There is a fundamental problem with how this company is communicating, and it needs to be stated plainly. Discord is not an appropriate channel for releasing news or material information. It is not an SEC-recognized disclosure outlet, yet the company has developed a bad habit of using it that way. Public companies are given clear avenues to communicate material events to shareholders: formal press releases and broad-distribution platforms like X. Those channels exist for a reason, and ignoring that framework has real consequences.
Material developments such as Tzero accreditation verification for the Gaia platform, wallet integration, and the use of top-tier compliance providers like SumSub absolutely warranted press releases. These are meaningful milestones that signal legitimacy, seriousness, and operational progress. They should have clearly explained why these providers matter, what they enable, and how they move Gaia forward. That is how you inform investors and build confidence. Failing to do so was a mistake. At the same time, smaller, non-material updates, like a single $200,000 investment into the Lumen syndication, are perfectly suited for an X post. Positive signal, lightweight update, no need for anything more. What you do not do is bundle everything together into oversized press releases and dump them late in the week when nothing gets absorbed. That approach kills momentum.
This needs to be a two-stage communication strategy with intention and sequencing. Without it, all that gets created are short-term spikes followed by sell-offs, and the stock goes nowhere. That raises a bigger question: what is the point of investing if there is no strategy to build long-term shareholder value? Constant volatility without a coherent narrative only benefits short-term traders. That is not why most shareholders are here.
We traded up on the anticipation of the December 1st launch and are now effectively back where we started, despite the fact that there is now a functioning platform. The December launch did not go as planned, but that alone did not justify the magnitude of the selloff. With clear, timely communication, investors would have understood what was being built and been willing to wait. Instead, the absence of explanation created uncertainty, and uncertainty always gets priced in aggressively.
I also want to be very clear about my position. I am bullish on the company and bullish on Gaia. I am especially bullish on Alan’s involvement. In my view, he is the driving force here. He has good judgment, understands execution risk, and knew the platform launch should have been delayed. He was overruled, and that matters. I have opinions about others involved, but I’m not going to get into that. Alan protects his team, and I respect that about him.
Some people interpret my posts as harsh, and they are, intentionally. When the company does things right, communicates properly, follows a strategy, and executes well, I will be the first to acknowledge it publicly. I will do the write-ups and support it. But when execution slips, communication breaks down, and mistakes are repeated, I will be the strongest critic in the room. I’m not a cheerleader. I’m an investor.
I’m well-informed. I understand tokenization. I’ve spent hundreds of hours researching this space, this platform, and this company. I know Gaia and its potential. Did I get everything right? No. My international capital thesis was wrong. I believed international money would be ready to deploy at launch, and it hasn’t shown up yet. I was wrong on that. Could they still attract it? Yes, but it requires a pivot, and that’s what I’m waiting to see.
So my criticism should not be mistaken for being bearish. It isn’t. I don’t sugarcoat things, and I don’t play games. If I’m posting due diligence, it’s because I believe in what I’m analyzing. I don’t lie for self-gain. That’s why I’m blunt, and that’s why I’m comfortable standing behind what I say.
AI
