I would feel much better....for you to allocate your precious and limited time into writing/recording some more tehnical stuff and creating a "document" aka VERI for dummies video/PPT version.
Indeed Dorky.
Something that illustrates the various aspects of the business model from the perspective of all stakeholders involved, as well as each of their priorities and risks, i.e.
• ICO/exchange market investors
• the interests of the issuing corporate entity
• potential "institutional investors"
Here's an example to start you off and give you some ideas. This one illustrates the two potential scenarios I outlined in an
earlier posts whereby instead of selling the 'reserved' token supply on the open market they are held by a corporate entity instead and shares sold in that corporate entity. As you correctly say, I may have no idea what I'm talking about - it's just that scenario 2 looks far more attractive to me both from the issuer's point of view and from that of prospective 'institutional'. Feel free to respond with a similar document showing why it isn't.
Finally, there is one aspect missing from this analysis of course. That's the thing that everyone has been asserting consistently in this thread which is that VERI is "software" and not a "trading security" (even though it's traded and held as one by every poster I've seen). But to make a proper appraisal of that dimension of the token we'd need to see the applications concerned and be able to quantify its potential revenue earning capacity.
Lets see what Monday brings on that front
