4 ms·
If you’ve ever done a normal startup you’d know you constantly get bombarded with warnings of failure, and more often than not those warnings are right. And it’
by chrischen 4y ago
If you’ve ever done a normal startup you’d know you constantly get bombarded with warnings of failure, and more often than not those warnings are right. And it’s not necessarily because people know something, but because most startups fail and you have more than a 50/50 chance of being right just by saying “you will fail.”
- cuteboy19 4y agoThat is fine if it is just a loss to you and your investors. Not to your customers. It is like Elizabeth Holmes being told that her tests were faulty and she still does not fix them.
- chrischen 4y agoThis is just a startup that happens to be able to skirt investment laws. This is a failing of regulations rather than necessarily outright scams. If people could invest in regular startups a lot of people would lose money too. Elizabeth Holmes didn't have faulty tests. She literally lied and defrauded investors about having the thing she was working on. That's actually a bad example to compare to the UST situation because that thing was out in the open, including how it worked. A scam requires some deliberate deception or lying. A bad idea is not necessarily a scam, and dumb people knowingly pouring money into a bad idea is also not a scam. If it was a scam in any way, it was a failing of governments of wherever you lived letting you invest in this.