131–140 of 182 posts
I bet there are many other boardrooms around Silicon Valley who are panicking over this. There's so much pressure to be immediately profitable and show predictable year over year growth. How many have faked user trials or cooked the books in ways that would make Enron blush?
Earlier 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…
Off topic: he's 95 years old?! I don't care how well connected he is, who thought it would be a good idea to have a nonagenarian on the board of a (supposedly) cutting edge health-tech company?!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because Stanford cultivates this type of activity through a deep worship of commercial activities rather than pure pursuit of knowledge to a very smart but very impressionable group. Colleges need to hold learning to the highest regard ... Holmes was constantly invited as a speaker to campus before she became disowned. Look into Clinkle if you want another example. Kids are obsessed with getting rich quick and glamor…
Stanford sells rich parents membership in a club for their children. Their billions is a pile of bribes. Poor smarter children go without.
Of course poor students are less likely to get accepted because of less access to private tutors and other support.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, that David Boies: https://www.forbes.com/2003/05/28/cz_vm_0528sco.html
I remember in the 90s being a teenager reading Boies brilliant work shredding the Microsoft monopoly with such overwhelming skill, and he was almost a hero of mine. Since then I've realized he's just a hired gun, a genius with no morals or integrity who's in it for the money and nothing else. What a disappointment.
HN is on fire today. Zecco and now Theranos. I'm getting the feeling that we are going to see more and more stories like this in the near future. Theranos running fake tests is just another example of the type of charlatans enabled by socioeconomic lineage. > Theranos plans to offer investors shares in the company in exchange for them not filing lawsuits against the embattled blood-testing company. How far removed ca…
Can't read the Journal article so not sure if it has this or not, but reply from Theranos: This is a one-sided filing by one party to litigation, and we will respond at the appropriate time in the appropriate forum. We disagree with much of what PFM alleges in its complaint. This is not, however, the time or place to contest their mischaracterizations of the record. We will litigate this case in court, where it belon…
Holmes?
HN is on fire today. Zecco and now Theranos. I'm getting the feeling that we are going to see more and more stories like this in the near future. Theranos running fake tests is just another example of the type of charlatans enabled by socioeconomic lineage. > Theranos plans to offer investors shares in the company in exchange for them not filing lawsuits against the embattled blood-testing company. How far removed ca…
did not see a story on Zecco when I searched past week on HN. What post are you referring to?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Off topic: he's 95 years old?! I don't care how well connected he is, who thought it would be a good idea to have a nonagenarian on the board of a (supposedly) cutting edge health-tech company?!
And what evidence, besides your random agism, do you have to argue that a 95 year old person shouldn't be on the board of a company?