The correct way to launch a coin of this type would have been to have the remittance infrastructure in place and then launch the coin when it could actually be used. The way it went the coin was launched first, then came the promises, delays, etc... just like all the other failed coin projects that never intend to deliver and are just a vehicle to increase the wealth of a few individuals before being abandoned and the parties involved move on to their next scheme.
What is the value that you would put on a coin that you described? Let's say there are about 1.3 MILL coins in existence and stakes at 5% a year. At the moment of launch the entire project's infrastructure is built and placed in your lap with 0 native users.
How would you distribute that coin out? What is the value of 1 of those coins, $.01, $1, $242.22? (Sidenote it sounds like from other statements of yours that your belief is only for btc so I would think you might be able to relate to this problem) And this is a start-up company, you took the "start-up" from it. Wouldn't it be better for the value of the coin to grow in value as adoption truly grows?
The coin could simply be distributed the same way coins typically are. Mining, ICO, givaway, etc... The difference being that the project is complete and the coins can actually be used for their intended purpose immediately. Currently coins are released with an outline of a project and a roadmap stretching way into the future that will likely never be completed. And even if it is, the typical goals are nothing that will ever provide a path for widespread adoption. Mobile wallets are not a game changer.
People are currently mining and buying into coins with nothing but fancy graphics and boilerplate verbiage. Logically people would mine a coin that already had a working product. But then again, since the altcoin world has become nothing more than just one big worldwide online casino, people may not even be interested in an actual product.