3 ms·

I disagree. She was the CEO and ultimately had the most control. She also did the most lying to investors. We don't know what SBF will be charged with yet - bu

I disagree. She was the CEO and ultimately had the most control. She also did the most lying to investors. We don't know what SBF will be charged with yet - but how would we feel if one of the other employees who did more of the actual transfers/faulty accounting got more of a sentence? As long as it clear that the CEO (in this case SBF) knew about the wrongdoing I think it is fair to hold them to the harshest sentence - even if they are not the "mastermind". It's not like Holmes was a random former actress they found to be a clueless spokesperson. She was a smart person with plenty of resources and education.

dmix 4y ago
> but how would we feel if one of the other employees who did more of the actual transfers/faulty accounting got more of a sentence Sunny wasn't just one of the employees, he was essentially a cofounder and was Elizabeth's closest advisor. The book made it sound like he ran the actual company while she was distracted with the media and having dinners with politicians. Re: SBF, he owned 90% of Alameda and was responsible for sending them FTX customer funds to cover their loses, so he will always be more guilty than the girl who ran it and likely made the actual loses. These details matter. CEO's have more control formally but who did the dirty work is most important.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- fasthands9 4y ago
  I'm not saying he was a random employee but he was definitely lower on the totem poll. Holmes could have had him removed from the company at any time. The same is not true of Sunny removing Holmes. I have also read the book and agree Holmes was more into the PR stuff and investor stuff. But again - the crimes had to do with lying to investors.
  - dmix 4y ago
    I feel like the biggest source of truth was inside the company. Controlling the employees is what kept it hidden for so long and an employee was what took it down. But you might be right that most of the fraud was via investors. The companies operations were just a fiction after a certain point.
  - lupire 4y ago
    She was convicted of the investor crimes, and he was convicted of the operations crimes.
    - fasthands9 4y ago
      >Following a three-month trial and deliberations over five days that ended in July, Balwani's jury returned guilty verdicts on all 12 charges brought by the Justice Department — seven counts of wire fraud for defrauding Theranos investors, two counts of wire fraud for defrauding paying patients, two counts for conspiring to defraud investors and patients, and one count for wire fraud related to Theranos advertisements to patients in Arizona. I dont know the exact breakdown but seems like most of his crimes still had to do with defrauding investors. What distinction do you mean by "operations crimes"?
      - dmix 4y ago
        All tort cases need someone to be the harmed by the crime. So of course the investors would be the central focus. How they pulled off the crime is how they are prosecuted though. Running the fake company that investors put money into is as critical (or more so given the due diligence process) as persuasively asking the investors for the money.
        fasthands9 4y ago
        This was not a tort case. Obviously people were harmed but it was a criminal case.
- lupire 4y ago
  > she was distracted with the media and having dinners with politicians. She wasn't distracted, she was the distraction, the pretty young pretend-genius (with no college degree), white blonde lady in her Steve Jobs costume. Do you think Sunny would have gotten all those investments from old military guys?
  - TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
    CEOs are primarily sales people who exist to sell the company to investors, and to a lesser extent to employees. A talent for strategy and execution is useful but not essential. If you execute without selling, you don't have a company. If you sell without executing you can always write it off as a super-exciting best-effort failed adventure from which you learned a lot etc. As long as you avoid fraud, obvs. So yes - Holmes was the sales person who bought her own hype. Sunny seems to have been the executioner.
    - selimthegrim 4y ago
      Executor?
  - dmix 4y ago
    > Do you think Sunny would have gotten all those investments from old military guys? You're reading far too much into the wording of my comment. Yes, being distracted by dinners with politicians and investors was a critical part of the scam. Regardless, having a "real" company is what allowed her have that image. She just wanted to maintain the fantasy lifestyle and didn't care how. The hard day-to-day grunt work was done by Sunny, while she barely talked to employees. VCs engage in plenty of due diligence into portfolio companies. After 5-6yrs the persuasive pitch deck + founder is no longer good enough to avoid questions. That's where well run company protects the lie long-term, the meat and potatoes.
alasdair_ 4y ago
>She also did the most lying to investors. The reason Sunny got a longer sentence is that unlike Holmes, he was convicted of lying to patients, not just investors.

dmix 4y ago

> but how would we feel if one of the other employees who did more of the actual transfers/faulty accounting got more of a sentence Sunny wasn't just one of the employees, he was essentially a cofounder and was Elizabeth's closest advisor. The book made it sound like he ran the actual company while she was distracted with the media and having dinners with politicians. Re: SBF, he owned 90% of Alameda and was responsible for sending them FTX customer funds to cover their loses, so he will always be more guilty than the girl who ran it and likely made the actual loses. These details matter. CEO's have more control formally but who did the dirty work is most important.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
fasthands9 4y ago
I'm not saying he was a random employee but he was definitely lower on the totem poll. Holmes could have had him removed from the company at any time. The same is not true of Sunny removing Holmes. I have also read the book and agree Holmes was more into the PR stuff and investor stuff. But again - the crimes had to do with lying to investors.
- dmix 4y ago
  I feel like the biggest source of truth was inside the company. Controlling the employees is what kept it hidden for so long and an employee was what took it down. But you might be right that most of the fraud was via investors. The companies operations were just a fiction after a certain point.
- lupire 4y ago
  She was convicted of the investor crimes, and he was convicted of the operations crimes.
  - fasthands9 4y ago
    >Following a three-month trial and deliberations over five days that ended in July, Balwani's jury returned guilty verdicts on all 12 charges brought by the Justice Department — seven counts of wire fraud for defrauding Theranos investors, two counts of wire fraud for defrauding paying patients, two counts for conspiring to defraud investors and patients, and one count for wire fraud related to Theranos advertisements to patients in Arizona. I dont know the exact breakdown but seems like most of his crimes still had to do with defrauding investors. What distinction do you mean by "operations crimes"?
    - dmix 4y ago
      All tort cases need someone to be the harmed by the crime. So of course the investors would be the central focus. How they pulled off the crime is how they are prosecuted though. Running the fake company that investors put money into is as critical (or more so given the due diligence process) as persuasively asking the investors for the money.
      - fasthands9 4y ago
        This was not a tort case. Obviously people were harmed but it was a criminal case.
lupire 4y ago
> she was distracted with the media and having dinners with politicians. She wasn't distracted, she was the distraction, the pretty young pretend-genius (with no college degree), white blonde lady in her Steve Jobs costume. Do you think Sunny would have gotten all those investments from old military guys?
- TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
  CEOs are primarily sales people who exist to sell the company to investors, and to a lesser extent to employees. A talent for strategy and execution is useful but not essential. If you execute without selling, you don't have a company. If you sell without executing you can always write it off as a super-exciting best-effort failed adventure from which you learned a lot etc. As long as you avoid fraud, obvs. So yes - Holmes was the sales person who bought her own hype. Sunny seems to have been the executioner.
  - selimthegrim 4y ago
    Executor?
- dmix 4y ago
  > Do you think Sunny would have gotten all those investments from old military guys? You're reading far too much into the wording of my comment. Yes, being distracted by dinners with politicians and investors was a critical part of the scam. Regardless, having a "real" company is what allowed her have that image. She just wanted to maintain the fantasy lifestyle and didn't care how. The hard day-to-day grunt work was done by Sunny, while she barely talked to employees. VCs engage in plenty of due diligence into portfolio companies. After 5-6yrs the persuasive pitch deck + founder is no longer good enough to avoid questions. That's where well run company protects the lie long-term, the meat and potatoes.

alasdair_ 4y ago

>She also did the most lying to investors. The reason Sunny got a longer sentence is that unlike Holmes, he was convicted of lying to patients, not just investors.