Post: #126

(04-20-2016 10:05 AM)samsamsam Wrote:  I wonder if she stole a bunch of money and it will appear in the Panama Papers part 2. I heard no Americans were in the first set of releases. No way not one single American was in those files.

Zerohedge had an article saying that the US has its own places to hide dirty money, so now all our corporate oligarchs don't have to hide money offshore. It further speculated that the release of the Panama papers was banking espionage to increase demand of American banks. No idea if it's true or not, but it makes some sense.

Post: #127

WNB


Putting women in charge will result in losses to investors. I could put some analogy but I would simply tell people to look at statistics. What is the percentage of great companies leaded/founded by women?

The idea of using a less invasive method and with a fraction of the blood necessary is a marvelous idea. Any executive would pour money into that. Unfortunately she kept the lie for too long before people noticing the idea didn't work as she preached. It's not like "Oh, the result is wrong 50% of the times but soon we'll figure how to sort it out". I remember seeing an article at Wired (don't read this shit anymore) praising this idea.

Post: #128

She seems to have gained a lot of weight. Maybe she ate all the bungled blood samples to protect them from falling into FDA's hands?

Post: #129

Looks like another gurl powered Silicon Valley scam is being exposed:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/05/13/..._theranos/

Is uBeam the new Theranos? Former engineer claims ultrasound charging tech doesn't work

Quote:A former VP of engineering at a startup that promises fast, wireless charging of electronic devices has claimed that the technology doesn't work and its CEO is misleading people.

The engineer in question, Paul Reynolds, posted his claims - as well as a number of other critical pieces on uBeam's CEO Meredith Perry - on a personal blog called Lies, Damn Lies and Startup PR.

Quote:In his posts, Reynolds, who worked for the company from 2013 to October 2015, during which time the company received $23m in funding, he repeatedly draws parallels between uBeam and its founder and Elizabeth Holmes at Theranos - the blood-testing company that has been under increasing scrutiny for claiming a technological break-through that remains stubbornly under wraps.

Quote:As to whether uBeam has technology that actually works: one of its high-profile VCs Mark Cuban has admitted he has not seen it work. And no one has been shown a working prototype

Post: #130

But she wears black turtlenecks! She's just like Steve Jobs!!

Post: #131

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-18...st-results

Elizabeth Holmes Admits Theranos' "Technology" Is A Fraud: Restates, Voids Years Of Test Results

Quote:Theranos has now told regulators that it threw out all Edison test results from 2014 and 2015, effectively confirming it has no proprietary technology, and also validating that its valuation should be zero.

Quote:Worse, Theranos has told regulators that it used the Edison for 12 types of tests out of more than 200 offered to consumers and stopped using the devices altogether in late June 2015. In other words, Theranos' insane "valuation" was achieved on the basis of doing only 6% of blood tests in house (all of them erroneously we now learn), and outsourcing 94% to companies whose products actually worked and many of whom likely had a far lower valuation than the one at which a bunch of idiot billionaires "valued" Holmes' worthless company.

Quote:In the process of commiting fraud and building up her valuation, Holmes repeatedly gambled with people's lives, sending them clearly wrong results. As a result some patients have received erroneous results that might have thrown off health decisions made with their doctors, the WSJ reports. All this is needed is one death and there is a criminal case.

One thing is certain here. They ain't got any black turtlenecks in prison.

Post: #132

Wow. All those articles listed at the end...

Post: #133

Perhaps Theranos should be hiring NASA test pilots?

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #134

What are the odds of getting the pussy pass if she gets charged?

Even better, since it's likely she won't get charged because misogyny and all, will she get rewarded with another high profile gig? Or does she fade into obscurity?

Post: #135

Rewarded with an executive position by Hilary perhaps?

Post: #136

I guess I have a limited imagination.

I just can't comprehend her actions and putting human beings at risk.

Fucking crazy.

I think she is going to dye her hair soon to try and signal she is insane and try and get away with it.

Post: #137

You heard it all here first.

Post: #138

(05-16-2016 08:05 AM)Dusty Wrote:  But she wears black turtlenecks! She's just like Steve Jobs!!

This dude did it first

Post: #139

Direct result of Wall St flooding the valley with money looking for the next Facebook or Google. It puts a stain on the whole scene there, and exposes it for what it is now; there is no religion left in Silicon Valley. You now have hyper motivated preppy douchebag test takers flocking there to score a lottery ticket, not the brilliant hippie escapists who left the East Coast to go and invent and create at Stanford in the sunshine. Those brilliant hippies created for the sake of building something new and great, not purely motivated by growth or profit. I would even put Larry Ellison in that bucket, and Zuckerberg. Those days are over, and I would say Silicon Valley is a place to be avoided for any new graduate, unless you want to be a corporate robot at the big firms, or end up working for a maniacal fraud like this bimbo.

Post: #140

(05-20-2016 08:32 AM)Vaun Wrote:  Direct result of Wall St flooding the valley with money looking for the next Facebook or Google.

It isn't even Wall St, it's Silicon Valley angel investors like Tim Draper, who gave her the first chunk of change to get it started. His daughter was a childhood pal of Holmes, apparently.

If she got the chance to take Theranos public, Wall St would have been all over it. And it would have created the opportunity for the short sell of the century, had people paid attention to the alarming absence of fundamentals.

Post: #141

(05-20-2016 01:04 PM)SlickyBoy Wrote:  

(05-20-2016 08:32 AM)Vaun Wrote:  Direct result of Wall St flooding the valley with money looking for the next Facebook or Google.

It isn't even Wall St, it's Silicon Valley angel investors like Tim Draper, who gave her the first chunk of change to get it started. His daughter was a childhood pal of Holmes, apparently.

If she got the chance to take Theranos public, Wall St would have been all over it. And it would have created the opportunity for the short sell of the century, had people paid attention to the alarming absence of fundamentals.

most of those angels and VC's are influenced by or come from wall street

Post: #142

I just saw this headline today at MarketWatch and wanted to share it: "Walgreens made $50 million Theranos deal without testing its technology."

The bad news: Someone at Walgreens fucked up royally and it will probably affect prices in their stores for everyone.

The good news: No matter how bad you or I fucked up our investments and no matter how many mistakes we make at work, and least we aren't the guy who made the decision to spend $50 million on this scam.

Imagine having that on your resume.

Post: #143

(05-20-2016 02:10 PM)Vaun Wrote:  

(05-20-2016 01:04 PM)SlickyBoy Wrote:  

(05-20-2016 08:32 AM)Vaun Wrote:  Direct result of Wall St flooding the valley with money looking for the next Facebook or Google.

It isn't even Wall St, it's Silicon Valley angel investors like Tim Draper, who gave her the first chunk of change to get it started. His daughter was a childhood pal of Holmes, apparently.

If she got the chance to take Theranos public, Wall St would have been all over it. And it would have created the opportunity for the short sell of the century, had people paid attention to the alarming absence of fundamentals.

most of those angels and VC's are influenced by or come from wall street

My understanding is that all recent funding for Theranos came from private equity (dumber money) rather than venture capital. For example, CrunchBase shows that 80% of all Theranos funding was from PE. The rumor mill says that Silicon Valley VC's smelled something was off with Holmes and Theranos and haven't touched the company since 2010.

Post: #144

(05-25-2016 04:44 PM)Soma Wrote:  My understanding is that all recent funding for Theranos came from private equity (dumber money) rather than venture capital. For example, CrunchBase shows that 80% of all Theranos funding was from PE. The rumor mill says that Silicon Valley VC's smelled something was off with Holmes and Theranos and haven't touched the company since 2010.

What's the difference between PE and VC? Am I to assume that PE is when you gamble with other people's money, and VC is when you gamble with your own?

Post: #145

(05-25-2016 05:16 PM)porscheguy Wrote:  

(05-25-2016 04:44 PM)Soma Wrote:  My understanding is that all recent funding for Theranos came from private equity (dumber money) rather than venture capital. For example, CrunchBase shows that 80% of all Theranos funding was from PE. The rumor mill says that Silicon Valley VC's smelled something was off with Holmes and Theranos and haven't touched the company since 2010.

What's the difference between PE and VC? Am I to assume that PE is when you gamble with other people's money, and VC is when you gamble with your own?

Technically speaking, VC is a form of PE. The other being BO. However, PE and BO are used synonymously.

VC would be investing at the seed (idea) or start up stage (early operations) of a company, whereas BO would be investing in more mature companies. VCs look for 1 hit wonders, and most of their investments are failures with very few but very successful winners. On the other hand, BOs look for established companies with a track record and steady cashflows. Due diligence is significantly more important for BOs (investing millions/billions more than VC on each venture) which is why this Theranos scandal reflects very badly on the profession; these dimwits were trying to make a quick buck on the back of a female exec (the next steve jobs) that no one really bothered to do their due diligence.

And although it's all private money, some larger pension funds and foundations/endowments do occasionally invest in PE funds so I wouldn't be surprised if this scandal impacts more people than we think (indirectly).

Post: #146

Greedy, anorexic capitalist:



Enlightened, curvy feminist:

Post: #147

(05-25-2016 06:58 PM)EDantes Wrote:  Greedy, anorexic capitalist:



Enlightened, curvy feminist:

What's your point?

Post: #148

(05-25-2016 04:30 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  I just saw this headline today at MarketWatch and wanted to share it: "Walgreens made $50 million Theranos deal without testing its technology."

The bad news: Someone at Walgreens fucked up royally and it will probably affect prices in their stores for everyone.

The good news: No matter how bad you or I fucked up our investments and no matter how many mistakes we make at work, and least we aren't the guy who made the decision to spend $50 million on this scam.

Imagine having that on your resume.

I don't know how people give money to these dorks. They could give it to me and I would give them a bigger ROI, probably by buying coke in Colombia and slinging it in Asia.

Didn't know what to feel after reading this story

Quote:Ebullio Capital, Which Lost 96% In 2 Months, To Shut Doors [Reports]

http://www.valuewalk.com/2016/02/ebullio-capital/
Nigga, how the fuck do you lose 96% of your value in 2 months? You could have put all of it on red and your chances of making a profit would have been higher.


Also, what's BO?

Post: #149

(05-25-2016 08:21 PM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

(05-25-2016 06:58 PM)EDantes Wrote:  Greedy, anorexic capitalist:



Enlightened, curvy feminist:

What's your point?

Sarcasm

Post: #150

^^^

That's why being a blue pill male in any competitive business environment is a terrible idea. You're liable to make terrible decisions just because you want to bang a salesperson or you're so desperate for approval that you will hop onto stupid ideas for no other reason that they're popular.

Would Trump have bought into something like that just because everyone else loved it or because the CEO is a skinny blonde?

Trump would not have. Be like Trump.