Are we using the same definitions? I thought the liquidity premium is the differential in return people are willing to incur for the convenience of liquid over illiquid assets?

What meaning of premium are you using? I want to make sense of "[...] just as much (or as little) premium for illiquid assets as for liquid assets [...]". Thanks.

Same definition. Right now markets pay a premium for the convenience of liquid assets as you say. What I'm saying is that the investment profiles of the SWFs may lower that premium/raise the price of illiquid assets such that the two are effectively the same price. Feels like two sides of the same coin.

I could probably have been clearer, but I kindof liked the way the title sounded. Appreciate the feedback.

Perhaps a better way of stating it would be:

Illiquid investments currently need to pay a premium over their more liquid counterparts. However, an increase in long term investors may reduce this requirement over time.

Yes, that's clear. The clever title "Illiquidity premium" is OK.