Some thoughts regarding what to cut.
There are a few instances where you spend time giving the Referee permission to change things. Phrases like “Changing these secrets for most NPCs will not affect the overall adventure much, and adding additional secrets to those NPCs without them can also work” make it feel like the ideas presented don’t matter. If they aren’t relevant they wouldn’t be in the adventure. As someone who is reading the module to understand your vision of the scenario I would prefer you just gave me the ideas as they stand. If I have another idea I can change it, but it’s helpful to have one clear vision to work from.
During the launch there’s a section on adding NPCs from other works to give plot hooks to completely separate adventures. That muddies the water quite a lot. If I ran this adventure and followed those guidelines there’s a very high chance that my players wouldn’t pursue this mystery at all, which is fine, I suppose, but then what would be the point of having it?
It seems like the key function of the launch is to introduce one of two hooks: “Jeanne Marsh’s brother has been harmed by the company and they’re covering it up! You need to help expose them!”
Or
“Anthony Newland was forced out of the company he was instrumental in starting. He’s the one who should be in charge!”
I would try to focus the text more towards those two things.
Once we get past the party I think the vision gets clearer.