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

221–230 of 633 posts

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#221

Post by bmelton »

Lewton wrote: post #113
RunawayGalaxy wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Not trying to play contrarian here, but are there any reported cases of people who've actually died for lack of Daraprim?

> Find one person who got it for free

This guy got it free, for life. http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/this...

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#222

Post by PeCaN »

binarymax wrote: post #96
discombobulate wrote: post #77

I quite like Martin. I talked to him a few time on YouTube, whilst he was live streaming. He's whip-smart & knowledgeable. He does, however, have a couple of major flaws. 1) He trolls. Hard. 2) It seems he lies. Which I picked up from a previous news article. (He claimed to have ~$50mm under management @ his previous hedge fund. It was more like $1.6mm. Something like that). I can forgive the trolling. It's over the…

Oh so his only two flaws are trolling and he lies. But he's OK sure. How about the fact that he caused the suffering of patients needing the drug that he was raised prices on?

Got a source for the "suffering"?

also, iirc the patients that need that drug are literally low triple digits if not lower. making sure they all get it one way or another is not exactly a challenging logistics problem. imo it's more of a marvel that something so niche is available at all.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#223

Post by bronzeage »

Clubber wrote: post #5

I use to hate this guy, then I saw the Vice interview on him. It was nice to see his side of the story. I don't know much about this case in particular. It was kinda sleazy to see the congress question him about his price increases when they knew damn well it was perfectly legal and they haven't done anything to stop it. Shkreli seems to be trying to expose this hypocrisy, but the news loves their stories. Vice inter…

That interview changed my point of view as well. It does indeed seem like hypocrisy, and like the competing and stronger drug companies set up this publication lynch. I can't believe that out of all the strong drug companies, the first time a drug was increased in price is this poor 2015 founded company. Why is it, that the first time we hear about this common practice in drug industry it's within this relatively new company?

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#224

Post by singtings »

charlesdm wrote: post #84
Sangermaine wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you kidding? He's human garbage, let him rot. It's astounding how people are being taken in by this con man.

Plenty of people who one would classify as "human garbage" make hundreds of millions. Frankly, it does not matter. What matters is: 1) did people lose money, due to some scam? and 2) did he do anything illegal.

Well he committed fraud but people did not lose money. So yes to question 2 and no to question 1.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#225

Post by kbenson »

bmelton wrote: post #179
charlesdm wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't particularly like the guy, but I do believe him to be pretty smart. How can he be convicted of fraud if he got them a 3x return?

Because he defrauded them in order to get their 3x return. Put simply, if I burn my house down in order to collect the insurance money, I've committed insurance fraud whether or not I pay that money back, and no amount of profit on the payback negates the illegality.

Although, interestingly, he didn't steal their money, he lost it in a bad trade, which is probably (maybe?) covered under the risks associated with the fund's operation. The deception was not telling people their money was gone (and also lying somewhat about details of the fund initially). Given that the loss was an accident that he didn't profit from, and that he worked to repay the money, there's a critical difference between your example and what's reportedly happened here, which is intent.

It's more similar to you managing a property for someone, and telling them you got fire insurance when you haven't yet, and then when the house burns down accidentally you work to make the money to cover what the insurance would have covered. You did commit fraud by not getting the insurance when you said you would, but you also covered the costs in the end.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#226

Post by MichaelGG »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #210
MichaelGG wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in order to save ~100% on a $100,000 treatment, they have to "jump though the hoops" and prove they need it (otherwise everyone would just do that?). OK?

It wasn't always a $100,000 treatment. Shkreli made it a $100,000 treatment with the justification being that the poor could still obtain it for free. But then he puts a bunch of beauracratic roadblocks in the way and it's their fault they don't jump through his hoops? For a pill that costs $1 outside the US and which he made $750? Come on man.

I'd imagine the roadblocks are there to prevent people abusing the system. And the rest of the roadblocks are by the FDA and perhaps CBP, right? Otherwise people could just import the $1 pills and be fine.

If it turns out Turing was acting malicious and intentionally tried to block people from getting the medication despite knowing they were eligible, that's a different story. But I'm hardly going to take the word of biased medical professionals on it.

Martin put a face to all this, pointed out a huge flaw in this system and made money doing it. Then to top it off, he dares to laugh at everyone in the system about it (like in [1]).

If Martin had just hid behind normal pharma PR, few people would be outraged, it'd just be general grousing with little airtime.

1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EXsVfiFbp8

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#227

Post by nodesocket »

Unfortunately Martin was made a scapegoat and they made an example out of him because of his arrogance and vocal personality. How did the executives that caused the financial crisis of 2008 get off completely free but a relatively tiny hedge fund manager get the book thrown at him? This was a witch hunt, no doubt about it.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#228

Post by emodendroket »

charlesdm wrote: post #220
elliotec wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a check/balance against state power, i.e. the judicial system. Many countries have used this method for centuries. It's not ridiculous because the idea is that (the diverse selection of) your peers are equal to you in most ways, so are able to fairly judge you. A judge still has a lot of power and usually ultimately the decision goes to them as far as sentencing etc.

Right. But thing is, they are not actually equal on specialised matters? I understand that it works when you're dealing with things like murder. That can be relatively clear. But how about hacking? Securities fraud? Money laundering? Tax fraud? These are all highly specialised issues that the average person knows nothing about. No average person, unless they have an interest in it, will be able to make a good call on…

The judge/jury distinction is basically orthogonal. Judges who hear a case are not necessarily experts. And by the same token, one could easily imagine a system where a jury had to be composed of experts in the field. I'm not convinced that would be a good thing to do, though.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#229

Post by pyroinferno »

Sangermaine wrote: post #110
enschlnd wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's not kidding. He's not human garbage. It's not astounding that different people have different opinions at all. Your post suggests that you're very emotionally attached to your opinion, which is not good. Nor takes into consideration some basic premises which are necessary for people to understand one another.

>He's not human garbage. Yeah, but he is. Spare me the faux "logically objective" pose. There is a reason he's known as the "most hated man in America". His actions have earned him this reputation.

>"Spare me the logic" Yup, this is hackernews alright.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#230

Post by austenallred »

emodendroket wrote: post #201
austenallred wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not wrong. Humans are fallible and thus so are jury trials.

But judges are infallible and thus so are bench trials?

Um no one said or even implied either of those things
Post reply on HN