Here my thoughts on the subjects discussed.

1. Backed by Saffron Spice I think is a bad idea because it's a limiting feature. First, it's not very practical as you have to get the largest Saffron producers and distributors involved or have to collect a shit ton of Saffron spice ourselves which is going to take a shit ton of money and probably will need angel investors. But in that case, might as well start your own Saffron distribution company. Second, if you peg the price of the coin to a fixed price relative to the spice, then this limits any future price growth. What good is it to have a fixed price if the potential could be much bigger. Lets say in 2009 BitCoin decided to back the price of BTC to the price of a gallon of milk worth around $3. Back then when BTC was worth pennies, this would have been a valid proposition, but imagine it actually had gone through.

2. Stake in cryptoxindia. If big holders want a stake in cryptoxindia exchange, then the devs should hold a separate ICO/IPO and give everyone a fresh chance to invest in the comapny/project. Just because some of us were lucky enough to accumulate a bunch of coins at dirt cheap prices shouldnt give us any more reason to hold a stake. It doesnt even make sense for anybody with any amount of coins to hold a stake in the exchange. There is no correlation. Yea its a win win for the holders but a lose a lose for the devs. Its pretty much blackmailing the devs "Hey give us a stake in your exchange or i wont guarantee not to dump and sell significant quantities of SFR." Any stake of a future company (in this case cryptoxindia) should be done through an IPO.