Sounds like a great idea to me. Why do you think this is bad?
I don't necessarily think it is bad. I've written up and proposed quite a few radically different ways of doing things.
PoT forging does nothing to address vendor Chicken / Egg.
PoT forging spurs initial adoption by users who can then be used to market to vendors as a built in revenue stream (assuming the numbers are large enough). It's why merchants have adopted Bitcoin. They have a built in user base at relatively no cost to the merchant.
Viral spread of a cool app for electronic payment via smartphone using purchased "tokens" called Cryptis does. Refocus from PoT to that app - it is what users will sign up for to download. Start spreading it in Africa - they already understand and use this technique because they don't have banks.
I agree that this is a potential marketing technique that could work in certain parts of the world. This portion would be the only part that would be a radical departure from our current plans and would require serious thought. Ultimately, I don't think that what you are describing is bad and I think that it could be hugely successful, but at this point you have to gauge the damage of alienating the entire current base of those who invested and stuck with Crypti and the morale aspect of completely re-writing the playbook essentially.