No. Eligibility should be assessed against the current programme and the applicant’s circumstances, not the date when a proposal first appeared.
Turn discrepancies into review questions
Ask counsel whether the proposal identifies an existing immigrant classification and accounts for admissibility and availability. A seller’s revised price does not answer those legal questions. Keep a record of which source supports each material claim, and request an explanation wherever the proposal relies only on publicity.
Ask, as the first question, which immigrant or nonimmigrant classification the proposal says the applicant will hold, and under what authority. A programme description is not itself a legal basis, and a proposal that cannot identify the classification has not answered the question it appears to answer. From there the ordinary requirements continue to apply: admissibility is assessed on the applicant’s own history, and matters such as prior immigration violations, certain criminal records or misrepresentation are generally evaluated regardless of any payment.
No payment cures inadmissibility. Confirm as well whether the arrangement described has actually commenced and is accepting applications on the terms quoted, rather than being an announced intention. Executive Order 14351 and the official programme materials are the primary sources for this; a summary prepared by someone selling a service is a secondary account and should be checked against them rather than substituted for them.