3 ms·
I'm pretty sure that $600M was intended to be returning a 100x return and nothing else. My point remains, at this point if Theranos fails (and TRULY loses $600
by pj_mukh 11y ago
I'm pretty sure that $600M was intended to be returning a 100x return and nothing else.
My point remains, at this point if Theranos fails (and TRULY loses $600M) then it'll be because of the media shitstorm. If they naturally died because the company was full of shit (which it would eventually), then we'd have more reason to be angry at the waste of money.
- CPLX 11y ago> If Theranos fails (and TRULY loses $600M) then it'll be because of the media shitstorm lolz So the reason the house of cards collapsed is because the WSJ said "Hey guys that thing might be a house of cards over there"?
- pj_mukh 11y agoSorry, that's not right. What I meant was at this point, we just won't know. Or are we assuming that the FDA would've never caught on and shut them down if it wasn't for WSJ? That they would've let fraudulent testing go on unabated. I don't know really know what WSJ did that wouldn't have otherwise come up in regular FDA proceedings other than telling a bunch of millionaires they were stupid with their money. P.S: To my point there are two articles on the HN frontpage about Theranos just today. This now seems like click-bait hoarding. The original WSJ piece was obviously warranted (if for anything then as a warning to SV biotech investors).