저자: 미상 · 외국인
요약 보기
영상은 비벡 라마스워미와 그가 관여한 Roivant/Axovant 제약사들이 실패한 알츠하이머 신약(RVT-101)을 재포장해 IPO로 막대한 자금을 조달한 과정을 '사기 시나리오'처럼 재구성해 비판한다. 핵심 근거는 GSK 4건 임상 실패, 684명 2B 연구의 completer/responder 분석 조작 의혹, 버뮤다 법인 구조, Roivant의 연 매출 약 6,100만 달러 대비 R&D·SG&A 과다 지출(순손실 약 11억 달러), Vtama 매출 75% 양도 등이다. 다만 진행자는 사기라고 단정하지 않고 의견일 뿐이라고 명시한다. 대상 자산에 대한 1~3개월 가격 방향 예측 발언은 없다.
다듬은 글
Have you ever wanted to be a billionaire? In this video, I'm going to show you step-by-step how a presidential candidate gaining popularity today is believed to have tricked people out of billions of dollars to line the pockets of himself, his brother, his mother, all while robbing investors. So, in this video, I'm going to provide you the exact steps on how to replicate this potential scam.
Now, I want to be clear. I'm not personally coming to the conclusion that this is a scam. These are just the opinions of the information that I found and put together in this video. So, it's important that everybody come to their own conclusion. So, as I always like to say, don't sue me, bro. And hypothetically, if you wanted to become a billionaire fast and quickly, here's a fantastic way to do so.
Step number one. Identify the easiest way to get rich. You might think the easiest way to get rich is winning the lottery, becoming an internet sensation, or a musician, becoming the next Taylor Swift, or being an actor. And all of these are actually very rare ways to get rich. You need something that attracts a little less attention and is a little bit more guaranteed.
How about Wall Street? Like investing in a company that is going to IPO on a major stock exchange like the New York Stock Exchange. Frequently, any year certain way to get rich, especially if you can sell before your hyped-up stock crashes 99%. Okay, so we'll go with Wall Street. Step two. Identify a product with limitless potential revenue.
Actually, I think the potential opportunity here is is really tremendous for delivering value to patients. There's over 5 million patients who suffer from Alzheimer's disease in this country alone. And if you think about it, we own global rights to a drug that has already demonstrated in a large phase 2B study efficacy in the two parameters that the FDA has historically required for new Alzheimer's disease drugs.
And actually, we're only one we believe we're only one additional phase three study away from the approval of this drug. In other words, forever potential revenue. And infinite hope. Curing something that is good for humanity like Alzheimer's. In the pharmaceutical world, well, you'd be perfectly fit to make billions with such promises.
And of course, there's infinite potential because ultimately, everybody unfortunately might end up being subject to the terrible disease that is Alzheimer's. So, why not support a company for the good of humanity with limitless potential to make money? And also, an industry in which most people have zero clue about drug lingo anyway.
The thing with RVT-101 is it's actually a neurotransmitter targeted therapy that actually in part works through the release of acetylcholine. So, that way, you could disclose your fraud in plain sight, and investors wouldn't understand it. But, you'd be legally protected. So far, so good. Easy way to get rich, easy way to sell it, easy way to protect yourself.
But, just to make sure, let's go to step three and add a little bit more protection here, and let's incorporate the company in Bermuda, which is also a tax haven so that when you get rich, you pay as little money as possible in taxes. Step four, just to kind of be a little un-ironic about it all, or maybe ironic, name your company not after the lives that you're not going to save anyway, but instead, name your company after getting rich like Roivant or R O I or return on investment vant.
Yes, that is going to be the parent company, and your baby company is going to be called Axovant. This video is going to be about both and we'll show you how the scam works. But the point is you're going to layer these companies to be a little confusing, too. Step number five, because so far all we've done is identified we're going to get rich on the stock market.
We're going to use a pharmaceutical with hopium and we're going to incorporate it in Bermuda. Then we're going to pick a name for our company, but now we need some startup capital. So, we're going to call up our hedge fund friends for the company we used to work with and we're going to fill them in on the scam.
We're going to raise some startup capital from them. Step number six, we're going to go to a major pharmaceutical with an existing reputation like GlaxoSmithKline, aka GSK, and we're going to offer to purchase one of their failed drugs for $5 million along with some option revenue. Step number seven, we're going to change the name of the drug so you can escape the failed reputation of the drug that you just bought because the drug you just bought has already failed four clinical trials, but we don't want anybody to realize the drug that we're going to sell on the stock exchanges is the same one as the one that had previously failed.
Step number eight, we're going to have our mommy, who is a doctor, reinterpret the results of the failed studies to make the drug seem like it's not a failure after all. In other words, you're not even going to put on the doctor's jacket and pretend to conduct a new study. You're just going to use one of the old existing studies that failed and add some more clarity on how it's actually not a failure.
So, let me clarify that. GSK, GlaxoSmithKline, conducted four studies. All of them failed. Let's go ahead and pick the one Vivek and his mommy used, the study with 684 patients. In a large phase two study, phase 2B study, with 684 patients. And let's see if we can manipulate some of the data. Okay? So, we're going to take a failed study of 684 patients.
We're going to try to make it seem good. But first, let's actually confirm that this study did fail. Here's the study disclosed in Vivint's SEC documents, making it clear that GSK conducted the study, and that this was not actually a Vivint conducted study. Then, we're going to be able to coordinate that study and trial number with these other sites to indicate that yes, indeed, this is the failed study of 684 patients conducted and concluded by 2010, 5 years before Vivint ever even considered taking this product public, this failed product public.
And then let's go to a neutral publication and make sure that it actually failed. Yes, it did. No statistical significance in the outcome of this drug's effects on Alzheimer's. In fact, the drug wasn't even tested on its own. It was tested in conjunction with an Alzheimer's drug that already worked anyway.
In other words, the drug that Vivint is going to take public isn't even a drug that works on it all on its own. It already relies on a drug that already works for Alzheimer's. But we're just going to add our own sugar water to it and IPO that. But even that failed. Okay, so now we know that the drug is a failure.
How do we trick people using a study of 684 patients into making them think that this study that failed is actually a good study? Ah, well, this is where you have to introduce completer analysis and responder analysis. Sounds confusing, right? That's the point. We need to be able to trick people, and these things sound official.
Ooh, analyses. That's official, right? But you and I know the truth. You and I know that a completer analysis removes everybody from the study who didn't complete the trial. Who are the people most unlikely to complete the study? Well, people with adverse side effects or people the drug didn't work for.
So, in other words, let's remove the people who didn't complete the study or people who didn't have all of their information in the study or just people we didn't want included in the study, potentially the bad results, right? And we cherry-pick people out. And unsurprisingly, now you can make the drug look statistically significant as a success.
Ah, interesting. So, with a different analysis hidden in plain sight, you can take a failed study and make it look successful. A responder analysis does the same thing. Looks at the average response of those who completed the trial. What's important to remember here is that by only looking at people who completed the study or who had all their information and followed your rules exactly, you basically cherry-pick your favorites, right?
You can rig the data. But you can trick people about this in plain sight because you can tell people about we did completer and responder analyses and these were statistically significant to help. Well, most people A, won't ever even read those filings. They'll just see stock that's going up and want to invest and be part of it because of FOMO.
And B, even if they read the filings, they wouldn't understand anyway. So, now that the scam is set up, let's have Mommy and her friends issue press releases on how the drug is effective using new rigged analyses. Here's a press release from Mommy's friends who are also on the board of this scam company.
Well, alleged scam, remember. Don't sue us, bro, okay? The company failed a long time ago, but we still don't want to get sued here. Anyway, you got to make your own conclusion. So, Mommy and her board member friends say via this completer analysis this drug is a success. In fact, it's statistically significant to show that it is a success based on that same 684-person trial from 5 years ago on a trial they didn't even conduct themselves.
They just reinterpreted the results for. But, we're also going to publish a responder analysis in a journal somewhere to say it's statistically significant. And we're not even going to be bashful about this. Mommy is going to put her name right on this. All right, cool. Now, we got evidence that says this drug works.
So, look at what we've got. We've got a failed drug that we're going to pretend works. We got a company incorporated in Bermuda, and we're going to market the crap out of this with our hedge fund buddies, and we're going to IPO the sucker to make billions of dollars. And that's it. Step 10, file for IPO to market the failed drug.
Now, raise $1.8 billion for the eight people who work on your staff, including yourself, your mommy, and your brother. Make sure to give all of your hedge fund friends a head's up a heads up. Woohoo, tricky. Head's up or a heads up? Hmm, that the drug is a scam. So, they could sell after, you know, a certain period of time.
The stock is public, so there's plenty of liquidity for you to sell and dump. Step 11, since you're in control of the phase three trial, which you need to get through to actually make sure the drug can sell to people, you know exactly when the drug is going to fail. But, since you're already going into the trial with a failed study, you pretty much already suspect that the drug is going to fail anyway.
But, you're conducting the phase three trial, right? Vivek and his seven friends, they're the ones conducting the trial and any new people they hire. So, they can slow walk this. They can take as much time as they want. So, in the meantime, the stock stays high because people have hope that the trial is going to be a success.
After you make all your money though, and after waiting a couple years to do your trial, you can release your failed phase three study result. Apologize that the drug failed and watch the stock lose 99% in a day. But by then, you've already long made your profit. Oh, and to cover up the history of the failure, make sure to change the name of the company so that when people look up the historical stock ticker symbol from Axovant to Sio Gene Therapies.
Yes, let's hide it all so nobody knows about this alleged scam. And since the scam was so successful and now you're on your way to becoming a billionaire, it would be a good idea to probably keep going with your scam. Now, again, who knows if it actually is, but Vivek today has somewhere between a 7 to 15% stake in a nearly $9 billion company called Roivant.
Remember, that was the mommy company to this baby company. And this company is a company that shows $28 million in annual revenue, but expenses that are absolutely mind-blowing. Yet, this is a company that this presidential candidate is a major shareholder of. You ready for these numbers? Take a look at this.
Roivant, ROI, Return on Investment Sciences Limited. This was the mommy company to that scam company, well, alleged scam company. Again, I don't want to make that conclusion. Maybe I'm missing something. But my opinion is a lot of the information that we've put together here looks a little sus. It kind of feels like you plan to become a billionaire with a failed drug by marketing a failed drug, but only some people would say that.
Other people would say, "No, you know, they had hope it could work. Hey, it was a wildly successful IPO and it had a good cause, and forget about all the people who lost their life savings on the drug because of all this hope they were marketed. You know, it was a valiant attempt. Okay? So, what do we have at Roivant Sciences, or Roivant Sciences, whatever you want to call it?
Well, what you have here is a company with annual revenues up about 10% from last year, from about $55 million to $61 million. That sounds good, right? I mean, $61 million of revenue, that's fantastic, right? It is, except when you're spending $525 million on research and development. So, you're spending nearly $10 on research and development for every dollar you bring in.
But, it's not just that. You're also spending nearly $10 on selling, general, and administrative, which is probably mostly stock-based comp for board members to write articles about how great all of these drugs are. Even though you're not bringing in any revenue, you're marketing the crap out of your drugs that mostly suck.
And so, here's a company that's literally burning net loss of $1.1 billion at at Vivek helped found $924 million last year. Massive money burn for drugs that they have either in development or are selling. If you go to their website, you can see, "Oh, look at all this pipeline, all this pipeline of hope for drugs that they're creating." Here's one that's actually being commercialized, that's actually being sold.
It's called Vtama. It's for plaque psoriasis. Now, if this Vtama was so successful, or going to be so successful, then you might be surprised to find that Roivant, or Roivant, or whatever you want to call it, actually sold off 75% of their ownership in Vtama to another company. In other words, the one commercialized drug they have, they already promised to give away 75% of the revenue for.
Yep. That is how to make a lot of money trying to sell drugs that might never actually be wildly profitable. And you do it all by starting your scam on how to become a billionaire by taking a failed drug, changing its name, incorporating it in Bermuda, and renaming it, remarketing it, IPOing it with false hope, and then doing it over and over again.
Now, I'd like to be clear. While I'm a licensed financial advisor and I provide a lot of insight into how to actually build your wealth without being a scam, whether it's vesting in stocks, or building your wealth by increasing your income, by learning how to make more money as an employee or an entrepreneur, and learning about the ins and outs of how to actually make money the right way, and learn the tricks of the trade, well, check out my programs linked down below.
But when it comes to something that smells pretty sus, I'd say, "Hey, here's a way you can become a billionaire in a pretty sus way." Who knows? Maybe it was all legitimate. But through my research, there were a lot of red flags that just left me with more questions than answers. Maybe this was all a mistake, but let's just say if I were to interview Vivek, I'd have questions about this historharing the video, .
Comments 0