Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Theranos Low on Cash After Settlement with Walgreens

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 78 posts

Re: Theranos Low on Cash After Settlement with Walgreens

#51

Post by abduhl »

awinder wrote: post #49
seanp2k2 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why stop operating when you can continue until bankruptcy and beyond? Serious question...if there's no reputation left to lose and everyone is still getting paid, what incentive do they have to stop?

If you're an investor, do you want to get some pennies back on the dollar, or do you want to get 0 pennies back on the dollar? If they liquidate they can take that cash and pay out something, at least to some class of investors.

I would imagine writing the whole thing off as a loss is better from a tax perspective.

Re: Theranos Low on Cash After Settlement with Walgreens

#52

Post by Uhhrrr »

protomyth wrote: post #3

A company has not only totally failed in the market but employed deception which lead to a lawsuit, my question is how do they have any money left at all? Isn't this such a miss that whatever was left should just be returned to investors and the company close down. Does anyone have a scenario where this company becomes viable?

Maybe if they have patents which become extremely relevant.

Re: Theranos Low on Cash After Settlement with Walgreens

#53

Post by dragonwriter »

Bartweiss wrote: post #24
protomyth wrote: post #3

A company has not only totally failed in the market but employed deception which lead to a lawsuit, my question is how do they have any money left at all? Isn't this such a miss that whatever was left should just be returned to investors and the company close down. Does anyone have a scenario where this company becomes viable?

In all sincerity: does Theranos have anything left? This isn't 23andMe where a viable product got caught up in legal fights over reporting. As I understood it, the fraudulent component here was "everything at all worthwhile about the product". Are they just a shell at this point, trying to use the team and leftover money as a basis for a new project? Do they have some existing offering which isn't totally valueless?…

> In all sincerity: does Theranos have anything left?

As I understand it, Holmes controls an outright majority of the voting rights, so the question is does Holmes have anything left to gain from Theranos operating.

Re: Theranos Low on Cash After Settlement with Walgreens

#54

Post by sliverstorm »

chongli wrote: post #36
paganel wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Years from now, we will be reading amazing business school research Serious question: Is there a decent future for business schools ? Has anyone done a decent ROI calculation on them based on the financial and business results of the past 15/20 years? Are they currently on an upward trend? Downward? Stagnant? The reason I'm asking is that from half a globe away (Eastern Europe) the MBA and business school hype seem…

Is there a decent future for business schools? Yes, as long as you understand their purpose. They exist as a form of class signalling. [0] Many of the older forms of nepotism/cronyism have been made illegal. Racial and IQ discrimination are also illegal. Therefore, business schools and law schools fill the gap. They exist to tell an employer that the applicant is either a member of their class or an ally. [0] http://…

I'm not a fan of floods of MBAs, but surely the degree serves some purpose other than class signalling. It seems like an exercise in typical engineer hubris to think is a trivial pursuit could learn in a week.

Suppose you take a veteran engineer heading into management, and send him/her to get an MBA. Will they come back no better for it?

Re: Theranos Low on Cash After Settlement with Walgreens

#55

Post by cr0sh »

Overtonwindow wrote: post #7

Theranos seems to be an example of supreme hubris. Years from now, we will be reading amazing business school research into how a company, seemingly built on the ultimate vaporware, run by a woman who saw herself as the next Steve Jobs, collapsed due to the CEO's hubris. I think if it weren't for Holmes controlling interest she would have been let go a long time ago.

Also the fact that she doesn't like getting stuck with a needle.

Now, nobody -likes- getting stuck with a needle, but it really isn't as terrible as many make it out to be (unless they miss the vein for an IV - over and over - but that's just up to incompetence or being unlucky).

Certainly not so bad as to perpetrate something of this magnitude.

That said, I tend to wonder if it is possible at all (that is, within the realm of what our technology currently allows for, or what can be done with potential near-future technology) to be able to do the kind of testing at all?

Basically - can you take a drop of blood, and analyse it in such a manner to do all the tests touted by Theranos (even if only in a lab setting and "by hand")? I know for some things it is possible (we all know of glucose testing for those with diabetes, and I've seen something similar for testing of LDL/HDL levels) - so can that be extrapolated to other things - and all with one drop?

I don't know - but I'd love to know. Personally, I don't mind having blood drawn for a test - what I don't like is having to go to a special center to have it done, or to have it done as a separate appointment or whatnot. It would be much more efficient if the doctor or nurse could just poke my finger, get a drop, and stick it in a hand-held machine or something and get an instant reading.

But so far, that seems like it's still in the realm of science fiction than possible science fact.

Re: Theranos Low on Cash After Settlement with Walgreens

#57

Post by heythere124 »

chongli wrote: post #36
paganel wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Years from now, we will be reading amazing business school research Serious question: Is there a decent future for business schools ? Has anyone done a decent ROI calculation on them based on the financial and business results of the past 15/20 years? Are they currently on an upward trend? Downward? Stagnant? The reason I'm asking is that from half a globe away (Eastern Europe) the MBA and business school hype seem…

Is there a decent future for business schools? Yes, as long as you understand their purpose. They exist as a form of class signalling. [0] Many of the older forms of nepotism/cronyism have been made illegal. Racial and IQ discrimination are also illegal. Therefore, business schools and law schools fill the gap. They exist to tell an employer that the applicant is either a member of their class or an ally. [0] http://…

Since when is discrimination based on IQ illegal?

Re: Theranos Low on Cash After Settlement with Walgreens

#58

Post by parthpatel1001 »

abduhl wrote: post #51
awinder wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're an investor, do you want to get some pennies back on the dollar, or do you want to get 0 pennies back on the dollar? If they liquidate they can take that cash and pay out something, at least to some class of investors.

I would imagine writing the whole thing off as a loss is better from a tax perspective.

Please excuse my ignorance, but I don't understand this.

Scenario 1: I have $100 in gains this year. I owe $30 in taxes. I am left with $70. (Say $100 is 30% bracket)

Scenario 2: I have $100 in gains this year. I write off a $10 loss. (Say $90 is 25% bracket). I owe $22.5 in taxes. I am left with $67.5.

Is it the case that writing off the loss is better, if you can be bumped so far down the brackets that (gains - loss)(1-lower_tax_rate) > (gains) (1 - higher_tax_rate)?

Re: Theranos Low on Cash After Settlement with Walgreens

#59

Post by chongli »

heythere124 wrote: post #57
chongli wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a decent future for business schools? Yes, as long as you understand their purpose. They exist as a form of class signalling. [0] Many of the older forms of nepotism/cronyism have been made illegal. Racial and IQ discrimination are also illegal. Therefore, business schools and law schools fill the gap. They exist to tell an employer that the applicant is either a member of their class or an ally. [0] http://…

Since when is discrimination based on IQ illegal?

Since Griggs. [0] You can't do broad-based testing such as IQ or IQ-proxies (SAT or ACT). This is why companies have shifted to hiring based on degrees.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griggs_v._Duke_Power_Co.

Re: Theranos Low on Cash After Settlement with Walgreens

#60

Post by chongli »

sliverstorm wrote: post #54
chongli wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a decent future for business schools? Yes, as long as you understand their purpose. They exist as a form of class signalling. [0] Many of the older forms of nepotism/cronyism have been made illegal. Racial and IQ discrimination are also illegal. Therefore, business schools and law schools fill the gap. They exist to tell an employer that the applicant is either a member of their class or an ally. [0] http://…

I'm not a fan of floods of MBAs, but surely the degree serves some purpose other than class signalling. It seems like an exercise in typical engineer hubris to think is a trivial pursuit could learn in a week. Suppose you take a veteran engineer heading into management, and send him/her to get an MBA. Will they come back no better for it?

It's not that these degrees are required, it's that candidates are expected to have degrees from specific schools such as Harvard. That's what makes it class signalling. You could be a business genius but if you went to a low-tier state school you're not getting hired at the big Manhattan bank.
Post reply on HN