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

Theranos didn’t work with the huge drug company it supposedly made money from

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 119 posts

Re: Theranos didn’t work with the huge drug company it supposedly made money from

#11

Post by OopsCriticality »

minimaxir wrote: post #8
notacoward wrote: post #5

This company is looking less and less like they're struggling to develop new technology, more and more like a deliberate sham. Given that so much of their support thus far has been due solely to the Cult of Disruption, I can't help but wonder if news like this might make at least a few investors consider a return to good old-fashioned due diligence before placing their bets.

What's interesting is that venture capitalists are slamming media outlets for reporting on the issue. Here's a rather silly rebuttal to a recent Theranos piece on The Information from Dave Morin: https://twitter.com/williamalden/status/658705178523258880 "Isn't it time as Millenials that we try to use the Internet to unearth deeper facts and see through these traditional smear campaigns?"

Morin's rebuttal is all the more laughable in the light that Theranos may be deficient in their quality systems: https://www.theverge.com/2015/10/27/9621026/fda-theranos-lab...

These aren't trivial problems that can be fixed "at the time of, or within a week of, the inspection", as Theranos claims.

Re: Theranos didn’t work with the huge drug company it supposedly made money from

#12

Post by seivan »

7Figures2Commas wrote: post #4

Since there's so much interest in unicorn valuations today, and Theranos is a prominent unicorn, anyone wondering about the potential implications of all this news on Theranos' valuation might find it useful to look at Valeant Pharmaceuticals, a publicly-traded company (ticker: VRX). It is facing a number of issues, a few of which have led some to speculate that it could become pharma's version of Enron[1]. In July,…

Would you short it x10?

Re: Theranos didn’t work with the huge drug company it supposedly made money from

#13

Post by joezydeco »

pen2l wrote: post #3

Walgreens recently halted all Theranos expansions (currently only 41 Walgreens have Theranos centers... there were plans to expand to many more): http://techcrunch.com/2015/10/23/walgreens-halts-theranos-te... And it recently came to light that Elizabeth Holmes was misleading people when she said her company voluntarily stopped using nanotainers -- it seems she was forced to stop by FDA: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/1…

How can you perform live tests on patients and still be in stealth mode?

At some point you have to come clean with the FDA about your technology, right? Or is this considered a wide-field clinical trial?

Re: Theranos didn’t work with the huge drug company it supposedly made money from

#14

Post by alexhu11 »

7Figures2Commas wrote: post #4

Since there's so much interest in unicorn valuations today, and Theranos is a prominent unicorn, anyone wondering about the potential implications of all this news on Theranos' valuation might find it useful to look at Valeant Pharmaceuticals, a publicly-traded company (ticker: VRX). It is facing a number of issues, a few of which have led some to speculate that it could become pharma's version of Enron[1]. In July,…

Valeant is especially pernicious case of credulous investors looking at a rising stock price and skipping their due diligence. There's a lot of amazing blog posts from John Hempton and others outlining the problems with their story.

http://brontecapital.blogspot.com/2015/10/some-comments-on-v... http://brontecapital.blogspot.com/2015/10/simple-proof-that-... http://brontecapital.blogspot.com/2015/10/valeant-and-its-ca...

http://azvalue.blogspot.com/2015/08/valeant-detailed-look-in... http://azvalue.blogspot.com/2015/08/valeant-detailed-look-in...

Re: Theranos didn’t work with the huge drug company it supposedly made money from

#15

Post by antr »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #10

I wonder what the real story is. A lot of questions, that if true make it look bad, but if those are just random guesses with no basis in fact? Then its just a hit piece.

Me too, but I'm also very curious to see the due diligence reports (if any), DFJ has on Theranos given that they've been in Serias A, B, and C.

Re: Theranos didn’t work with the huge drug company it supposedly made money from

#16

Post by raverbashing »

erobbins wrote: post #7

Between this and the "wireless energy over ultrasound" scam I'm starting to wonder if VCs actually do any due diligence at all.

I bet they pour over and nitpick lots of minor details on the financials

Tech? That's for the nerds. The light is blinking so it's fine I guess

Re: Theranos didn’t work with the huge drug company it supposedly made money from

#17

Post by 7Figures2Commas »

raverbashing wrote: post #16
erobbins wrote: post #7

Between this and the "wireless energy over ultrasound" scam I'm starting to wonder if VCs actually do any due diligence at all.

I bet they pour over and nitpick lots of minor details on the financials Tech? That's for the nerds. The light is blinking so it's fine I guess

> I bet they pour over and nitpick lots of minor details on the financials

What financials? Lots of these companies have little to no revenue.

Re: Theranos didn’t work with the huge drug company it supposedly made money from

#18

Post by volaski »

minimaxir wrote: post #8
notacoward wrote: post #5

This company is looking less and less like they're struggling to develop new technology, more and more like a deliberate sham. Given that so much of their support thus far has been due solely to the Cult of Disruption, I can't help but wonder if news like this might make at least a few investors consider a return to good old-fashioned due diligence before placing their bets.

What's interesting is that venture capitalists are slamming media outlets for reporting on the issue. Here's a rather silly rebuttal to a recent Theranos piece on The Information from Dave Morin: https://twitter.com/williamalden/status/658705178523258880 "Isn't it time as Millenials that we try to use the Internet to unearth deeper facts and see through these traditional smear campaigns?"

It's a conflict of interest only if there actually is a conflict of interest. Tell me, what "conflict of interest" does Dave Morin have with Theranos?

Re: Theranos didn’t work with the huge drug company it supposedly made money from

#19

Post by mmahemoff »

7Figures2Commas wrote: post #17
raverbashing wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet they pour over and nitpick lots of minor details on the financials Tech? That's for the nerds. The light is blinking so it's fine I guess

> I bet they pour over and nitpick lots of minor details on the financials What financials? Lots of these companies have little to no revenue.

Projections up and to the right.

Re: Theranos didn’t work with the huge drug company it supposedly made money from

#20

Post by tvladeck »

joezydeco wrote: post #13
pen2l wrote: post #3

Walgreens recently halted all Theranos expansions (currently only 41 Walgreens have Theranos centers... there were plans to expand to many more): http://techcrunch.com/2015/10/23/walgreens-halts-theranos-te... And it recently came to light that Elizabeth Holmes was misleading people when she said her company voluntarily stopped using nanotainers -- it seems she was forced to stop by FDA: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/1…

How can you perform live tests on patients and still be in stealth mode? At some point you have to come clean with the FDA about your technology, right? Or is this considered a wide-field clinical trial?

> How can you perform live tests on patients and still be in stealth mode?

That really hit the nail on the head for me.

Post reply on HN