SYNTHETIC SAMPLE · NOT A REAL ASSET
What a Cheap-to-Truth decision memo looks like.
This example exists to show the structure and level of reasoning a buyer receives. Every fact below is synthetic.
Repurposed oral small molecule / common inflammatory indication
Why it survives the first cut
Existing human safety experience is relatively strong, the endpoint can be measured objectively within a short window, recruitment is plausible, and no assumed logistics burden forces an expensive site model.
What could kill it
| Question | Current assumption | What would change the call |
|---|---|---|
| Human efficacy | Moderate signal | Primary dataset fails independent review |
| Rights | Potentially obtainable | Exclusive rights unavailable or economically irrational |
| Regulatory usability | Likely | Target regulator requires a materially different evidence package |
| Recruitment | Fast enough | Real site feasibility contradicts modeled enrollment |
Cheapest credible next experiment
A short, randomized Phase II-style study with an objective endpoint, approximately 120 evaluable participants, limited visits, and aggressive elimination of low-enrolling sites. Geography should be chosen only after FDA/regulator usability clears the hard gate.
Illustrative geography comparison
| Country | Why it could win | Why it could lose |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | Fast startup, strong quality, potential R&D incentive | Not always cheapest gross cost |
| Poland | Lower cost, strong EU framework | More startup friction |
| United States | Maximum direct applicability | Higher conventional cost and startup burden |
Recommendation
INVESTIGATE, but do not license yet. Verify the human signal and rights position first. Obtain real site budgets from the two leading geographies. If either fails, stop before building a larger program.