4 ms·
> Much of Pierce’s behavior, though, wasn’t so different from that of other tech founders and CEOs promising financiers vast rewards right over the horizon. It
by the_watcher 7y ago
> Much of Pierce’s behavior, though, wasn’t so different from that of other tech founders and CEOs promising financiers vast rewards right over the horizon.
It seems pretty clear that her behavior was very different than any tech founder who declined to forge signatures on contracts.
- dmix 7y agoI also don't see much of a connection between hyped up "unicorns" and overtly defrauding multiple companies and investors through forged contracts. That's far worse than even the few non-software tech companies (Uber, Airbnb, maybe WeWork?) who skirted some grey areas disrupting entrenched markets. Even in biotech with Theranos that's extremely rare. Its just trendy to broadly attack SV these days.
- the_watcher 7y agoYea, it looks like this was an extremely clear, open-and-shut fraud case when it came to trial, and it was discovered fairly easily once any pressure was applied.
- Mathnerd314 7y agoI think he's saying that a casual visit to the office wouldn't have displayed anything incriminating, and the business plan was typical beyond the huge capital requirements. And startups are overly rosy about future revenue all the time. So there weren't a lot of "red flags" in the beginning, although he goes on to describe a lot of discrepancies later. Clearly most companies don't engage in fraud though, or at least they're better at not getting caught.
- ljw1001 7y agoYou wouldn't see anything like that at, say, Theranos, or (to a lesser degree) at WeWork, which was about to be a superhot IPO a few weeks ago and is now struggling to survive. Defrauding investors in an IPO is still defrauding investors.