1. It has a massive target in the form of a centralized dev team - same as Ethereum. This is a very easy target for governments to crack.
2. Network effect is close to zero
3. The dev penalty is widely known and contrary to cypherpunk principles. Hence no buyers of last resort. It can easily run to zero and stay there.
4. ASIC resilience is a scam.
It has one thing going for it, they capped supply unlike Grin. Grin team fucked up the economics, same mistake as Monero.
1- I agree, development was designed to be centralized for the first year to allow for quicker progress (compare it to Grin or Monero for example), Ethereum and Zcash have the same model but Beam will change that by handing it to a foundation (same like the one Bitcoin had early days), but honestly if you think about it even the Bitcoin core write access is mostly held by Blockstream employees so...
2- Network effect works as long as the tech evolves, IBM had the network effect at some point as well, not denying Bitcoin's Network effect but I don't think this is a zero-sum game, don't forget that Beam was the first MW implementation, and it offers the best privacy/scaling right now.
3- Dev tax is priced in, I see the dev tax the same way I see the coinbase reward miners collect, we don't expect miners to throw free power thus we shouldn't expect devs to work for free, and you are so wrong about the cypherpunk principals, free means freedom and not slavery. also, what about the 1M BTC Satoshi owns? is it fair if he would be able to spend it one day?
4- Nothing is Asic resilient and the plan is not to be ASIC resistant, but switching PoW every 6 moths ruin any plans for any ASIC R&D thus making the distribution somewhat better the first year.