just brew it! wrote:My take is that the founder/CEO believed that they could do what they claimed... but reality eventually intervened. Then, when things started to go south, instead of admitting defeat they inexplicably doubled down and pushed their flawed product to market anyhow, hoping they could fix it before anyone noticed.
ThatStupidCat wrote:BTW have you seen their board of directors? I thought it was freaking Lockheed or some other defense company. Makes you wonder what they're really cooking under the labs.
Captain Ned wrote:ThatStupidCat wrote:BTW have you seen their board of directors? I thought it was freaking Lockheed or some other defense company. Makes you wonder what they're really cooking under the labs.
just brew it! wrote:.... doubled down and pushed their flawed product to market ......
tanker27 wrote:Product???? No one even they will disclose exactly what their testing procedures are. It's all still a mystery. Even after the FDA and CMS questioned the validity of some of the results in which they say some of the diseases/afflictions/ailments could not possibly be identified from a single drop of blood. Which is the number one thing that Theranos claims.
tanker27 wrote:Now Holmes is claiming ignorance. Oh an yesterday's interview on NBC she gave up the Steve Jobs look for a business suit.
Glorious wrote:She's lucky she got off with just a ban, because I don't think criminal charges were out of the question given the nature of the whole affair. This whole thing screams fraudulent, down to their reactions to any journalist who questioned any aspect of their claims or simply reported the bare facts of regulatory involvement.
just brew it! wrote:I don't believe Holmes originally set out a decade ago to perpetrate a massive fraud (though it appears to have ended that way).
JBI wrote:She hasn't been banned yet, but a ban and/or criminal charges are looking increasingly likely.
tanker27 wrote:"IF" she does have something it probably would be in her and Theranos' best interest to maybe partner up with another testing lab/agency/company to bring whatever product that there still is to fruition. But this may be a forgone option at this point.
tanker27 wrote:Well looks like the Jig is up. WSJ is reporting that the investigation has turned to criminal.....
http://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-is ... 1461019055
Glorious wrote:JBI wrote:She hasn't been banned yet, but a ban and/or criminal charges are looking increasingly likely.
Yeah I was wrong, it hasn't happened yet but the ban is already in the works and it doesn't look like there is any chance of it not happening at this point.
w76 wrote:FWIW, I'd been following her specifically (up and coming potential leaders sometimes interest me more than the widget/service they sell), and I'm in the camp I think with OP. I think she seriously, 100% believed in the product. Which was OK, except after all the revelations I think she still hasn't come around to the full reality of it, which means she's internalized the RDF. That's dangerous. She had warning signs. The RDF meant she dismissed them.
tanker27 wrote:Glorious pretty much sums up how I feel about Theranos and Holmes. I do not think her playing as the innocent bystander is going to pass.
just brew it! wrote:Best case, she's incompetent/negligent/delusional, and managed to hide that fact from everyone for over a decade. Worst case, it was a scam from the get-go. I figure the truth is somewhere in the middle, but closer to the former than the latter (I think the "scammy" aspects crept in little by little, slippery slope fashion, as reality set in and things started to go south).
The Egg wrote:If it was a scam, she would've had to start planning in her early-twenties, which doesn't seem plausible, since at that point you don't have enough life experience to know how to game the system.
Glorious wrote:The problem I have with that though, specifically with the Jobs comparison, is that Jobs was *IN* the garage with Wozniak et al. He understood how the stuff all worked.
Even in the heyday of the RDF, which was *after* that, it was unreasonable expectations and outrageous behavior, not that whatever product being developed simply did not work at all. Apple consistently produced products, and even the canonical failures were completely functional, even if somewhat flawed. Same deal with Nextstep, he might oversold it but it wasn't as if the investors didn't realize they were gambling on more on Jobs than anything else. Either way, the product was delivered and it worked.
With Holmes, well, it's always been just this one thing. This one idea, that for like over ten years now, has *never* worked.
You know, that's sort of important. In fact, it's the only thing that actually matters.
lecturing the world about how she's obviously a brilliant visionary because she says so
paulWTAMU wrote:lecturing the world about how she's obviously a brilliant visionary because she says so
That sounds like a sweet gig; any advice on pursuing it ?