Find other people to con please...after reading through your posts I was left with alot of.questions than answers.

@Borsenmakler,

All, or most, market players need information and efficient and effective information channels in order to reduce their costs and to raise revenues.

Consider also, that trust between any two parties can exist if none of the parties anticipate/expect to lose from their interaction, or, both parties have something to gain and the gains are divided fairly.

Now,brands need trust and consumers need trustworthy brands. Thus, brands can provide consumers with information that leads to savings(while utilizing the brands)and also help in easing information access, for example by sponsoring infomercials.Consumers on the other hand will be 'compelled' to cooperate since they have more to gain and less to lose.

If one can create the infrastructure and the relationship 'rules' and engage with the relevant players then Nash equilibrium conditions can be attained. And this is what we've been doing for the last 2 years.What we have is a pivot point that can turn a huge ship with little effort.

@the deal,
Since you have so many unanswered questions, may I infer that you are using instinct to pass your judgement?

@Mukiha,
My proposal is en route.

@Gordon Gekko,
It makes a lot of sense to notify the CBK when it comes to the 500M plus returns; this will be done at the right moment. Nevertheless, I would like you to stop using the pyramid scheme analogy since it is not applicable. The dissimilarities between such schemes and what we have are too many to be ignored.

@josiah33,
One can design a rocket with full capabilities and fail to get an astronaut to use it. The crux of the matter is political concord. At least the CBK works that way.

@The Merchant,
You'll surely get my proposal.Thanks.

@BOMBOCLAT are you UK?
Wacha until njugunajohn finds the email address you are using!!

email me at: maninacitybus@yahoo.com

please drop me a line williaraplani at gmail dot com.

@BorsenMakler,
You don't need any corrections. I'll send the proposal.

@wanyuru and StatMeister,
6.5M is the total amount required to start the 'chain reaction'.

500M is the amount we get from the 'reactor' in two years after roll out.

17% is a figure set in relation to current interest rates with some 'competitive edge' added.

@amolo
I don't think your chain of inference is sound. Let's suppose I don't have 65K, but I have 1 shilling would the logic still apply? There's a reason why there are threshold values in many events in the world.

@willin2learn and Kaka M,
I will inbox you. Thanks.

@bomboclat
Your email address has given me an adrenalin rush.But I will send the proposal.

@Derrick.joker
Joke appreciated Derrick.

Sheila sent me the data, I wouldn't invest in this business though.
The idea has no clear source of revenue and most importantly whatever you are selling is not exactly tangible.
My take is you want to link buyers with sellers for a commission. I don't think you need that much capital and you probably need to start small, have a proof of concept then grow from there.

For those saying it's a con, read the plan and projections, ignore the post or ask serious questions to proove it's a con instead of blindly pouring water into it.

@madhaquer,
Thank you for reading our proposal and offering an honest critique.

True, the sources of revenue are in most cases intangible. This is because the crux is in relationships and the events spawned by the relationships, unlike in the case of a physical object being exchanged.

We are talking about people collaborating, and interacting in ways that will be mutually beneficial;by reducing their costs and increasing their revenues.

We are not connecting buyers and sellers at a commission; we are creating a new personality, by integrating production and consumption and creating value via this personality.

@bomboclat,
Thank you for your response. We look forward to having a productive and fulfilling relationship with you...and your partners.

tuma hapa nijionee >>>> mercgene@gmail.com