Simon Pérez and Silvia Charro are forever linked to a viral moment that brought them into the spotlight for all the wrong reasons. These two well-known economists had built a reputation sharing advice on mortgages and investments, earning attention beyond the usual audience. Yet the fame came with a price neither expected.
The turning point occurred at the end of 2017. A casual night out with friends, a lengthy after-dinner video, and a lively bingo session precipitated a drastic shift. The following day, both appeared visibly exhausted. In that clip they advocated fixed and floating rate mortgage loans. The message itself was accurate, but the delivery and context created a backlash that eclipsed the content.
The video went viral, spawned countless memes, and briefly surged in popularity before ending in job loss. He had been associated with a real estate firm and lectured at a university, but the collapse of credibility followed quickly. The couple embarked on a prolonged period of hardship, a year of personal and professional upheaval that included drastic changes in lifestyle and perspective. They questioned their public personas and the path they had chosen.
More than five years later, they began rebuilding their careers with a new venture. A major national newspaper covered their turn toward agriculture and investment themes that go beyond mortgages. They spoke of a project focused on cannabis cultivation for pharmaceutical purposes, signaling a pivot from financial topics to agribusiness and regulated cannabis production. The venture was branded Green Capital, aiming to supply the pharmaceutical sector rather than consumer cannabis products.
Balkan mystery
About a year after the project began, the couple assessed their situation and described a field operation in a Balkan country. They explained the process step by step on their YouTube channel, which remains their primary channel for communicating with investors and followers. Despite modest view counts for most videos, the venture drew sufficient interest to attract significant funding.
From the start, they built a cannabis cultivation facility in North Macedonia and began to plan for expansion. The aim was to serve international markets, including potential opportunities in Portugal and Colombia. They described the early phase as challenging, noting legal and cost considerations that pushed them to establish operations in North Macedonia with medical THC production destined for pharmaceutical use rather than recreational cannabis.
According to their account, the operation has required careful compliance with Macedonian regulations, including reporting requirements for any plant that is removed or dies. The landscape in the region is nuanced, with the state permitting production for export under licenses while not allowing local consumption or purchase by residents. They claimed steady progress with regulatory clarity and the ability to secure licenses for pharmaceutical use of the product.
Investors were guided by forecasts of robust returns, with optimistic projections ranging from high teens to triple digits in some scenarios. Over time, they revised these expectations as they gained experience, adjusting to market realities while continuing the expansion plan. They highlighted a paid-in capital structure that supported growth while maintaining regulatory compliance and governance with multiple investors and corporate entities involved in the venture.
Colombian plant
The plan included face-to-face investor presentations in major Spanish cities before extending efforts to Latin America. The goal was to establish a second production facility that could deliver a regulated cannabis supply to international markets. The cost dynamics were explained as favoring certain regions due to real estate and operating expenses, with North Macedonia positioned as a transitional hub for regulatory ease and administrative efficiency.
Colombia emerged as a key target for licensing pathways and cooperation on drug regulation. The partners cited Colombia as highly open to international agreements and noted how existing pharmaceutical regulations could support expanded cultivation under stringent controls. The idea was to leverage the Colombian framework to enable broader distribution across Europe and beyond through licensed pharmaceutical channels.
The plan also contemplated exporting medical cannabis to regions like Europe, with discussions about partnerships in small but strategically important markets. The emphasis remained on medical cannabis rather than recreational use, aligning with stricter regulatory regimes while acknowledging the evolving legal landscape in various countries.
As stated in their communications, the team discussed cultivar selections to meet investor expectations and regulatory requirements. They described a careful approach to cultivation that prioritizes medicine and science over entertainment, stressing that their activities are not related to illegal drug trafficking and emphasizing legitimate medical applications rather than consumption for leisure.
In terms of governance, they described a distributed ownership model with multiple partners and corporate entities. They noted that a portion of investors contributed to new company formations, ensuring proper legal standing and governance for the venture as a whole. They stressed that participation required substantial commitment, with careful consideration given to the level of investment and the associated risk profile.
Looking ahead, the team signaled continued growth rather than opportunistic funding, with plans to expand into new markets such as Colombia while keeping rigorous compliance in place. They suggested that regulatory maturity in regions like Europe could unlock opportunities and reduce barriers to entry, emphasizing the importance of aligning business models with evolving laws and medical-use frameworks. The overarching aim remained to build a legitimate, science-driven enterprise with a strong focus on pharmaceutical-grade cannabis and responsible expansion across borders.