A $100 million wire transfer. Is this literally how people invest in start-ups, just wiring huge sums of money to someone they do not know , on a promise/hope. that just seems so reckless on so many levels
I'm honestly very curious as to what better ways you have in mind for transferring large sums of money.
Elizabeth Holmes found guilty
261–270 of 1001 posts
Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty
#262What always amazed me is they had nothing… nothing that could do the thing they claimed. To the point they used competitors machines to produce results. Pretty amazing.
Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
How exactly do you check if something is authentic? I can have a hundred Theranos-branded t-shirts, mugs, pens, diaries, socks and whatever else you want made and shipped to me in like 2 weeks.
That's your job. Sellers are motivated to provide evidence. "I just have it lol" is not going to command much premium over your costs.
Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
> people are having success with her ideas today Citation needed. The whole concept has a critical flaw, as pointed out by her engineering staff and medical advisors: blood tests require a certain minimum volume of blood to work, and that's inescapable because blood components are discrete, not continuous. For example, a drop of blood is about .05mL, or about 1/20th of a milliliter. A common testing sample size in a…
No need to poll 100 million. 20,000 is pretty accurate.
Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty
#265This will sound weird but I am a collector of swag from large companies that have collapsed due to anything from mismanagement to outright fraud. While we're a rare breed there are others like me out there. Still, even with this oddly specific marketplace being small, let me tell you, the Theranos swag market is hot right now (check eBay if you're curious). Wish I had gone big on this one earlier, because I have a fe…
Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty
#266It blows my mind that she was found guilty for defrauding investors, but not guilty for defrauding patients about their test results. Investors know that every dollar they put into a company could disappear, it's why startups get capital from investors and not bank loans. But a patient does not expect for their blood test results to be completely wrong. Her tests weren't giving false-negatives or false-positives, the…
my thoughts exactly. i'm woefully underread on the whole situation but something is weird and different about it.
one thing that does jump to mind is that the investor list and board composition isn't what i'm used to seeing for stem ventures. i can imagine that perhaps they're less forgiving of failure and were operating with more blind trust in company leadership on stem/technology matters.
Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty
#267Guilty of taking a billion+ dollars from rich and influential people who couldn't bother to do the bare minimum due diligence into their investments due to greed and FOMO. Not guilty of endangering thousands of lives by running fraudulent and inaccurate tests under sub-par lab conditions. Our justice system is such a farce.
As another comment said, patients' tests were apparently run on regular machines, so the patients weren't harmed.
Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty
#268Guilty of taking a billion+ dollars from rich and influential people who couldn't bother to do the bare minimum due diligence into their investments due to greed and FOMO. Not guilty of endangering thousands of lives by running fraudulent and inaccurate tests under sub-par lab conditions. Our justice system is such a farce.
Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
Our justice system works well. You are confusing your own emotional feelings for what you would have liked to see with the reality of what was able to be proven without reasonable doubt. The type of populist mob justice you allude* to is not just at all. *(Fixed grammar error specified below)
If “proven beyond a reasonable doubt” keeps leading to bad outcomes, maybe that’s not the right standard.
Re: Elizabeth Holmes found guilty
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
> people are having success with her ideas today Citation needed. The whole concept has a critical flaw, as pointed out by her engineering staff and medical advisors: blood tests require a certain minimum volume of blood to work, and that's inescapable because blood components are discrete, not continuous. For example, a drop of blood is about .05mL, or about 1/20th of a milliliter. A common testing sample size in a…
No need to poll 100 million. 20,000 is pretty accurate.
Of course, like everything it could be biased by the used methodology.