Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Theranos
- This topic has 35 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 1 month ago by
joec.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 23, 2016 at 3:56 PM #21981May 23, 2016 at 4:10 PM #797928
no_such_reality
ParticipantToo much money chasing some place to be.
May 23, 2016 at 5:21 PM #797935joec
ParticipantI suppose I am not the only one then…I have seen interviews with Holmes and on this company for a while and all the interviews with the head person there makes me not like her for whatever reason.
Like you said, maybe something isn’t right, but all the secrecy and a lot of the controversy surrounding the place (I think one of the early researchers committed suicide too) makes me happy the whole place is sorta imploding.
They make all these claims, have been in stealth mode for 10+ years? and no scientific reports. When some research is finally done, it is now known that it was all a sham with fake results, errors in reporting, etc etc etc…
Just more silicon valley “hype” and bubble talk.
I wonder what the valuation is now after they hit 10 billion.
May 23, 2016 at 5:46 PM #797938Anonymous
GuestI’ll confess that there is some desire for schadenfreude behind my interest in this shitshow.
No college degree in an intensely scientific field, no experience with process in a highly regulated domain, no business relationships in a very mature industry … and none of that mattered to investors.
Her lack of qualifications was apparently her biggest qualification!
May 23, 2016 at 6:23 PM #797940mixxalot
ParticipantPardon my ignorance but WTF is Theranos?
May 23, 2016 at 6:39 PM #797943phaster
Participant[quote=mixxalot]Pardon my ignorance but WTF is Theranos?[/quote]
BioTech company that has “REVOLUTIONARY FINGER-STICK TECHNOLOGY” for blood analysis 😉
“cause I know more than anybody, Buy! Buy! Buy!”
May 23, 2016 at 6:41 PM #797944Guest[quote=mixxalot]Pardon my ignorance but WTF is Theranos?[/quote]
http://www.google.com/search?q=theranos&source=lnms&tbm=isch
May 23, 2016 at 8:06 PM #797947njtosd
ParticipantThe thing that surprises me is that Theranos filed patent applications on it’s (theoretical) developments. Applications that go beyond a provisional application are published at the 18 month mark. So why did they keep saying that it was all so super secret? Most of their so called technology has been available to the public for a while now. Perhaps they were trying to suggest that they had something better than what was in their patent applications….? According to the PTO database, there are 109 applications that have published (so far) that have been assigned to Theranos.
I think the business world was looking for a female Steve Jobs. It didn’t hurt that she was young and blonde. I think she’s at least a little Aspergers and probably could not let go of the idea that she had something great. The money lost is a tax on those who have forgotten the idea that if it seems to good to be true, it probably is.
May 24, 2016 at 10:33 AM #797968Balboa_Again
ParticipantYeah, I assumed they were trying to have the best of both worlds. Create the impression of very valuable trade secrets, while churning out a bunch of apps to create the impression of a very valuable portfolio. Move directly to “Go!” and collect absurd valuation.
May 24, 2016 at 11:33 AM #797974FlyerInHi
Guest[quote=njtosd]
I think the business world was looking for a female Steve Jobs. It didn’t hurt that she was young and blonde. I think she’s at least a little Aspergers and probably could not let go of the idea that she had something great. The money lost is a tax on those who have forgotten the idea that if it seems to good to be true, it probably is.[/quote]I had seen her on some interviews before and she seems a little creepy to me.
The old men, past their prime, like Henry Kissinger who populated her board could not see beyond the facade. That’s frequently the case.
May 25, 2016 at 10:04 AM #798037ParticipantAh that scam startup!
May 25, 2016 at 10:50 AM #798042ltsddd
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]
The old men, past their prime, like Henry Kissinger who populated her board could not see beyond the facade. That’s frequently the case.[/quote]
Why would the guy care? He’s there to line his pocket. On the other hand, how on earth was she able to pull this past the VCs?
May 25, 2016 at 5:09 PM #798061GuestShe charmed the old influencial men. And the VCs thought if all those guys are supporting her, then there must be something very valuable.
May 25, 2016 at 9:22 PM #798063Hatfield
ParticipantYeah, it was weird who she packed the board with. Presumably it was to win lucrative VA contracts. As I’m guessing you all saw, a couple days ago the WSJ reported that they’d just invalidated TWO YEARS of tests using their flagship Edison testing product. They’d been faking their data all along.
May 26, 2016 at 10:52 AM #798066Participantwow quite a con artist this woman is!
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.