I am not telling you anything; the data speaks for itself. I will quote my claims as a reminder to my contribution within this thread.
Most rounds lasted 60 days, but one of them lasted 190 days (extended from 100 days), and the last few recent ones were 30 days.
The rounds had $3M, 3.5M, 4M, and 10M fundraising goals.
I will add the other assertion and “fact” I was contesting earlier from another contributor.
The fundraising goal goes down from $10M to $3.5M after June 28th, 2022.
As for the rest of their statement, “very close” is a subjective definition and therefore cannot be argued against. However, my intuition agrees with their general notion and therefore I also highly suspect funds are being carried over from previous rounds.
Probably not clear then. I would have said that in some respects this is worse for the investor (that is, a convertible note is worse for the investor than debt is).
Since I got my phone, I am not so interested in doing anything to harm Purism. But they do appear to be willing to break the law and to break their promises (recinding early “immediate refund” promises). Why would anyone want to invest in that? Anyone could forward Purism’s offer to sell unregistered Securities to unaccredited investors, to the Securities Exchange Commission. Why invest in a company that could be taken down so easily and its officers go to prison? The reason I so highly suspect that these Securities are illegal is because of our claims here. If I were Todd or Kyle, I would jump in to this thread right about now (or sooner) and correct any incorrect information. All they have to do is give their SEC registration numbers and explain how we can verify that Purism’s actions are legal. But no. They stay silent. If people were accusing you of crimes, would you correct the record? Maybe not if you knew they were correct. I suspect that Purism is getting large investments from wealthy people anyway. But if the investment offers are even being pitched to unaccredited investors (much less taking money from them), they’re still breaking the law. I know that they are doing this because they offered to sell me thess securuties and I do not qualify as an accredited investor.
I assume you are only talking about investors in the US. (For the same reason, most investment opportunities offered in my country explicitly exclude investors in the US, because compliance with US securities law is too onerous.)
(For US investors) You the investor are claiming to be an “accredited investor” and to meet the necessary conditions. So as long as you the investor do not lie, there is no problem. If you do lie and it all goes to shit, who knows where that lands.
There are many schools of thought on that. Many people over the years have faced that exact quandary. You should examine the actual outcomes achieved in court and in the court of public opinion. It is not a simple question to answer but would be better pursued as a separate topic.
If you can get the SEC to prosecute, nothing more than filing the complaint is necessary. Then the full force of the United States government lands squarely on the perpetrator. Signing a contract to take part in an illegal activity for many unsophisticated people can be a single act of ignorance. The price is likely to be only the loss of their money. Such a contract to conduct an illegal transaction is void in any event. I wouldn’t want to be the multi-million dollar company that launched that scheme and collected several million dollars in violation of Federal statutes. Ignorance won’t do much for them. Even advertising such a scheme to the general public is illegal. The laws are there to prevent exactly what Purism is doing, from happening. When it happens, people go to prison.
A typical PDF prospectus that is made available to people in my country contains language such as
This prospectus may not be distributed in the United States
Each Applicant in the Offer is deemed to represent that the Applicant is not a U.S. person and is not acting for the account or benefit of a U.S. person. The Applicant agrees not to offer or sell <<insert name of security>> in the United States or to, or for the benefit of, U.S. persons.
(and it goes on with more legalese along the same lines)
but in the internet era everybody understands that that is laughable. It can’t be enforced by the company offering the securities and it can’t be enforced on every person who downloads the PDF.
(The PDF is typically not just downloadable directly from a public web page. You have to click through a few screens saying that you are not ‘dodgy’ and that you won’t do ‘dodgy’ things before you reach the screen where you get to download the PDF. Like EULAs, most people click through without reading.)
So the company protects itself by stating clearly what the rules are and if someone who applies for the securities breaks the rules, and gets found out, then the hope is that it is on the applicant.
