First of all, @LeGonze - you rule. This is the best "question" post we've ever had.
I'm just back from a gone 28 out of 30 day stretch, so if it's OK with you guys, I'm going to answer these points a bit at a time. I have to make perfectly clear that our project/application is still a work in progress, and that anything I say below is our position/perception at this time, but it may change as the rules become more clear/get adapted. One thing I'm extremely pleased about is the regulator understands this is a new developing space, and has a serious but open-minded approach. That is huge.
2. The underlying network is trustless, and decentralised; I'm not sure as I read somewhere that CSC Foundation needs to have some control over the network??
>>>>We plan to decentralize by offering granting partner operators the right to operate a validating node. The process will take time, but the plan is not to centrally control and we believe that will be acceptable.
3. The financial system is available to everyone without being controlled by a single entity; Same here as the point #2.??
>>>To me, this is the same question, with the same result.
1. The technology behind the VFA has a clear roadmap for development and project milestones; I think we are getting this Check ✔️ soon right?
>>>We have shared the roadmap and do not expect any issues with this.
1. The VFA has a competitive market capitalisation in comparison with the general market capitalisation that is allocated to other DLT assets; I think this is kind of Subjective, Do we have a Competitive Market Cap? But I think right now we Fail ✖️
>>>All that is being asked here is consistency relative to other assets (ie: nothing like a coin where you have this warchest of tokens that - solely at the entity's discretion can be put into play at any time but are not in the market/ecosystem at this time). Since all our coins are in the market from day one, no premine, etc. We should be OK here.
3. There is a trading pair between the VFA and fiat currencies: Provided that the Authority may allow for acceptance of VFAs which do not have a trading pair with fiat currencies if the VFA has a trading pair with other major VFAs and the Authority is satisfied that the regulatory objectives sought in this sandbox framework are nonetheless achieved. I think we Check ✔️ We are getting Fiat Pairing with the BRM right?
>>>Correct. The fiat gateway will be very limited in terms of amounts/limits, but we will have this.
DLT Asset Economics
1. The VFA reflects a service, in other words the relation between a company’s growth and performance and the services that it provides; Can you explain this? Seems to be like a Security. Does it aplies to CSC?
>>>We have already passed the VFA test (which is self administered, but guided by the regulator) and we should have zero issue here.
4. There are strict security protocols limiting scams, hacks and theft of funds; I think we Check ✔️ But Explain this one please.
>>>This is where we particularly shine. The tools we have put in (much of which was built based on regulator feedback culled in mid-late 2017) are particularly good and I think we'd be looked at as a model with respect to this particular bit of the project.
5. The team behind the VFA should allow a fair distribution of the token (limiting the risk of a small number of investors acquiring a majority supply of the token); Fail ✖️ I don't think we check this one. I mean the Top 100 has 82.81% of coins and only the Top 25 has 53.93% at this moment. How are you guys going to check this one?
>>>>Every single coin was bought in the open market and have been in the open market for years. There is no more equitable way to distribute. This rule is more designed to prevent an ICO/new project from hoarding coins and restricting fair access. Yes, the bags are heavy at the top, but we've been transparent w/regs about holdings of Foundation members, and the relative percentage as such, which is well within the norm.
More to come and great Qs @LeGonze - Thanks!