You gained a new follower today, looking forward to going through some of your analysis, and glad to have ya on Steem. I really need to start watching more analysis videos, I've been enjoying them a lot over the holiday break :)
However, I don't agree with many of ways you've presented the data or the rational that this is just a pump and dump. I figured I'd leave my thoughts as to why, since I absolutely love a good debate.
First of all, the comparison to Steem and Bitshares isn't represented well. You are right in pointing out that Steem has incredibly high transaction volume (at a peak of 1.3m transactions), which is higher than any other blockchain that I know of. However, when you do the math on that, you'll see that 1.3m transactions/day is only about 15 transactions per second. Thats a long ways away from the 604m transactions/day that a 7000 TPS blockchain can produce. Steem and Bitshares are arguably close to each other in terms of transaction speed, but neither of them are anywhere close to what RaiBlocks has been proven to achieve. There's also the issue that both Steem and Bitshares are filled with non-transfer operation types, which can fill up blocks fast and could create delays in confirmation.
Why is RaiBlocks different? It's because it's not a blockchain like Bitcoin, Steem or Ethereum - it's something fundamentally different and new, a block lattice (or DAG).
These legacy blockchains you mention (Steem/etc) all have sequential numeric blocks which are produced by the block miners/producers, and those entities are allowed to produce blocks through PoW, PoS/DPoS, or some similar method. Users submit transactions to these producers for inclusion within the next block on the blockchain. Their transaction is included (if space permits), then subsequently confirmed, to prove that it's a valid transaction as it propigates through the network.
At the core, almost all adoption related issues can be attributed to this flaw within this model of the blockchain - limited space and time. It's also the reason that adoption is actually decreasing in the case of Bitcoin (primarily fees today, but also block speed/size). It doesn't matter how great you make the Bitcoin wallet's UI, how many stores accept it, or how many people are doing transfers to one another - the blockchain itself is the source of the frustration in nearly every case. Tweaking these values every time scaling needs to occur isn't a solution to the problem either, and Lightning doesn't solve any problems since it still requires the same fee/wait to open or close a channel. The model these blockchains follow creates inconveniences and a dependency upon whoever or whatever is creating each block (or until you move off-chain, like Lightning).
This next generation of cryptocurrencies, like RaiBlocks (and IOTA), no longer follow this model. Instead of a relationship between a user and block producer, in which the user submits operations to the block producers, they are one and the same. The user themselves now create new portions of the chain (or Tangle in IOTA) in the form of "blocks" (or Tips in IOTA). The only wait for inclusion is now based on the time it takes for your machine to create and validate that transaction and then broadcast it. Blocks are never full and there's no fee market to compete against.
Technologically, in my opinion, it's a superior way of including data within a publicly distributed and decentralized ledger.
The frenzied hype and most of the garbage you read on the internet doesn't talk about any of this because most people don't really understand what's actually happening or how it works. Most people are seeing fast transactions that don't cost them a dime, so that's what they're talking about. Once you dig deeper into the technology you'll start to realize what's magical about it and why smarter money is betting on RaiBlocks to upset many other currencies. At least that's what I see in this current rise :)
Also - one last point I'd like to make regarding something you said (@7:52) regarding Steem/Bitshares and adoption. I believe the adoption of RaiBlocks has already been much more rapid than either Steem or Bitshares. To compare apples to apples, out of the ~18.5m blocks within the Steem blockchain, only 3.3m (3,327,919) transfers of STEEM or SBD have actually occurred since it's creation in April of 2016. RaiBlocks at this point is at 2.3m (2,371,871) transfers of XRB which is not too far behind. Steem's been more widely used for much longer than RaiBlocks, so I'd imagine that at this point, there are more transfers on RaiBlocks per day than there are for Steem. There's no good way to look up this data at the moment so I'm speculating, but you can't rule it out and just say that these chains are more widely adopted.
To close, I have high expectations for all of the currencies you've mentioned. As a Steem witness myself, I obviously am cheering for all of the graphene chains to find success, but new advances in technology like this can't just be ignored and deemed as a P&D :)
RE: Why Raiblocks Will End as a Pump & Dump