Hey /biz/, how long do you think it's going to take until Theranos is bankrupt?
>>1168272
they have a sound business model with great marketting and positive cash flow.
the promised product that bankrolled the company does not exist as it is impossible. as it turns out, you need to actually draw a set amount of arterial blood as with a standard blood sample in order to get an accurate and meaningful result. its just the laws of physics. no handful of magic beans is going to change that.
they're still one of the largest testing companies in america and they have a massive market share.
>>1168272
Within the year.
>>1168294
This article says otherwise with regards to their market share:
http://www.economist.com/news/business/21656196-theranos-ambitious-silicon-valley-firm-wants-shake-up-market-medical
They have a ton of buzz marketing on their side
"Edison" doesn't actually exist. Their software essentially just guesses through extrapolation.
Walgreens and CVS are dropping them due to the massive liability of them having so many incorrect tests
>female CEO
>>1168315
pretty much this. yeah.
all blood tests extrapolate. but you're correct in the way you describe it. its like eli lilly's FDA approval of strattera
>13 week trial on 22 patients
>FUCKING APROVED BECAUSE ITS NOT SPEED
>oh shit it doesnt work
>canada revokes patent
>settles for millions around the world for paying bribes to get aproval
>only standardized control trial shows that it has no improvement on patients disability
you can test any infinitesimally small sample and derive a result. but you start to end up with problems like in astronomy where after 10 years of deep space telemetry three different academics will argue for a particular solar system having 3, 7 or 12 planets because of the way the data is interpreted.
>>1168315
http://www.techinsider.io/how-theranos-revolutionary-technology-works-2015-10
http://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-has-struggled-with-blood-tests-1444881901
Is that true about them using software? If so, that could be considered fraud. These two articles don't mention anything about that though, except that they're still using other companies machines to do the testing.
the investors bought the hype. they paid into the scheme without ever asking anyone in the industry if it was even possible for this technology to work.
then they were talking about floating the company. investors wont vote to float a company on the open market unless they want to sell to get their money back. this generated huge interest. their business came under scrutiny. the investors have lost their money because they bought WAY too high believing they were buying in on the ground floor of the next microsoft. they dont have a new product. nearly all the value of the company is in the patents which are of no value. the company will continue to exist. the investors will just take a massive hit on the value of their shares.
this is the reason the company hasnt gone public yet. the investors are holding out to see if the new technology will work
>protip: there is no new technology
>>1168272
Have any of you ever heard Elizabeth Holmes voice? It's deeper than most mens.
>>1168272
She has the sexiest woman voice it's so fucking deep
>>1168272
10/10 would bang
>>1168272
why is she wearing a turtle neck in so many photos... is she trying to make that her trademark look like she's Steve Jobs or something?
Seems like she's done a good job of convincing people to back her idea that might not actually work and she's now a paper billionaire. The list of prominent people appointed to the board of the company is interesting too.
>>1169007
Definitely trying to imitate Steve Jobs. Seems like she knows how to play the SV Game quite well.
I still got popcorn ready for when it implodes for being the scam that it is.
>>1168495
Ugh, you think so?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGfaJZAdfNE#t=1m23s
>Have rich, connected parents
>They are convinced to give you your tuition money as money for a startup when you decide to drop out (no scholarship eh?)
>Become hailed as a female billionaire under 30
>Oh, wait a minute, if you had finished that degree you might realize that your product doesn't work!
>Whoops
>You, Elizabeth Holmes, managed to fuck up life on easy mode
>You had one job
>>1169966
... what the fuck?
She sounds like someone deliberately and very obviously trying to make their voice sound deeper. Like, that is literally what it sounds like when you try to do a deeper voice. Why? Why would she do that?
>>1169997
I came here to say this, except
>fuck up life
Hardly. She'll be wealthier than 99.99% of the world for her entire life just because of the buzz she's made. Even if she is a complete fraud, which she is, she'll still be opulently wealthy.
>>1168272
>>Investing in a women inventor
You deserve to lose your money
