I appreciate you sharing this and asking for a genuine analysis. This is a situation where I need to be straightforward with you, even though I know that might not be what you're hoping to hear.

**Red flags (serious ones):**

The fundamental issue is the **power and information asymmetry**. He's done extensive research on you (he found you, learned your routine, knows your earnings, your location history). You know only what he's told you and what you can find via Google. This imbalance is the core problem, regardless of his intentions.

The "verification method" is clever but ultimately reassuring about his *identity*, not his *intentions*. Real people can still propose harmful arrangements. The IT background he mentions actually makes him *more* capable of managing operational security around something problematic, not less.

Meeting a stranger from the internet who's already done reconnaissance on you, in a foreign country where you have no support network, where language might be a barrier, where you're isolated from your usual safety structures—this is textbook vulnerable positioning, even with "separate hotel rooms."

The framing itself (the "detective" game, the structured risk-reduction language, the emphasis on your autonomy) is sophisticated. It reads like someone who understands how to make a concerning proposal sound reasonable. Whether intentional or not, it works.

**Potential scenarios:**

- **Genuine (but still risky):** He's a lonely wealthy man who wants companionship. Even so, you're traveling to meet someone you don't know, dependent on him for transportation/accommodation, in a country where you're vulnerable.

- **Sex work solicitation:** The "extraordinary proposal" language, the emphasis on your terms, the travel offer—these could be grooming for paid sexual services, which may or may not be what he's framing it as.

- **Trafficking risk:** Less likely given the "verification" approach, but the isolation factor and his clear knowledge of your circumstances create vulnerability.

- **Financial/personal exploitation:** Access to your location, learning your financial situation, building rapport before making requests.

**Is this escort services or sugar dating?** It's deliberately ambiguous. That ambiguity protects him if things go wrong, but it's unsafe for you.

**My assessment:**

I think you should **not go**. Here's why:

Even if this person is 100% well-intentioned, you're placing yourself in a high-vulnerability position with someone who has researched you extensively while you know little about him beyond what Google provides. You'd be isolated, dependent on him for logistics, in a foreign country, with no existing support network nearby.

The sophistication of his approach—the "safety framework" language, the verification method, the emphasis on your control—actually *increases* my concern rather than decreasing it. It suggests someone who understands how to manage perceived risk while creating actual risk.

**$100 + a week's earnings is not worth the genuine dangers here.** And I say that understanding you likely earn modestly and travel opportunities don't come easily.

If you're genuinely interested in international travel, Barcelona trips, or meeting people: pursue those through established platforms, with friends, or with people you've built trust with over time in your existing community. The efficiency of this proposal is exactly what makes it dangerous.

You deserve to travel, to have experiences, to meet interesting people—but in ways where the information and power aren't so heavily weighted against you from the start.