tdbowieknife
3日前
Three extensions for the second USP token raise now. Every time the raise stalls, they push the deadline out instead of closing the round or reporting meaningful progress.
What this repeated extension actually signals... The public-facing narrative is always “high demand, more time for investors,” but the behavior is much more consistent with:
Insufficient new inflows — the raise isn’t filling, so extending is the only way to avoid admitting failure.
Avoiding a hard stop — a closed, underfilled raise would force them to disclose how little capital they actually attracted.
Maintaining the illusion of momentum — keeping the campaign “active” lets them continue marketing without explaining why the target hasn’t moved.
Regulatory pressure avoidance — some CF issuers extend deadlines to avoid triggering reporting obligations tied to closing events.
This is exactly what you see in shaky Regulation CF raises and borderline RWA token projects: the deadline becomes a moving target, not a real constraint.
Why this is concerning in USP’s case...
I've already noted the opacity issues, and this pattern reinforces them:
Two years delinquent with yearly disclosure.
No audited financials for the underlying real estate portfolio.
No verified yield mechanics — “stable returns” without a disclosed cashflow model.
No clarity on redemption/liquidity — secondary trading exists in name only.
No explanation for the slow raise — they never address why they can’t hit even modest targets.
And now: three deadline extensions. That’s not normal for a healthy raise.
The non-obvious part...
Each extension resets investor psychology. It keeps early investors locked in (“maybe it’ll close soon”) while giving the issuer more time to market to new ones. It’s a classic tactic used by CF issuers who are struggling to reach minimum viable funding.
If this were a strong offering, they wouldn’t need three extensions — they’d be oversubscribed.
https://gaia.primior.com/#/offering?oid=692ced763718031beb358e74
Stick a fork in this already...
.
.
Watch your wallet
Buyer Beware
Social Media Promoted Frontload Pump and Dump Share Selling Scam
..
.
SomeOTCGal
3週前
My personal sense of the company's direction, based on the optimistic view that they are actually doing what they say they are doing:
Info #1: Some time ago in discord, Allen revealed months of work in 2024-2025, travelling to different countries and hosting conferences with investors, GPs, etc, which resulted in a tier list of countries which have the highest demand and liquidity for US assets. There was chatter back in 2025 about how international investors don't have a cheap or convenient pathway into US investment, due to regulations and traditional infrastructure.
Info #2: Primior clearly does not have an OTC mindset as a company. They've struggled since platform launch with understanding OTC expectations and cycles, and while there's been a little more engagement since then, there's really been no concerted effort to focus marketing in that direction.
Info #3: Johnney has always always said that the platform is his first priority, and the ticker falls further down the list. He's stayed consistent in stating that the company doesn't need the ticker to raise capital - they acquired it purely for dealing with the SEC and murky tokenization regulations. He wants to reach NASDAQ, but primarily as a milestone and marker for the company's success, as well as the "prestige" PR it would give the platform. The stock is not their main concern.
My Conclusions: Johnney is not planning to cater to the OTC crowd basically at all, which would make sense if he has no intention of staying in the OTC any longer than necessary. There's never going to be any consistent flow of emotional hyping, no unsubstantiated daily promises. The OTC may, what, pump a stock up to around $1 if the highest level of hype piles in? And then crash down again? Johnney doesn't plan to stop anywhere near penny land, so why would the company dedicate its marketing budget to attract these kinds of fickle, short-term, chump-change retailers? They'll need a much stronger and more stable audience than that to reach their real goals.
I believe that high-value international investors will be targeted for marketing first, to bring activity and revenue into the platform. To that end, when GAIA listings start dropping, from our perspective they'll drop all at once without any preamble, followed by official PR. Once the fundamentals become clear and there's a firm proof of concept and demand, marketing will shift to include American crowds as well. However, this might not look like marketing for the stock, but rather for GAIA as a tokenization service, in other words advertising the platform itself to the public, not advertising "a stock to buy."
Simple public awareness of a hot new product/service that's showing success will naturally draw market investors as people hear and learn more about it, and realize it's publicly traded as well, without any concerted push specifically for retail investment. This would be a move like BYND and Peloton made back in the day; there was basically no online stock chatter about them before they launched their products and started selling. The products came first, and the ticker rush naturally followed.