“Unraveling the Allegations: Cristy Fermin, Alden Richards and the ₱100‑Million Actor Scam Rumor”

Introduction

In recent weeks, entertainment columnist Cristy Fermin has once again made headlines—not for a film or TV project, but for speculations she aired regarding a supposed scam involving actor Alden Richards and a staggering amount of ₱100 million. The rumor quickly swept across social media, prompting fans, netizens, and industry insiders to take sides.

In this piece, we take a closer look at the claims, the reactions, and attempt to separate fact from fiction—investigating whether any credible evidence supports the alleged scam by an unnamed actor.

1. The Rumor That Sparked It All

The story began when Cristy Fermin, during her online show “Cristy Ferminute,” mentioned an unnamed actor who purportedly deceived Alden Richards out of nearly ₱100 million.

Though Fermin didn’t publicly name the actor, her insinuations fueled rampant speculation online—and several names quickly circulated among fans.

Despite no proof being provided, the claim itself grabbed attention because of the huge amount involved and Alden’s high-profile status. Over time, Fermin’s remarks have evolved into insinuations that Alden was defrauded by someone he trusted.

2. Cristy Fermin’s Pattern of Insider Teasing

This isn’t the first time Fermin has alluded to behind-the-scenes drama without naming names. Over the years, she has revealed alleged tensions between Alden and his handler—named “Sam”—claiming that his interference had affected work schedules and media appearances.

Fermin even implied there was miscommunication during a film or TV shoot, with Alden instructing Sam to maintain boundaries . She has also defended Alden in other situations, insisting he did not sponsor fan drama or respond poorly to fake Taylor tweets .

When she places herself as an audience or witness—someone “in the know”—her remarks carry weight. Yet there remain gaps between claiming insider status and providing verifiable evidence.

3. Alden Richards: The Public Response

Alden Richards has become known for his measured and tactful public persona. Time and again, he has cautioned fans and netizens not to fall for misleading rumors, fabricated content, or fake social media posts.

A few points he’s emphasized:

Fake images of himself have circulated, and his talent agency (Sparkle GMA) even released a statement warning against believing them.
He regularly urges followers to confirm rumors only via official statements from his sources .
He’s maintained that comparisons with other celebrities are made fairly, not as part of any intentional PR stunt

Most recently, Alden has stayed mostly silent about the ₱100M “scam” charge—sending only a reminder to remain wary of unverified stories and character assassination online.

4. Where Are the Facts?

Broken down, the allegation lacks concrete documentation:

Claim
Evidence Provided?

An actor scammed Alden of ₱100M
None—no documents, no transcripts, no legal filings

Cristy mentions someone unnamed
✅

Alden appears to respond generally
✅

Netizens speculate names
✅

In these types of high-profile situations, assumptions and rumors tend to fill the void when lacking solid proof. While Cristy Fermin has a reputation for tight-lipped disclosures, many critics have questioned the ethics of dropping “blind innuendos” without verification.

Meanwhile, Alden’s consistent urging to think before sharing suggests he’s neither accepted nor confirmed any accusation, but rather quietly defending himself—or at least his image.

5. Comparisons to Previous Cristy Fermin Incidents

The ₱100 million narrative is not the first time Fermin’s stories caused alarm. In 2024, actress Bea Alonzo filed a cyber-libel case after Fermin aired unsubstantiated statements about Bea’s personal affairs. Dominic Roque, too, pursued legal action after alleged claims aired on Fermin’s program

Even Sharon Cuneta and Kiko Pangilinan filed complaints against her. These legal precedents highlight her pattern of teasing rumors without due diligence—often prompting legal or formal rebuttal from those named or implicated.

6. In the Midst of Social Media Speculation

Reddit threads illustrate how rumors gain momentum:

“It’s one thing to report on showbiz balita and it’s another to spread malicious rumors.”

“She makes money out of damaging people’s reputations… Most of the time… these chismis pundits are acting on their own.”

Netizens have also remarked on Fermin’s tendency to revisit the same “blind hints,” and how her frequent use of legal defenses may embolden her to continue

There’s also concern that while her scoops are sensational, they lack accountability. Some suggest fans contribute to the problem by sharing rumor-backed speculation, giving attention and engagement to these allegations.

7. So: Is There a ₱100M Scam?

At this time:

No legal complaint has emerged that names an actor or claims Alden was defrauded of ₱100 million.
No contracts, bank transfers, or affidavits have been presented.
Alden himself has not issued a denial—only calm reminders advising people to verify news.

Therefore, there is no substantiated evidence the alleged ₹100 million scam actually happened. This points more toward another case of an unverified inside story, rather than a factual incident.

That said, it is also possible there are matters being handled privately or under non-disclosure. Still, until facts are presented publicly (lawsuit, statement, document), this remains claimland.

8. What Should Viewers Make of It?

Here are some practical steps to take when encountering rumors like this:

Look for official legal filings—libel suits, defamation counters, police complaints.
Check for statements from directly involved parties (e.g., Alden Richards, the alleged actor).
Evaluate the source—does the person claiming knowledge have reputational accountability?
Ask whether there’s collateral evidence—audio, documents, witnesses.

Until these appear, treat the story as speculative.

Conclusion

Cristy Fermin has reignited attention on a rumored ₱100 million deception involving Alden Richards—but without concrete names, documents, or any lawsuit, the story remains unverified. Alden’s own reminders to verify and fact-check should be heeded by fans and observers.

Until proof is produced—such as court documents or direct admissions—the narrative will remain in rumor territory. This case echoes previous Fermin-linked stories, where dramatic assertions stir interest but lack accountability.

Further reading

For more context on this topic and the individuals involved:

Bea Alonzo files cyber‑libel case against Cristy Fermin – shows precedent for Fermin’s unverified claims (tribune.net.ph, reddit.com, kami.com.ph, philstarlife.com)
Dominic Roque’s complaint against Cristy – another example involving legal action (tribune.net.ph)
Alden Richards cautions netizens on photos – demonstrates his caution and public image awareness (kami.com.ph)
Cristy’s comments on Alden’s handler “Sam” – reveals ongoing relationship details

Closing Thoughts

The ₱100 million claim may make headlines, but headlines aren’t the same as verified facts. As lies or libel spread faster than truth, it remains prudent to await evidence. In entertainment journalism, responsible reporting requires more than leaving readers to guess—especially when large sums and reputations are on the line.