I'm not sure that this is an improvement over coloured coins, which is currently in development. Have you looked at coloured coins and compared your 'Peershare' to it to asses pros + cons? It would be a waste of time to develop an inferior version of something that is already being developed.
I have looked at coloured coins and considered how Peershare compares to them. Very briefly, Peershare is simpler than coloured coin (meaning it has a better chance of being successfully implemented), offers more features specifically useful to companies issuing shares and can be expected to have lower transaction fees. Importantly, the blockchain and protocol is solely controlled by shareholders of a single company allowing the protocol to be responsive to their specific needs, whereas coloured coin holders will be subject to the interests of Bitcoin miners.
Here's a more detailed comparison:
1. Peershare provides a way to easily and automatically distribute dividends directly to shareholders. So far as I have seen, no coloured coin design proposes implementation of similar functionality (though coloured coin architecture would permit such an implementation). Because Peershare focuses its scope to company issued shares, it is able to meet the needs of this use case much better.
2. Coloured coins are not as divisible as Peershares given that Bitcoin imposes a minimum size of 5430 satoshis.
3. Transaction fees on coloured coins are much higher than what is likely for Peershares -- dividends distributions are currently about 5% of the cost (on the Peercoin network) while actual Peershare transaction cost would vary but would likely be even less than the low Peercoin transaction fee.
4. Bitcoin miners have different interests that may be at odds with interests of holders of specific types of coloured coin holders. For example, a 5430 satoshi minimum Bitcoin transaction size was imposed this spring. It is possible that additional changes would be implemented in the future that could adversely effect coloured coins. Peershare is architected so that the shareholders hold the fate of the network -- it exists for them exclusively. They can alter transaction fees, control minimum transaction size and even issue new shares according to their collective interests using hard forks. Part of the reason for coloured coins using the Bitcoin blockchain was the assertion that a separate blockchain for each type of asset could not be secured. This is true for proof of work chains, but not proof of stake chains. The coloured coin design has not been updated to take advantage of the recent emergence of proof of stake.
5. Blockchain bloat will be minimized as a different blockchain is used to track Peershare ownership.
6. Peershare is simpler with a more narrow scope than coloured coins. Coloured coins have been talked about for quite some time but no usable implementation has emerged yet. Hopefully Peershare with a more focused and simple design will be brought into reality more rapidly.
