Kashoggi's sister was the mother of Dodi Fayed and people wonder why there are conspiracy theorists.
I don't think of an cursory accounting audit as a conspiracy theory. These things go on all the time but aren't ever caught until someone takes a close look and has a reason to do so.
It would be far more shocking to believe that COS is making so much more money honestly with less than 75% of its former membership, a dictator with sole signatory on accounts and no outside accountability for over two decades.
Especially the dictator of a cult that practices and teaches the art of deception, lying and cheating, breaking laws and uses others for his own benefit.
I wouldn't expect anything less than a herd of elephants in their accounts. Would you?
I think you missed my point.
I wasn't talking about the audit, but one should be done as there are more than elephants in the maze of mirrors.
You're right. DM would make great friends with all kinds of crims, wouldn't he? Sorry I didn't give it enough attention just yet. The arms thing is a very big deal.
I'm just trying to get together enough evidence to justify a full audit and seizure of accounts. It's actually much easier than I thought it would be, too.... there's no direction I can even look toward that doesn't have an elephant. Crikey, I'm only on the FIRST NAME on the IAS list!
We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on developing and commercializing innovative small-molecule drugs for the treatment of cancer and immune mediated diseases. Our mission and goal is to build a viable biopharmaceutical company that designs, develops and commercializes novel therapies intended to improve quality of life, increase duration of life and resolve serious unmet medial healthcare needs
WOW! Just checked out Duggan's Stock. It went from a low in 2011 of $4.75 to a current price of $15.02. The high for 52 weeks was $15.82.
There are over 68 million shares, with a market value of over one Billion dollars!
I found the following to be interesting. This is not your typical "Psych" phamacutical company, but rather one who is avoiding the psych drug realm? Perhaps this is why this is accepted in the COS?
Yah, but look at the 5 year graph and you'll see the highs and lows.
But what you say about Duggan - I thought the same thing. The more I read about him and his company, the more I thought he might be okay. Now his company has partnered up with that monster pharmaceutical company, Janssen Biotech, and they actually MAKE psych drugs - it is part of Johnson & Johnson (link: http://seekingalpha.com/article/313249-pharmacyclics-scores-big-with-janssen-biotech-deal) so that excuse doesn't hold up any more. They are CO-OWNERS. PARTNERS.
And Duggan still has outpoints:
1) The $20 mil he's apparently donated to IAS, apparently more than once? Where did it come from?
2) He still has no tangible product for his pharma company.
3) He was intricately involved with the Reed Slatkin scandal - where investors were defrauded out of $254 mil over 15 years http://www.skeptictank.org/slatkin/rslat085.htm
4) The direct real estate contacts with an Scn RE company that COS/Scn has used.
Duggan partnered up with Janssen, selling what appears to be over half his company (the controlling percent) in exchange for only $150 mil upfront to cover his responsibilities in their agreement - which is 40% of expenses and sales advertising, etc. Unless Duggan makes his milestones (targets) for completion of stages of the drug purported to help with cancer (and this is how he gets more money from Janssen, too), Janssen is not going to be sweet & understanding when Duggan runs out of money and Janssen will end up owning his company and his hide. Because that's the ruthless way it's done - and Janssen will run up those advertising bills beyond Duggan's ability to pay his 40%. But maybe that's the plan, maybe Duggan misrepresented his initial results and he plans to just sell his stock to Janssen when he can't make his milestones and hike out of there. :run: He's an investor, not an inventor. If he's never been anything but a scammer, what happens next will tell. But he's in a tight spot now, whether he fully realizes it or not. Results or GTFO basically.
There's nothing unusual about Pharmacyclics’ current financial scene. You'll find its story replicated scores, if not hundreds, of times throughout the pharmaceutical industry.
Big pharma hasn't created new drugs for a long time. For many years, big pharma companies have been investment, marketing, sales and distribution companies.
Big pharma buys / finds new drugs created by small, start-up companies run by scientists, venture capitalists and other financial "angels," which often include investors and owners that are big pharma or owned by big pharma.
Even before the Great Recession, life sciences start-ups have been shaky investments. They’re long shots. Right now, stock prices for many public life sciences companies are low. Life sciences companies that want to go public now are having an especially hard go of it. These days, when they do manage to go public, their stock is often purchased by investors who already own big pieces of the company, who are just doubling down on their investment. In other words, the VCs who are issuing the IPO are buying their own stock, buying low and gambling again.
The money men always demand the most favorable deal terms. Always has been that way, always will be that way.
The only unusual aspects of this story are:
1. An owner of a pharmaceutical company (of any ilk) is a Scientologist (of any ilk).
2. This particular Scientologist does very little Scientology himself (his wife is the one who seems to be the committed Scientologist).
3. This particular Scientologist is not an idiot. He's a hard-nosed, highly experienced investor, businessman and negotiator. He has an investment company and employs a full-time broker who runs his funds. He would recognize a con game from the get-go. Yet, he's still involved in a con game and on record as having donated $20M to the Church of Scientology.
4. $20M donations are not donations -- they're transactions.
What could be going on here? Perhaps …
1. This particular Scientologist was jacked up for baksheesh by the CoS because his wife wanted to keep doing her addiction, and this is the price of her addiction? (Admittedly, $20M is one helluva lotta family love, even if the husband and wife did do a marriage course together several years ago.)
2. The hard-nosed, highly experienced investor / businessman / negotiator received something else (financially speaking or otherwise) in exchange for his $20M.
3. The parties to whom he gave the $20M also got something else out of the transaction.
4. He didn't really donate $20M.
If, on the face of it, it doesn’t make sense, then the face of it isn’t all there is to it.
Thanks, TG1, for your helpful summary and info.
1. You have the wrong concept of Duggan. I wouldn't trust old records for his current involvement in Scn. He's personally been an active, dedicated Scientologist for ages. That's how Slatkin knew him:
"Then, in 1983, their second son was born. They agreed that they needed more money: "And my wife and I were looking at each other and we said, well, we've been volunteering this stuff here for, you know, 20 years between us and it might be a good idea to see if, while we're doing all this volunteer work, that we have enough money to raise our family."
That's what led Mr. Slatkin to fellow Scientologist Mr. Duggan, a successful investor, to learn about investing, according to Mr. Slatkin's deposition."
http://www.skeptictank.org/slatkin/rslat048.htm (you really should read this)
2. Yes, he did pay it. The $20 million is only from ONE year's list of IAS donors. I haven't added up all the years yet, but believe his total contributions are more like $30 to $40 million in total. He seems to be donating huge amounts to the IAS every year. His donation is at LEAST $20 million if just ONE of those issues is true. So that is conservatively low - no reason to believe every year is fabricated and his name and donations a falsehood. That makes less sense than the donations.
3. There is no reason to believe all investors are level-headed and wouldn't have personal interest in Scn. There are about a dozen investors who are Scientologists who have been involved in scams or schemes in years past and several are currently on the IAS donors list as well (i.e., Michael Baybak). Your premise is incorrect. Duggan is very experienced as an investor, but success? Not so much since Scn. Just Google him and read his history for yourself.
4. The reason he took on a partner is the reason that is obvious - he was short of cash. The articles tell exactly why his deal wasn't so favorable - it was his history - so there was no need for conjecture there. It's understandable he might be short of cash after some $30-40 billion in IAS donations. So he compromised about it being a big pharm company - and took on a partner he might not have taken on otherwise. Or, maybe he didn't personally care. Not everyone in Scn is crazily anti-drug and he obviously is not.
People make compromises all the time when they run short of funds.
5. Other - Extremely heavy coercion tactics, perhaps even threatened blackmail by the IAS thugs. There are horror stories about this, Synthia started writing a few of her own experiences here. Scn doesn't make 3X as much with only 25% of its former membership without some monstrous donations from a select, small number.
Or, to use the business word, it was "leveraged" out of these people.
I still think there's some connection to the real estate though. Haven't finished with that yet, but the rest makes sense to me.
Oh, and Duggan had some high priced professionals put together his financials, accounting and other things for him, too. Pricewaterhouse Coopers, for one, and his research team are all top of the line, too. This may make him appear much more acceptable, professional and level-headed than he actually is.
Very interesting thread. However I'll play devils advocate for a bit here.
"Connections matter. The fact that Scientology spends millions on its Narconons, ACHRs and other anti-drug and anti-medical groups ....