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

Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 633 posts

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#111

Post by Clubber »

MBCook wrote: post #89
mikeash wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with Congress questioning someone about legal but shady activity? If he broke the law, he'd just be prosecuted. No reason for Congress to have anything to do with it. But if what he did was legal but wrong, then maybe the law should be changed, and that's exactly what Congress is for.

This is hardly the first time this happened, they could have easily made a law years ago. Have they introduced the Shkreli Can't Endanger those Represented by Welfare Act have they? This was a PR stunt.

Yes, it absolutely was a PR stunt. I mentioned earlier that congress gets paid a lot of money to not regulate pharmaceuticals, this was them trying to save face so the fleecing can continue. Just an example of absolute corruption of our federal government.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#112

Post by kbenson »

tnecniv wrote: post #40
legohead wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The YouTube video of him doing an Ebay Analysis [1] was very interesting I thought, both from a technical point of view and another look at his character. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFSf5YhYQbw

Watching Excel power users is really fascinating.

The first time I saw that video was when referenced in a HN submission about Excel use[1]. You might find it interesting.

1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12448545

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#113

Post by Lewton »

RunawayGalaxy wrote: post #66
CydeWeys wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The outrageous price increases directly led to people dying because they couldn't afford life-saving medication. There's no redeeming yourself from that just because you're charming or intelligent. Psychopaths often are.

FWIW, he claims that he gave the medicine away for free to people who could prove they couldn't afford it, so that he was really only screwing insurance companies. I believe that he was trying to draw media attention to the outrageous, legally-allowed colluding practices of the insurance and pharma industries. It would have been in his best interest to not draw attention to himself and slowly raise the price of the d…

Find one person who got it for free

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#114

Post by KekDemaga »

wfunction wrote: post #78
kbenson wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, I'll bite. Why do you think he's human garbage? You felt strongly enough to reply, maybe you can muster the effort to explain why you think that?

> Okay, I'll bite. Why do you think he's human garbage. Obtaining a license just to increase a drug's price from $13.50 to $750 for no apparent reason other than greed isn't enough for you?

Can I presume you offer your skills to anyone who asks at a wage that reflects a minimum cost of living (ie no iPhone or other luxuries the bare minimum cost of living). If not what is your reasoning beyond apparent greed?

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#115

Post by blahblah3 »

huac wrote: post #74
swang wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Prosecutors argued that Shkreli lied to investors in two hedge funds and the pharmaceutical company Retrophin, all of which he founded. Shkreli told investors he graduated from Columbia University, that his hedge fund was large and profitable, and that he had hired an auditor, they said. These were all lies, according to prosecutors. yeah seems like a great dude...

I mean, everybody came out okay - Shkreli really made his investors a lot of money! Yeah, he lied, but he did some incredible work: typical fraudsters take your money and run - he doesn't fit that mold. Honestly, the issue was that he's an utter asshole, including to his investors. Investors are willing to put with a lot if you triple their money, but Shkreli managed to cross that line. That made him an easy target f…

Just because his investors made money doesn't excuse him.

Suppose you lent 10,000 to a friend and the friend promised to return it within a year. A year later, your friend doesn't pay you back and makes a bunch of excuses. Instead, he takes the 5,000 he has left to the casino, gambles it on the roulette wheel and by luck manages to turn that into 30,000 and pays you back 1.5 years later. I don't think you would be happy with that situation...

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#117

Post by sp527 »

The government and media couldn't have asked for a better outcome. The actual criminals on Wall Street and in Big Pharma, who had the foresight to line the right pockets, go ignored and the outsider who drew the ire of the public - for a decidedly amoral business decision with poor optics - is very publicly castigated. It's a win all around for a monumentally corrupt establishment, which has once again deferred meaningful scrutiny.

Shkreli made the mistake of setting himself up as the perfect loudmouthed, flamboyant patsy.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#118

Post by jjxw »

There seems to be a misconception regarding what Shkreli was found guilty of. The legal case here has very little to do with the pharmaceutical pricing controversy - it is a separate case based on a separate hedge fund that he managed. The gist of it is that he took people's money to start a hedge fund, lied to investors that the fund was doing fine when the hedge fund went belly up, but ended up returning everyone's money plus a sizable return when his separate pharmaceutical venture went well.

When fraud happens those affected don't usually get their money back much less a return on that money. However, it's pretty clear what he did is also fraud (false documents, not returning people's money when they asked for it) even if the fact that investors came out better makes the plaintiffs less sympathetic.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#119

Post by frgtpsswrdlame »

AJRF wrote: post #44
hellofunk wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could argue that he hurt a lot of sick people by making it very difficult or impossible for them to afford the hundreds of percent price increases he laid upon the drugs he took control over. Edit: [0] "... it says that the drug is available for free to people with deep financial need. But Dr. Aberg has watched her patients have to "jump through the hoops" to get it. Patients have to prove both financial need and…

He raised the price of Daraprim in order to fund R&D to find alternative treatments as Daraprim caused some nasty side effects. It was free to any individual who wished to obtain it, with Martin footing the bill. The side effect of the price hike was the insurance companies has to pay more, not individuals. So no, one couldn't argue he hurt a lot of sick people.

>The side effect of the price hike was the insurance companies has to pay more, not individuals.

I keep seeing this, don't you realize that those increased insurance costs are passed on to the people paying for insurance?

>He raised the price of Daraprim in order to fund R&D to find alternative treatments as Daraprim caused some nasty side effects.

You shouldn't buy into his PR efforts, take a look at this:

Shkreli admitted his company sold the same form of pyrimethamine, or Daraprim, that had been on the market for 70 years — although he expressed hope that his company could develop a more potent form of the drug that did not hinder the body’s production of folic acid.

“The mechanism of the drug is folate inhibition,” Anandya reminded the CEO, adding that what Shkreli had proposed might not even be scientifically possible.

“The entire mechanism of the drug is to stop the production of folic acid in the first place and the bulk of its side effects are tied up with that,” Anandya said. “It’s kind of counter-intuitive to say that you are going to solve this problem when it’s not a problem as much as the whole raison d’etre of the drug. This I find is the main problem with your plan. That the solution is not worth $749.”

“One cannot suggest such a (monstrous) increase in the price of a drug which by your own admission does nothing better while telling me your plan is to (because this is the only way it would work) create an entirely new drug not related to pyrimethamine at all because it would require a new structure,” the physician continued. “Which in turn would give you a big hassle since you would require testing and FDA approval from scratch anyway. I think your plan is flawed.”

from: http://www.alternet.org/economy/pharma-bro-martin-shkreli-ge...

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#120

Post by [deleted] »

AJRF wrote: post #44
hellofunk wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could argue that he hurt a lot of sick people by making it very difficult or impossible for them to afford the hundreds of percent price increases he laid upon the drugs he took control over. Edit: [0] "... it says that the drug is available for free to people with deep financial need. But Dr. Aberg has watched her patients have to "jump through the hoops" to get it. Patients have to prove both financial need and…

He raised the price of Daraprim in order to fund R&D to find alternative treatments as Daraprim caused some nasty side effects. It was free to any individual who wished to obtain it, with Martin footing the bill. The side effect of the price hike was the insurance companies has to pay more, not individuals. So no, one couldn't argue he hurt a lot of sick people.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN