The Kaito espresso sale is pretty weird to me and kind of has a 'worst of both worlds' implicit legal position: -->if the lockup is to address Reg S flowback concerns, they could still allow trading b/w non-U.S. persons during that time, but are not doing so; they could also aim for a shorter lockup under a 'debt security' instead of 'equity security' theory -->MiCa allows for day-1 liquid tokens & doing it under MiCa would also lower the likelihood that U.S. law applies, why are they not doing this under MiCa ? -->if the lockup is just meant to create parity with Espresso VCs, well this does not achieve such parity as VCs always find a way to sell OTC no matter what the express terms of the lockup says about prohibiting that -->if retail is getting their tokens this way instead of through airdrop & can't sell for a year then that means an even thinner float from TGE to 1-year anniversary than many other VC coins have had and even worse high-FDV/low-float phenomenon?