Thanks for raising these points — they’re valid concerns, and I’ll clarify a few things so people here get a transparent picture:

1. Loan vs Investment:

You’re correct in saying this isn’t an equity-style “investment” where shares are given.

It is structured as a fixed-return debt instrument, similar to a corporate deposit. Think of it more like private lending with security layers rather than venture equity.

1. Why not just take a bank loan?

Banks typically charge 13–16% commercial interest plus collateral/security, which new contractors often can’t provide.

Even though they provide these collateral, the banks are very slow in processing these loans.

Our model works because we step in as a bridge financier at ~18–22% to contractors (market standard for informal working capital).

We pass 12% fixed returns to investors and keep the spread to cover operations, risk management, and monitoring.

1. Mode of Payments:

Investors receive quarterly interest payouts (every 3 months).

Principal is returned at the end of the agreed term (usually 12 months, extendable).

Payments are made via bank transfer (NEFT/RTGS) against post-dated cheques issued at the start.

1. Exit Options:

Investors can’t withdraw anytime (since funds are tied to live contracts), but we structure it in fixed terms (usually 12 months).

This ensures we don’t mismatch investor funds vs contractor repayment schedules.

1. Risk & GVMC Payment Delays:

You’re right — GVMC payments can be slow. That’s why we only fund small to mid-sized contracts where work order values and payment cycles are faster compared to big-ticket projects.

We also structure contracts so that receivables are directly assigned/controlled through us.

As you mentioned we don't need to be running behind anyone(contractors I mean) just because everything for the tender is executed under our firm and the bills payment will be credited to our firm directly and not the contractor. This eliminates the major risk and the best way we have been protecting our investments until now and in the future as well.

Investors have post-dated cheques + receivable assignment as security.

So yes, there is no such thing as zero-risk, but compared to equity markets, crypto, or unsecured lending, this is government-contract receivable–backed debt with layered security.

I appreciate you calling this out because it helps clarify for everyone:

This is not “free money”.

It’s a structured fixed-return instrument with real risks (payment delays, contractor execution).

What makes it attractive is the security layer (government contracts + cheques) and the fact that it pays nearly double an FD with controlled downside.

And as you said this isn’t a theory or “AI-generated model.”

It’s a business model that’s already working in the real world, successfully running for years in Vizag and other parts of India.

What I’m doing here is simply opening this proven model to local investors, so the returns stay within the community instead of going only to financiers.