Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The standalone Theranos thread

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    The standalone Theranos thread

    Somehow the US election thread also became our Theranos thread, and it doesn't feel right to go back to that to post new updates, so here's a new one.

    A doozy of an update for our favorite Silicon Valley disruptor:

    Theranos Inc. allegedly misled company directors about its laboratory-testing practices, used a shell company to “secretly” buy commercial-lab equipment, and improperly created rosy financial projections for investors, according to newly unsealed court filings in a suit by one of its investors.

    The Silicon Valley company—which once promised to revolutionize the blood-testing industry using tiny samples from finger pricks—also allegedly ran “fake ‘demonstrations tests’ for prospective investors and business partners” using commercial devices while pretending to showcase its own technology, according to the filings.

    The accusations are based in large part on testimony from 22 former Theranos employees or directors who were deposed by lawyers for Partner Fund Management LP, a hedge fund suing Theranos. The filings contain some of the first substantive details to emerge from several court proceedings against the company, though they include only short excerpts from the depositions.

    #2
    The standalone Theranos thread

    I still don't quite understand why Theranos is only banned from doing blood testing for two years. Why are they allowed to do it ever again?

    Comment


      #3
      The standalone Theranos thread

      And how long before Stevette Jobs goes to jail for a really long time.

      Comment


        #4
        The standalone Theranos thread

        Please don't say she'll probably never do time Ursus. It's been a week of dashed expectations.

        Comment


          #5
          The standalone Theranos thread

          My guess is that the length of the suspension is linked to limits on how long a ban can be barring a procedure akin to a full trial.

          One reason why she hasn't been prosecuted already is the authorities have maintained hope that there wil eventually be some funds available for restitution. Another was uncertainty over to what extent others (particularly the deep pocketed board) were aware of the deception.

          Developments in both respects have not been favourable for her at all.

          Comment


            #6
            The standalone Theranos thread

            Chicken soup, or possibly oxtail.

            *Ah. Not the thermos thread.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by WOM View Post
              And how long before Stevette Jobs goes to jail for a really long time.
              Well...

              Elizabeth Holmes, founder of embattled blood testing start-up Theranos, has been charged with "massive fraud," the Securities and Exchange Commission said on Wednesday.

              The SEC alleged in a complaint that Theranos raised more than $700 million from late 2013 to 2015 while "deceiving investors by making it appear as if Theranos had successfully developed a commercially-ready portable blood analyzer that could perform a full range of laboratory tests from a small sample of blood."

              The SEC also said Theranos deceived investors by "hosting misleading technology demonstrations, and overstating the extent of Theranos' relationships with commercial partners and government entities, to whom they had also made misrepresentations."
              https://twitter.com/CNBCnow/status/973959052928737281

              Comment


                #8
                No jail, though

                Comment


                  #9
                  I didn't read the release or know too much about SEC charges...is this a civil thing? Or did they already accept the charges and agreed to the punishment?

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Wait....they announce the charges, the plea and the fine all on the same day? Why does that make so little sense to me? Why would she not get jail time when Pharma Bro got seven years for what seems like so much less?

                    Comment


                      #11
                      This is an SEC plea deal. Shkreli wouldn't admit to what he did so got taken to Federal Court (I think).

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Exactly

                        The SEC also seems confident that the forfeited assets can provide meaningful restitution, which was not at all the case with Shkreli.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Disqualified for 10 years and a fine? Wow. Her self serving book or whatever should cover her losses. Even after a plea, make her serve at least a year.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            This administration doesn’t send blond ladies who went to Stanford to jail, Spoony. It would be off brand.

                            There was no plea. She settled a civil action.

                            And she can’t profit from a book because California has a Son of Sam law that prevents just that.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              I assume that someone passed a law to stop the Son of Sam from selling his story, but I've got to say that is a fucking glorious name for a law.

                              Comment


                                #16

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  I know that he was a severely mentally challenged man, and incapable of telling his story, but the Ed Gein law just wouldn't have had the same ring.

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Trying to get ursus's attention here (he was last seen here, hoping he'll be back soon!) as I've got an IT problem, trying to embed a tweet but not managing, maybe someone else can help.

                                    This is his instruction: 3) In the expanded reply box, paste the link to Twitter between "Tweet" tags (in square brackets, with a backwards slash in the second one, just as with any other formatting tag).

                                    I've tried but total fail. What does ursus mean exactly by "tweet tags, in square brackets etc.", I mean what does this tweet tag physically look like?

                                    This is the (test) tweet address I wanted to embed (the one I got from "Copy Link to Tweet"): https://twitter.com/BBCFOUR/status/974012298971901952

                                    so what should there be before https: etc. ? and at the end, after the digits?

                                    Thanks in advance good people of OFTLand.

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      Type it thus

                                      [tweet]https://twitter.com/BBCFOUR/status/974012298971901952[/tweet]

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        Thanks a lot Snake!

                                        Comment


                                          #21
                                          But what's annoying is that sometimes the embedded tweet doesn't show up (for me, at least) until after I do a refresh of the page after posting.

                                          Comment


                                            #22
                                            Draper continues to be delusional.

                                            Comment


                                              #23
                                              That’s from 2016.

                                              Is he still at it after she settled the fraud action?

                                              Comment


                                                #24
                                                Ah, my bad. Followed a link today. Sounds like he wasn't commenting in the immediate aftermath.

                                                Comment


                                                  #25
                                                  Happens to us all.

                                                  It wouldn’t surprise me if there were still one or two true believers hanging their hat on the fact that the settlement did not include an explicit admission of guilt.

                                                  Comment

                                                  Working...
                                                  X