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

Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President Balwani Charged with Fraud

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 557 posts

Re: Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President Balwani Charged with Fraud

#511

Post by onecooldev24 »

mikeyouse wrote: post #464
rb808 wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. Shkreli lost 100% of his original investors' money. Source? I hadn't heard that. http://fortune.com/2017/08/05/why-martin-shkreli-is-guilty-w...

From the SEC's original complaint: https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2015/comp-pr2015-2... > 44. On March 2, 2011 , Shkreli stated in e-mails to MSMB investors that "MSMB returned +4.24% in February 2011 " and had "returned +41.71 % since inception on 11/1/2009." In fact, by the end of February 2011, MSMB had virtually no assets. MSMB had suffered over $7 million in losses in its account at Executing Broker a…

What about the fact, that he paid from his own shareholding of the company, and the company investors didn't end up paying for it. The bigger point every one is missing is, he got a 800% increase from the average sentence. That IS NOT FAIR!!

Re: Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President Balwani Charged with Fraud

#512

Post by killaken2000 »

vadimberman wrote: post #454
joering2 wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Larry and Sergey weren't well connected when they started, either, afaik, as most PhD students aren't. Doubt it. I don't think In-Q-Tel/CIA will write you a check because you just happen to have this shiny new search engine that may or may not change the world.

In-Q-Tel is NOT CIA nor its "venture arm" contrary to the popular misconception, and it's actually one of the more open VCs.

Are you sure. They do seem to be pretty close

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/intelligence-histor...

Re: Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President Balwani Charged with Fraud

#513

Post by isolli »

Ice_cream_suit wrote: post #344

From the Financial Times: Here's the nuance of her formula: Commit fraud as an attractive, well-connected WASP woman who happened to be neighbors with well-connected VC Draper family. Tell a great story: Stanford drop-out who studied Chinese, afraid of needles, wants to help the world. Leverage Silicon Valley connections to pull in other really big fish, such as Kissinger, et al, who would be really, really embarrass…

That's an interesting interpretation. But in that logic, how come she never sold any of her shares?

> Holmes has never sold any of her Theranos stock.

https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2018/comp-pr2018-4...

Re: Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President Balwani Charged with Fraud

#514

Post by _pmf_ »

swyx wrote: post #141
_pmf_ wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She is too intelligent to have believed even half of these things, so I'm going with wilful deception.

what actual evidence do we have of her intelligence apart from starting theranos and doing the original research that led to starting theranos? honest question

I don't know, but suggesting that Marissa Mayer or Elizabeth Holmes are not among the most intelligent people ever roaming this planet quickly labels you as an insufferable misogynist here.

Re: Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President Balwani Charged with Fraud

#515

Post by sidcool »

While we enjoy the fruits of capitalism we should also accept its Dark Side. There will always be people who abuse a Goodwill system. I'm not completely satisfied with the outcome, but I hope this serves as a warning to the abusers of capitalism.

Thank you SEC and the Justice Department.

Re: Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President Balwani Charged with Fraud

#516

Post by bonesss »

sgt101 wrote: post #374
siruncledrew wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, I think people blow up the saying out of context from self-confidence to business. If I say, "We're confident we can develop the machine learning technology to deploy X, even though we are currently using human checking" that's a lot different than saying "We can currently do all these things with this machine learning technology we developed" despite the technology not existing yet. It's essentially someone sta…

Yup agree; the gap between "we're confident we can" and actually doing it is.... v.a.s.t....

And the difference between those whose confidence was justified and those whose plans were 'a bridge too far' is... upwards of $900 Billion.

Every building is a blueprint at some point. Some jabroni pointing at the sky and describing what will be is part of the dilemma of innovation and construction.

Re: Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President Balwani Charged with Fraud

#517

Post by zaphos »

kahnjw wrote: post #505
ta76567656 wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Enron? WorldCom? The entire real estate bubble collapse that blindsided the country, including the SEC and other regulators? 2. Madoff was caught because his scheme fell apart, not due to any SEC or other government action.

Maybe you didn't carefully read my original post. I'm not claiming the SEC has a perfect record in finding frauds before the hurt anyone (that would be nearly impossible). I am pointing out that getting away with fraud is extremely difficult. Eventually, you'll get caught, the SEC will uncover everything, and you'll be broke forever. From op: >...avoiding the ire of the SEC is relatively easy if you set your mind to…

Even if it's relatively easy to not get caught, you can't be sure exactly how easy it is, and the downside is catastrophic. So no, I don't think every entity in your thought experiment would be committing fraud. Only ones that knew for sure exactly how easy it is and that they would not get caught for sure. And those ones, by definition, would never be caught so the public would never know ...

Re: Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President Balwani Charged with Fraud

#518

Post by happertiger »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #23

Ok, this is the money line in that press release for me: “The charges against Theranos, Holmes, and Balwani make clear that there is no exemption from the anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws simply because a company is non-public, development-stage, or the subject of exuberant media attention.” For all those entrepreneurs are trying to "fake it until you make it" be aware that the SEC considers your…

These are desperately embattled claims at scale. If you lie to the SEC and you are an ass to the government they will crush you. Oldest story in the valley, and certainly beyond... another tale of hubris that ends in classic tragedy.

Re: Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President Balwani Charged with Fraud

#519

Post by vadimberman »

killaken2000 wrote: post #512
vadimberman wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In-Q-Tel is NOT CIA nor its "venture arm" contrary to the popular misconception, and it's actually one of the more open VCs.

Are you sure. They do seem to be pretty close https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/intelligence-histor...

100% sure. Like your source says, it's a partnership between the CIA and the private sector.

"Close" does not mean part of the organisation. The founder Norman R. Augustine isn't even a CIA person. It is somewhat similar to a spinned-off company which runs independently but has tight connections (and a contract, in case of In-Q-Tel) with the organization that spinned it off.

* In-Q-Tel (theoretically) may have other contracts and major partnerships.

* In-Q-Tel gets to pick who they invest into; CIA may express interest in a particular area or a company but In-Q-Tel manage their portfolios.

* While In-Q-Tel is non-profit, the profits flow back and the employees may profit from it. Meaning, while part of the funds come from the CIA (taxpayers), part come from the past profits.

More detail to those interested in law: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewconten....

Re: Theranos, CEO Holmes, and Former President Balwani Charged with Fraud

#520

Post by gowld »

L_Rahman wrote: post #502
hyperbovine wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Umm, the money had to come from somewhere.

It came from the pockets of insurers and individuals who couldn't afford insurance at all when he jacked up the prices of essential drugs. That wasn't illegal at all though :) Just that he lied to his investors about the source of the returns.

People who can't afford insurance can't afford retail price either, and get discounts.
Post reply on HN