Thanks for that, Jafo....I was wondering about that aspect. Obviously, naming them 'shares' would unnecessarily complicate matters
However, perhaps the concept could still work if the said 'shares' were made available only to subscribers, aternatively named and never made redeemable for cash returns. Having clearly stipulated this, surely it would remain an internal affair, subscribers supporting their own community, and a public float isn't required.
For example: subscribers could have the option to purchase as many additional $2 to $5 units as they like, call them bonus subs, for argument sake, and each represents a premium product, or they could be bundled to obtain software items.
Yeah, the concept needs consideration, but I feel it has potential with the correct formulation and wording
