The Good Tech Companies - How Construct Koin Plans to Bridge a $300 Trillion Market Gap in Real Estate Financing

Episode Date: October 31, 2025

This story was originally published on HackerNoon at: https://hackernoon.com/how-construct-koin-plans-to-bridge-a-$300-trillion-market-gap-in-real-estate-financing. Construct Koin targets $300T real estate market with $100M presale. Analysis of ReFi protocol, AI lending, risks, and RWA tokenization trends. Check more stories related to web3 at: https://hackernoon.com/c/web3. You can also check exclusive content about #web3, #blockchain, #cryptocurrency, #real-estate, #construct-koin, #construct-koin-news, #good-company, #refi, and more. This story was written by: @ishanpandey. Learn more about this writer by checking @ishanpandey's about page, and for more stories, please visit hackernoon.com. Construct Koin (CTK) is building a blockchain-based financing protocol that targets the $300 trillion real estate market through a 10-phase presale raising $100 million. The project claims to have secured £15 million in assets and uses AI to process loan applications in hours instead of weeks. While the real-world asset tokenization market grew to $30 billion in 2025, representing a 400% increase over three years, questions remain about execution risks and regulatory hurdles that have plagued similar ventures.

This audio is presented by Hacker Noon, where anyone can learn anything about any technology. How Construct Coyne plans to bridge a $300 trillion market gap in real estate financing by Ashan Pondi? Greater than can blockchain technology solve century-old problems in real estate financing, greater than or does it represent another attempt to apply a solution in search of a greater-than problem? The question becomes more pressing as Construct Coyne launches a pre-sale thatims to raise $100 million by offering tokens that start at $0.10 and scale to $1 across 10 phases. The project positions itself as a real estate financing, refi, protocol that will modernize how capital flows into property development, but the proof will depend on whether it can deliver where others have failed.

The timing appears calculated. The tokenized real-world asset market crossed $30 billion in 2025, a figure that reflects roughly a 10-fold increase from 2022 levels. Private credit accounts for approximately $17 billion of this total, while U.S. Treasuries make up $7.3 billion. The momentum suggests that institutions are finding utility in blockchain infrastructure for specific use cases, particularly those involving yield-bearing assets with standardized documentation. Understanding refi and what construct coin actually does. Real estate financing through blockchain differs from the property tokenization projects that dominated headlines in previous cycles. Instead of selling fractional ownership in buildings, refi protocols focus on the financing

process itself. Think of it as digitizing the loan origination and management workflow rather than the asset title. Construct coin operates by connecting property developers who need capital with investors who provide it through token purchases. The platform claims to U.S.E. artificial intelligence integrated with building information management, BIM, software to analyze development proposals and make lending decisions in hours rather than the weeks or months typical in traditional finance. According to the project website, loans are secured by legal charges registered on title deeds with Hum Land Registry in the UK, providing a layer of protection through real property collateral. The mechanics work through a loan book model. When developers

borrow funds, they pay interest and profit shares back to the protocol. CTK token holders who stake their tokens receive 8 to 12% annual percentage rates paid in USDT stablecoin. The protocol claims it currently has 15 million pounds of assets already secured in chain, though independent verification of this figure through public blockchain explorers remains limited in available documentation. Breaking down the $100 million pre-sale structure, the fundraising approach spans 10 phases, each with a price increment. The first phase opened at $0.10 per token, and the final phase will close at $1.00 per token at the token at the token generation event, TGE. The model resembles how venture capital rounds work, with later

participants paying higher prices than earlier ones. Out of the one billion total token supply, 400 million tokens have been allocated to the pre-sale. This represents 40% of the total supply going to public participants. Another 15% has been earmarked for staking rewards, 20% for ecosystem growth, 15% for Deem and advisors, and 10% for liquidity and reserves. The vesting schedules fordeme tokens matter here, though specific timeframes were not detailed in the publicly available documentation. Projects that allow insiders to sell immediately after launch have historically faced selling pressure that can depress token prices. The presale accepts payments through both Fiat channels, credit cards, bank transfers, and six major

cryptocurrency networks including Ethereum, Bitcoin, Solana, Polygon, and Binance smart chain. Minimum purchase amounts vary by network due to transaction fee structures. Ethereum requires a $100 minimum duetto higher gas fees, while networks like Polygon and Solana allow $10 minimum purchases. The tokens will remain locked until TGE, which the project estimates will occur 12 to 24 months from launch. The technology stack and AI claims. The project emphasizes its use of AI for underwriting decisions. Traditional property development loans can take weeks or months to process as lenders manually review business plans, financial projections, and construction documents. Construct Coyne claims its system achieves a 95% speed improvement by automating this analysis

through machine learning models that assess risk based in multiple data points. The integration with BIM systems provides the AI with access to architectural plans, material specifications, and construction schedules. In theory, this all allows the algorithm to evaluate whether a project is feasible, properly costed, and likely to complete on time. The platform processes applications and provides offers in hours rather than weeks, according to marketing materials. However, the details about which specific AI models are being used, what training data they rely on, and how they handle edge cases remain undisclosed. The technical infrastructure runs on Ethereum as an ERC20 token. The smart

contracts are described as audited, though the names of the audit firms and links to audit reports were not prominently featured in the reviewed materials. The choice of Ethereum provides compatibility with existing defy infrastructure and wallet solutions, but it also means users will contend with network congestion and variable transaction fees unless they utilize layer two solutions. Market context and the RWA surge, understanding where construct coin fits requires context about the broader real-world asset tokenization movement. The sector experienced 380 percent growth over three years, reaching $24 billion by mid-2025, according to a report by Redstone, Godlet, and RWA.

XYZ. This represents a shift from experimental pilots' to-scaled institutional adoption, particularly in fixed income and private credit categories. Major financial institutions have entered the space. BlackRock launched a $2.9 billion tokenized fund, B-U-I-D-L, while Franklin Templeton's tokenized money market fund represents 420. million dollars in assets. Goldman Sachs partnered with Beny Mellon to tokenize money market funds, supported by regulatory frameworks that I am to streamline settlement and reduce costs.

The institutional involvement provides validation that blockchain infrastructure can solve real operational problems in capital markets. The projections for growth vary widely among analysts. McKinsey predicts the market will reach $2 trillion, while Boston Consulting Group estimates $16 trillion by 2030. Standard chartered projects $30 trillion by 2034. The $14 trillion spread between forecasts indicates how uncertain the adoption curve remains. What is clear is that the market exists and continues to expand, creating an environment where projects like Construct Coin can find early traction. Who is building this in corporate structure? Chris Baldry Choro serves as CEO and founder of Construct Coin. According to a podcast interview on the Crypto Podcast, Baldry Choro describes the

Project AS executing, one of the most innovative fundraising strategies in crypto history. His background includes work in recruitment and staffing solutions for commerce, based on corporate registry information. The corporate structure operates through multiple entities across different jurisdictions. Construct Coin Limited is registered in the UK and handles core lending operations, loan book management and regulatory compliance. Global real-world land assets limited, based in the British Virgin Islands, functions as the protocol parent company managing international Web 3 operations and global expansion. A Dubai entity, Construct Coyne DIFC, serves as the gateway to Middle East real estate markets. Construct coin technology limited handles AI algorithm development

and intellectual property management. This multi-jurisdictional setup is common among crypto-products. seeking to optimize for regulatory environments while maintaining operational flexibility. The UK entity provides legitimacy through company's house registration and operates under UK corporate law. The BVI structure offers advantages for token operations, while the Dubai presence targets the Middle East market, which represents over $2 trillion in real estate value according to project materials. Institutional appeal and compliance focus. The project positions itself is compliance first, a pitch aimed at institution. allocators who need legal clarity before committing capital. The protocol includes KYC and

AML requirements for all investors, with enhanced due diligence for purchases exceeding $10,000. This approach contrasts with many defy protocols that operate pseudonymously or with minimal identity verification. The emphasis on milestone-driven disbursements and Oracle verified events addresses one of the key concerns institutional investors have about blockchain-based financing. Traditional tranche financing releases funds only after borrowers meet specific milestones such as completing foundation work or reaching specific construction stages. Construct coin claims its smart contracts replicate this structure by releasing capital only after verification of progress, reducing the risk of fund misuse. The security model relies on conservative loan to value ratios

of 60 to 70%. This means if a developer defaults, the property securing the loan should be worth significantly more than the outstanding debt, allowing the protocol tour cover funds through foreclosure and sale. The protocol also maintains an insurance vault funded by a portion of fees to cover defaults beyond normal parameters. Whether these mechanisms will perform as designed during an actual default scenario remains untested. The pre-sale risk landscape in 2025, crypto pre-sales carry heightened risk compared to established projects. According to data from Kwego, over half of all crypto projects listed since 2021 have failed. The actual failure rate is likely higher since this figure only includes projects that reach listing on aggregator

platforms, which perform basic screening before inclusion. Common red flags in pre-sales include anonymous teams, unrealistic return promises, poorly written white papers, unclear tokenomics, and lack of transparency about milestones. Legitimate projects typically disclose team identities provide detailed technical documentation, show clear roadmaps, and communicate regularly about progress. Projects that lack these elements often disappear after raising funds, leaving investors with worthless tokens. The regulatory environment adds another layer of complexity. Crypto projects face scrutiny about whether their tokens constitute securities under various jurisdictions. The classification determines which regulations apply and what disclosures are required.

projects that ignore legal frameworks or operate without proper licensing expose themselves and their investors to enforcement actions, frozen assets, and potential criminal charges. Real estate tokenization track record. The history of real estate tokenization projects provides lessons. Multipleventures have attempted to bring property onto blockchain with mixed results. Early projects focused on fractional ownership, allowing investors to buy shares in specific buildings. These faced challenges with liquidity, regulatory components. appliance, and the complexity of managing physical assets through digital interfaces. More recent projects have shifted toward the financing layer rather than ownership

tokenization. This approach encounters fewer regulatory hurdles since it deals with loan products rather than securities representing property ownership. However, the business model still requires borrowers, which means projects must build relationships with developers and prove they can provide capital at competitive rates. The question of whether blockchain adds genuine value or mirror adds complexity remains contentious. Supporters argue that on chain transparency, programmable terms, and global capital access justify the technology overhead. Critics point out that

traditional finance already has efficient systems for real estate lending and that blockchain's benefits are often overstated relative to implementation costs. What could go wrong? Several execution risks warrant examination. First, the loan book model requires a steady pipeline of credit-worthy borrowers. If developers can obtain financing through traditional channels at lower costs, they have little incentive to use a new platform that charges fees. The project must either offer better terms than banks or target developers who cannot access traditional financing, which introduces credit risk. Second, the AI underwriting system remains largely improved at scale. While automation can speed processes, it also concentrates risk if the algorithms make systematic errors.

A series of bad loans could deplete the insurance fund and leave token holders with losses. The lack of detailed information about the IU-straining data, error rates, and decision-making process makes a difficult to assess this risk. Third, regulatory changes could impact operations. Governments continue to develop frameworks for crypto assets and tokenized securities. A regulatory crackdown in key markets could force the project to halt operations, delist from exchanges, or face enforcement actions. The multi-jurisdictional structure provides some flexibility but also creates compliance complexity

across multiple legal systems. Fourth, the token economics depend on sustained borrower demand and investor interest. If loan volume does not grow as projected, staking rewards may decline, reducing demand for the token. If token prices fall significantly below the purchase price, early investors may become discouraged and sell, creating additional downward pressure. The long lock-up period until TGE means investors cannot exit if circumstances change. Comparing to established RWA protocols, looking at established players in the space provides benchmarks.

Centrofuge has achieved $1 billion in total value locked, making it the third RWA protocol to reach this milestone. The platform tokenizes invoices, receivables, and trade finance instruments, pushing them into defy markets as collateral. Centrofuge completed AV3 migration in 2025, delivering multi-chain infrastructure across six EVM chains. Ondo finance focuses on institutional-grade tokenized securities and has built infrastructure for bringing fixed-income products on chain. The platform emphasizes compliance and works within regulatory frameworks rather than attempting to circumvent them. This approach has allowed Ondo to partner with traditional financial institutions and build sustainable business models. The difference between these established protocols and a new entrant like Construct Coyne lies in track record.

Centrofuge and Ondo have processed real transactions, demonstrated their technology works, and built reputations over multiple years. They have also secured institutional backing and navigated regulatory processes. Construct Coyne must still prove it can execute its vision and deliver returns to token holders. What the numbers actually show, the project claims 15 million pounds in assets already secured on chain. Converting to dollars at current exchange rates gives approximately $19 million in collateral backing the protocol before the presale completes. If the presale reaches its $100 million target, the ratio of raised capital to existing collateral will burly 5 to 1. This means the project

would need to deploy the raised funds into new loans relatively quickly to maintain proportional backing. The staking rewards of 8 to 12% APR paid in USDT require generating sufficient revenue from loan interest and fees. If the protocol charges borrowers 7 to 15% annual interest, as stated in marketing materials, the math works if the majority of loans perform and default rates remain low. However, a 10% default rate combined with recovery costs could quickly consume the margin between what borrowers pay and what stakers receive. The tokenomics allocate 15% of supply for staking rewards. With 1 billion total tokens, this equals 150 million tokens reserved for rewards. If tokens reach $1 at TGE as the presale structure suggests, that represents $150

million in value designated for staking. Paying 12% APR on a pool of stake tokens would require substantial protocol revenue, meaning the loan book must grow significantly to sustain these yields. The bigger picture, does refi have product market fit? The core question is whether blockchain-based real estate financing solves problems that matter to enough participants to create a sustainable market. Developers need capital and investors want returns. Traditional systems provide both, albeit with friction from intermediaries, paperwork, and slow processes. Blockchain's value proposition centers on disintermediation, transparency, and global access. By removing middlemen, protocols can theoretically offer borrowers lower rates and investors'

higher yields. By recording transactions on chain, all parties can audit the state of loans in real-time. By operating globally, capital can flow from anywhere to anywhere, removing geographical barriers. The counter-argument is that the friction in traditional finance exists for reasons. Paperwork and slow processes often serve as risk management mechanisms that prevent bad deals from proceeding. Intermediaries like banks provide expertise in underwriting, legal structuring, and recovery that algorithmic systems may struggle to replicate. Global capital flows sound attractive until investors face losses in foreign jurisdictions where recovering assets IS difficult or impossible. Final thoughts. After examining the available information about construct coin, the project represents both

the promise and peril of real-world asset tokenization in its current phase. The promise lies in the genuine growth of the RWA sector, which has demonstrated that certain use cases have found product market fit. The peril comes from execution risk, regulatory uncertainty, and the long history of crypto projects that fail to deliver on ambitious visions. The data points to consider are straightforward. The RWA market is real and growing, reaching $30 billion with institutional participation from major financial players. Real estate represents the largest asset class globally at over $300 trillion, meaning even a tiny percentage of tokenization would create enormous value. The technology for tokenizing loans and managing them through smart contracts exists and has been deployed by other

project successfully. Against this, the pre-sale model concentrates risk on early participants who must wait 12 to 24 months for tokens to unlock while hoping the project executes. The team, while public, does not appear to have prior experience building Defi protocols or managing large-scale lending operations. The AI claims lack substantiation through independent testing are published benchmarks. The regulatory landscape remains fluid, with governments still determining how to classify and regulate tokenized assets. The honest assessment is that Construct Coyne is attempting something difficult that, if successful, could generate returns for early participants. It is also attempting something that could fail for multiple reasons

including poor execution, regulatory intervention, lack of borrower adoption, or macroeconomic changes that reduce demand for real estate development financing. Potential participants should view this as a high-risk investment where capital loss is aerialistic outcome, not merely a theoretical possibility disclosed in legal disclaimers. The project would benefit from greater transparency about its AI technology, more detailed disclosure of its existing loanbook, and clear communication about partnerships with developers who will actually use the platform. Without these elements, investors are essentially betting on a vision backed by marketing materials rather than proven operational metrics. In a market where over half of projects

fail, the bar for success is high. Whether Construct Coin clears that Barr will depend on execution over the coming years, not on the quality of its presale marketing or the size of its fundraising target. Don't forget to like and share the story. This author is an independent contributor publishing via our business blogging program. Hacker Noon has reviewed the report for quality, but the claims here and belong to the author. Hashtag DiO thank you for listening to this Hackernoon story, read by artificial intelligence. Visit hackernoon.com to read, write, learn and publish.