A capital reader may comment on capital-readability and finance-readiness questions within the approved scope of the room.
Appropriate comments may include:
whether the problem statement is clear;
whether the public-good rationale is understandable;
whether evidence is organized;
whether risk-to-capital framing is coherent;
whether key diligence gaps remain;
whether governance questions are unresolved;
whether revenue or support assumptions are clearly labelled;
whether public authority boundaries are clear;
whether insurance-readiness questions should be routed separately;
whether the Project SPV-readiness record needs more structure;
whether the National Nexus Consortium Company readiness questions are premature;
whether claims language needs correction;
whether Nexus Rails routing is appropriate;
whether the matter may need legal, technical, public finance, insurance, or procurement review outside GRA.
The capital reader should remain at the level of readiness, structure, evidence, and questions.
A capital reader may ask: “What would a competent reviewer need to know later?” They should not answer: “Should capital be committed now?”
