What electrification does for flight is to diversify the means of getting airborne ~ more than has ever been possible ~ in the way that nature has filled every possible niche in the air.

In the way the Wright brothers pioneered flight only when  internal combustion supplanted steam, electrical VTOL only became possible when it supplanted internal combustion in turn. Altogether simpler to distribute around airframes, the single or twin engines familiar to aircraft and helicopters are  replaced by multiple motors driving fans or propellers... as few as eight or as many as three dozen in types attracting investment.

The analogy is computing, in which a single machine available to commercial concerns would be replaced by computers in every office, a PC on every desk and a smartphone in every pocket. In terms of the overall market for electrical aircraft there is likely to be a wider variation of types than evolved in the hydrocarbon economy, because of freedom in design of multiple-motored airframes.

The costliest implementation of convebtional  VTOL would be that of the Joint Strike Fighter, and its complexity not the least reason for the costliest overrun in aviation history. In contrast, ventures into electrical types take this ability as a universal constant.

Whilst most investment capital aims at fast returns from 'flying taxis' and cargo drones, the ecosystem of electrical flight will be wholly wider. This reflects the evolution of prior mobilities like the motor-car, which in the UK alone sprang from prototypes to a diversity of manufacturers numbering over two thousand (and reduced to single figures a century on as internal-combustion evolves toward senescence).

This diversification means that personal eVTOL has its place. While you may argue that single-seat rotorcraft never 'took off', the most numerous of helicopters is still a two-seater in the shape of the Robinson R22. This was predicated on the basis two seats were ideal for training students or wrangling cattle, and similar niches will evolve for personal air vehicles as the cost of ownership is reduced in the same way.

The overriding limitation of single-seat types in the past was that they were as expensive to operate as larger types. It is unlikely to be the case with multicopters, which have already supplanted rotorcraft in applications from aerial photography to survey and agriculture... beside cargo.

The latter already lift payloads beyond that needed to raise an individual, and the ability to do so is a logical progression that fills a niche between UAVs and flying taxis. A fact that is worth consideration is that in most economies charabancs, trams and buses preceded private automobiles.

So personal eVTOL is a natural evolution in an environment already enjoyed by millions of drones worldwide.  Beside this there has been a vibrant kit-build market from the outset of flight ~ for what else could the Wright Flyer be considered? The key to continuing the tradition with electrical motors is as dependent upon manufacture and distribution as much as has to do with aerodynamics.

From the outset and of necessity,  TELEDRONE prototypes have been esigned for flat-pack assembly, garage storage and a means of operation that reduces the cost of ownership.

Beside a market for individuals wanting access to their own 'personal air vehicle' there is also a replacement market for roles met by boats, helicopters or hovercraft. Consequently it is expected that the earliest iterations of air vehicles like the TELEDRONE will be aimed at ground-effect operation... a question of climbing ladders a rung at a time.