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

McKinsey to pay $573M to settle claims over opioid crisis role: source

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 572 posts

Re: McKinsey to pay $573M to settle claims over opioid crisis role: source

#331

Post by some_random »

cochne wrote: post #40
asjldkfin wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the point; you can't say their advice is ineffective, while also condemning them for being effective. The top comment derisively states: "The whole business is a scam built around sending in some 26 year-old with an Ivy League degree and $100 haircut to regurgitate snippets from articles in HBR" In the context of fining the company $500MM for being too effective. At least in the US, where the punishment is…

To play devil's advocate, they could be both ineffective and harmful. Just because they succeeded in getting the company to do something, that not mean it was the right thing. The sale of the drugs could have produced a net loss as well as harmed the people who bought them.

Sure, but I would think generating significant amounts of revenue would tilt the probabilities towards "consultants do actually do something".

Re: McKinsey to pay $573M to settle claims over opioid crisis role: source

#332

Post by t-writescode »

cmmeur01 wrote: post #309
ipv6ipv4 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a very early P2P lending participant in the early days of Prosper Lending, I've seen the other side of this. Many borrowers adopt a mindset that they have earned the money they borrowed and don't feel that they need to pay it back. I came in to Prosper with a distaste for the apparent predatory lender tactics and came out with an appreciation that not everything that seems predatory really is. While there are plen…

Asserting your debt as more important than someone's housing does seem like a pretty shitbag thing to me.

You say that but every debt company will say that very thing. Miss enough credit card bills, and they come for you; and, in states that don't protect the house, that's fair game.

Re: McKinsey to pay $573M to settle claims over opioid crisis role: source

#333

Post by smabie »

Geminidog wrote: post #276
klmadfejno wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I'm glad you enjoyed my prose so much. All I'm trying to convey is that my day to day is listening to client problems, looking at data, talking to employees, and presenting findings. It's neither a conspiracy, nor a scheme, nor a world of wealthy indulgence. I make a healthy wage, but its likely lower than I could get in tech. Like almost every company in the world, its a normal company.

>It's neither a conspiracy, nor a scheme, nor a world of wealthy indulgence But it is a crime the company is responsible for that caused many people to die and become addicted to opioids. You think Kim Jong Un walks among the people he starves to death on a daily basis in North Korea? No. He's too high up. He's in his palace in the capital and he doesn't even see the real state of his country. He just hears about it…

Sounds like everyone is guilty? Not a very useful perspective imo

Re: McKinsey to pay $573M to settle claims over opioid crisis role: source

#334

Post by vkou »

phrz wrote: post #151
ashtonkem wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s incredibly normal. It’s a regularly negotiated term that’s used to shield the wrongdoer from continued civil liability. Frankly, I think it’s such transparent bullshit that we should abolish it. Really, you admit to no wrong doing but you’re willing to fork over half a billion because ...?

If you're going to be made to pay out and concede liability, why not simply go to trial and suffer the same legal fate? It's not there as a mere legalese recitation or to shield the defendant's ego. To finish your rhetorical question, the reason you pay out but admit no wrongdoing is in recognition of the risk of financial liability stemming from the litigation.

> why not simply go to trial and suffer the same legal fate?

The same reason most people take a plea bargain. Punitive damages. "Prison for six months, or the risk of a jury sending you to prison for ten years" is a pretty strong incentive to plead guilty.

If the punitive damages can be expected to be 10-20x of what you'd settle for, you'd probably just take the plea.

Re: McKinsey to pay $573M to settle claims over opioid crisis role: source

#335

Post by wittyreference »

cmmeur01 wrote: post #309
ipv6ipv4 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a very early P2P lending participant in the early days of Prosper Lending, I've seen the other side of this. Many borrowers adopt a mindset that they have earned the money they borrowed and don't feel that they need to pay it back. I came in to Prosper with a distaste for the apparent predatory lender tactics and came out with an appreciation that not everything that seems predatory really is. While there are plen…

Asserting your debt as more important than someone's housing does seem like a pretty shitbag thing to me.

People say that like the "debt" doesn't ultimately matter - as if adopting a policy of "you only get property ownership rights if you can prove you're sorrier than the person who claimed your stuff" won't lead to calamity over the medium-long term.

Re: McKinsey to pay $573M to settle claims over opioid crisis role: source

#336

Post by nickff »

haltingproblem wrote: post #295
neurotech1 wrote: post #292

Let's not forget, these are the same consultants that did work for Enron, work leading up to the 2008 financial crisis.[0] McKinsey is also advising various government agencies on optimizing their Covid-19 response[1], generating revenue of $100m and counting. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McKinsey_%26_Company#Controver... [1] https://www.propublica.org/article/how-mckinsey-is-making-10...

Worse. Most of Enron management was directly sourced from McKinsey and McKinsey was intricately involved in its strategy and accounting. One day the story will be told of how they got away with it but Andersen took the whole blame. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-fea...

"The Smartest Guys in the Room" told that story, and the short version is that Andersen was the auditor which was supposed to be ferreting out accounting issues (and has certain legal responsibilities). McKinsey was a recruiting ground and consultant.

Re: McKinsey to pay $573M to settle claims over opioid crisis role: source

#337

Post by leafmeal »

Closi wrote: post #320
leafmeal wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are people downvoting you because they don't want to humanize someone they hate? Or am I missing something?

I’m downvoting it because it paints all management consultants with a broad brush of ‘being evil’ which clearly isn’t accurate. > While amusing, this attempts to humanize them and somewhat whitewash their abominable actions. Ouch - I’m a supply chain consultant (only one shade away!) is the implication that I am less than human and totally spineless? I know management consultants and most of them do in fact have a sp…

I was referring to downvotes on maybelsyrup's comment, not its ancestor from haltingproblem.

Re: McKinsey to pay $573M to settle claims over opioid crisis role: source

#338

Post by RhodoGSA »

leafmeal wrote: post #305
vypr007 wrote: post #190

Approaching this from a cold math perspective, like a McK consultant would.. $573M settlement for approx 450k deaths, is a a little over $1200 per death if that is given away as compensation at all. Not bad for McK I'd say. The consultants really managed this well.

From the New York Times article, "The amount McKinsey is paying is substantially more than it earned from opioid-related work with Purdue or Johnson & Johnson, Endo International and Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, its other opioid-maker clients, a person involved in the settlement negotiations said" https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/business/mckinsey-opioids...

Yeah, but liquidated damages can far exceed the cost of the project. In most CapEx you can see clauses that include 3-10X the cost of the project in potential liquidated damages if your robot goes down and damages things, or causes the line to go down. I have no idea how this is handled from the Service side but i imagine it's similiar. IANAL.

Re: McKinsey to pay $573M to settle claims over opioid crisis role: source

#339

Post by golemiprague »

cmmeur01 wrote: post #309
ipv6ipv4 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a very early P2P lending participant in the early days of Prosper Lending, I've seen the other side of this. Many borrowers adopt a mindset that they have earned the money they borrowed and don't feel that they need to pay it back. I came in to Prosper with a distaste for the apparent predatory lender tactics and came out with an appreciation that not everything that seems predatory really is. While there are plen…

Asserting your debt as more important than someone's housing does seem like a pretty shitbag thing to me.

How do you think the people who lend the money and their employees pay their housing costs? Not saying that there shouldn't be some humanity involved if possible but it certainly not shitbag, they gave someone money and he should give it back.

Re: McKinsey to pay $573M to settle claims over opioid crisis role: source

#340

Post by glaucon »

leafmeal wrote: post #305
vypr007 wrote: post #190

Approaching this from a cold math perspective, like a McK consultant would.. $573M settlement for approx 450k deaths, is a a little over $1200 per death if that is given away as compensation at all. Not bad for McK I'd say. The consultants really managed this well.

From the New York Times article, "The amount McKinsey is paying is substantially more than it earned from opioid-related work with Purdue or Johnson & Johnson, Endo International and Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, its other opioid-maker clients, a person involved in the settlement negotiations said" https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/business/mckinsey-opioids...

And if I killed someone to get their wallet no one suggests that because I didn't get much out of the wallet it's OK for met to have a lenient sentence ?

If McKinsey knowingly offered advice that led to thousand of deaths then the penalty should be more than $1200/body regardless of what their fees were.

Post reply on HN