Why it dies

The entire pitch rests on 'apply it to any tool, any generation' — but there is no shared substrate. A style that works in Midjourney is a LoRA in Flux, a prompt scaffold in Sora, a reference image in Runway. Portability isn't a feature you're adding, it's a physics problem you're waving at. Strip that away and you've got a fancy style-reference library — which Midjourney already ships as --sref codes, which any model house can bolt on the moment it matters, and which a weekend hacker can approximate with an embedding and good taste. 'Sell or license your eye' is a lovely dinner-party line that dies on contact with the fact that taste is contextual, not a static asset, and the market of people who'll pay to license a stranger's vibe is a rounding error. And 'everyone can generate, almost nobody can direct' is true — but the people who can't direct also can't tell that they can't, so they won't pay for the fix.

What would save it

Pick ONE tool and one workflow where losing your aesthetic between sessions is a bleeding, expensive problem — e.g. a production studio doing 200 shots that must all match a locked look. Own the 'consistency across a project' pain deeply for that one pipeline instead of promising universal portability. Prove the file survives a real handoff between two artists on a paid job. If you can make a director's look reproducible and enforceable within a single team's real production, you have a business; 'your eye as a file you can license' is the deck slide, not the wedge.