governance. A small set of actors is much more likely to have a convergent point of view, and the means to preach them.
Finally, at the end of ITN, it is clear that a group of ~300 pools could come up with a near perfect network efficiency, so this point does not even hold.
It is my opinion that a little bit more permissive barrier than what is proposed here won’t hurt.