A very worthwhile story, behind a paywall. Welcome to modern times.
Will the world ever come back to their senses and we will ever return to the "modern" times of 2002-2012 when all journalism was free?
Theranos Secretly Bought Outside Lab Gear, Ran Fake Tests: Court Filings
121–130 of 182 posts
Re: Theranos Secretly Bought Outside Lab Gear, Ran Fake Tests: Court Filings
#122Wow. Okay, this takes it from "Shit happens and people can be totally deluded" to actual, genuine fraud. Edit: Also, how can people be that stupid? You have to know the truth will eventually come out? Right? Or, no? I don't get it.
I think Enron makes a good example: because they had insulated themselves from reality for so long, they convinced themselves that what they were doing wasn't really that bad until it was clear it was going to collapse, at which point they were already fucked. Also, a lot of those people got away with it because they left before the fraud was uncovered, despite being part of it. And there are more than enough example…
I don't see how a CFO wouldn't see the issue with "mark to market" and showing potential future gains as current profit.
I am a little fascinated with Theranos because it seems like more employees (vs just leadership) seemed to be aware of, or participating in, the deception.
Almost makes more sense in the Enron case, as the people committing the fraud all had so much more to gain.
Re: Theranos Secretly Bought Outside Lab Gear, Ran Fake Tests: Court Filings
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Totally agree, not sure why they've killed your karma. Between taking a pay cheque and whistle blowing, the large majority of people will always not rock the boat and take the money.
I think you're referring to the people working for theranos itself. However, investors generally try and do their due diligence before investing. Did none of the investors seek an expert to verify the claims made by Theranos prior to investing?
Herd mentality? Later stage investors probably assumed the early stage investors did their homework, while ultimately no one really did (or the early investors weren't at home enough in the space to realise the product wasn't properly working, or results were being faked, etc)
Re: Theranos Secretly Bought Outside Lab Gear, Ran Fake Tests: Court Filings
#124I told you her schtick was too smooth. 'I'm too driven to care about anything but my work' is always a red flag.
Charitably, "anything" also included "reality", "the truth", "potential negative outcomes". She was just telegraphing her intent all along :) /s
No appreciation for humor, I see.
Re: Theranos Secretly Bought Outside Lab Gear, Ran Fake Tests: Court Filings
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was curious and googled a bit. Relevant part: > In the past year and a half, the grandson and grandfather have rarely spoken or seen one another, communicating mainly through lawyers, says Tyler Shultz. He and his parents have spent more than $400,000 on legal fees, he says. He didn’t attend his grandfather’s 95th birthday celebration in December. Ms. Holmes did. > “Fraud is not a trade secret,” says Mr. Shultz, wh…
> what the hell is wrong with Theranos that they seemed so focused on attacking anyone who questions them, rather than focusing on actually fixing the problem The problem is unfixable because it's a complete fraud. There is nothing. They're holding the fort for as long as possible, and it's amazing they've been able to hold it for so long.
You see this behavior in politics also.
Re: Theranos Secretly Bought Outside Lab Gear, Ran Fake Tests: Court Filings
#126How is it always WSJ busting Theranos? is a competitor funding their "investigative journalism"? Not to say the article is untrue, just the super hard-on WSJ has for Theranos is mysterious.
My guess: "If it bleeds, it leads." True life drama and gossip (for lack of a better word) has always sold papers.
I think integrity is important and I don't like the idea of attacking journalists for printing stories critical of Silicon Valley.
Overvaluation effects us all, these hundreds of millions drive up my rent, your rent and could be better allocated to other startup ventures.
Re: Theranos Secretly Bought Outside Lab Gear, Ran Fake Tests: Court Filings
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
The whole 'coming out of nowhere' thing is another red flag. This idea that an undergraduate built revolutionary medical tech in their dorm room no less? Who invests in that? With no data, no trials, no feasibility study?
People who are used to software success stories, not medical tech success stories. An undergraduate having an idea that changes the world is possible in the relatively unconstrained space of software (which the bubble is used to), less so in the long, dull slog of primary scientific research.
Reminds me of what my patent attorney friend said about the difference between copyrights and patents as it relates to software. Copyright serves writing, composing, etc very well because it's a difficult low output craft. Patents serves physical technologies because developing solutions to physical problems is as hard as it gets.
With software there very much more tends to be a direct map between requirements and the solution. It's definitely 'work' which should have some protection but not to the extent of copyright or patents.
Point to make. With a software company if you have a half decent marketable idea, money, and competent people to execute, you have a business. Because the engineers can make the software work. Maybe it's profitable, maybe not so much, but the result is real.
Biotech? Nope. High high chance that your engineers will hit a wall and not be able to make the idea work. And then you have nothing. It sounds like Theranos built a biotech company like as if it were software company and lied when they hit the wall.
Re: Theranos Secretly Bought Outside Lab Gear, Ran Fake Tests: Court Filings
#128So will Holmes go to prison? A green card holder in Texas was just sentenced to eight years in prison for voting in a US election. Surely Holmes will go away much longer right?
I'm extremely skeptical that this could in any way be possible, but is it remotely possible that she herself did not know the extent of the fraudulence of the tests?
Re: Theranos Secretly Bought Outside Lab Gear, Ran Fake Tests: Court Filings
#129This explains to some extent why investors might have given the company that valuation of 9 billion. If the company faked demos and portrayed results obtained on non Theranos tech as Theranos tech results, most investors can't be blamed for believing the tech worked and it was only a matter of time before all tests could be performed by the tech. What is baffling to me is unless the data was doctored why didn't any o…
One could have asked the same of the VW engineers involved in Dieselgate or the GM engineers who worked on the ignition switch and simply changed the part without changing the part number. There are those who want to be part of the team and there are those who can really play on that feeling. Then there are those who just want that buck.
How often are parts changed without changing the part number? If it's a common practice, it doesn't have to be seen as malicious. Are there major/minor/patch level part numbers like there are version numbers of software?
Re: Theranos Secretly Bought Outside Lab Gear, Ran Fake Tests: Court Filings
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
Totally agree, not sure why they've killed your karma. Between taking a pay cheque and whistle blowing, the large majority of people will always not rock the boat and take the money.
I think you're referring to the people working for theranos itself. However, investors generally try and do their due diligence before investing. Did none of the investors seek an expert to verify the claims made by Theranos prior to investing?
There is a concept of self-deception. During a con, a successful conman does very little, they "just" have to prime the mark. After they bite, then they fool themselves so to speak.
Just because VC have money doesn't necessarily imply they are more rational or better thinking. Everyone involved here wanted this to be real and true. So while on paper due diligence was done, unconsciously nobody wanted to lift the curtain too much and peek what's behind.
This is also very common with software testing. Often when developers are testing their own software, they are not very good at discovering bugs and so they end up in production. This happens because even though rationally they want to ship a better product, irrationally it is hard to get into a mentality of proving that the product you just sweated months on is broken, or bug ridden or unstable and so on. So tests are written but they are written to show make them pass and show that stuff and unconsciously avoiding the trick or edge cases that would reveal brokenness.