Theranos- medical lab testing

Hercule Parrot
Posts: 693
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2015 3:58 pm

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#26

Post by Hercule Parrot » Sat Jun 16, 2018 9:52 pm

Yeah, one of the secrets to her success was her extraordinary leverage over stupid old men. Astonishing story in the Bad Blood book about a birthday party for her, where they feted her as if she was an 11yr old prodigy. Henry Kissinger recited a poem he had written to celebrate her beauty and talents.!!

Saddest story was about George Shultz, a senior board member. His grandson was working in Theranos and realised it was a scam. Holmes and her scumbag boyfriend went after him with lawyers and 24/7 surveillance. Grandson called ol' George and said he needed to see him to tell him what was really going on there. Grandpa says "golly, how awful, come straight over my boy".

Before grandson arrives, Shultz calls Holmes and rats him out. Holmes sends a couple of very aggressive lawyers to the house, who hide in another room until their cue to jump out and threaten grandson with ruin if he doesn't immediately sign pre-drafted affadavit to the effect that he made it all up. Grandpa Shultz explains that Holmes is very upset by grandson's disloyalty, and urges him to comply.

That story will stay with me for a long time. I suppose they try to avoid each other at family gatherings now....



User avatar
much ado
Posts: 1388
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:56 am
Location: The Left Coast

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#27

Post by much ado » Sat Jun 16, 2018 10:51 pm

kate520 wrote:
Sat Jun 16, 2018 4:39 pm
Pretty good, huh? But I think Jennifer will have to practice to get that odd gaze just right.
Pshaw, that’s easy...contacts make you look like that. I’ve often wondered if people who wear contacts realize they look like they’re on the verge of going postal. Its one of the reasons I’ve never considered them.
There are reports that Jennifer Lawrence wears colored contacts...

Celebrities that wear colored contact lenses



User avatar
kate520
Posts: 14825
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Occupation: servant of cats, chicken wrangler
Contact:

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#28

Post by kate520 » Sat Jun 16, 2018 11:08 pm

Trigger warning - Kardashian at the link. ;)


DEFEND DEMOCRACY

User avatar
mmmirele
Posts: 2377
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:17 pm
Location: Xenu's Red Mountain Trap

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#29

Post by mmmirele » Sun Jun 17, 2018 12:47 am

much ado wrote:
Sat Jun 16, 2018 2:13 pm
Somerset wrote:
Sat Jun 16, 2018 1:56 pm
:snippity:
I read Bad Blood by John Carreyrou last week. Highly recommended. As JPC mentioned upthread, if the board of a medical company is populated by the likes of Henry Kissinger and George Shultz, you might want to think twice about investing in it. She and her asshole boyfriend are facing 20 years.
The book is being made into a movie with Jennifer Lawrence starring in the role of CEO Elizabeth Holmes.

Image

Pretty good, huh? But I think Jennifer will have to practice to get that odd gaze just right.
Not just the odd gaze. Elizabeth Holmes (no relation to my family TYVM) has a very deep voice, but there are indications it's not natural.



User avatar
kate520
Posts: 14825
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Occupation: servant of cats, chicken wrangler
Contact:

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#30

Post by kate520 » Sun Jun 17, 2018 12:58 am

Not her natural voice...do you mean she fakes a deep voice? Had surgery? How very strange.


DEFEND DEMOCRACY

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#31

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Wed Jul 04, 2018 5:34 pm

I'm almost done with Bad Blood. I recommend it highly. In addition to being great investigative journalism about an out and out fraud, the book also exposes David Boies and his firm of bullies for what they are.

As for the con woman, Elizabeth Holmes, I was fascinated by her deep voice. It took some doing but I found this 2005 KQED interview with her in her normal voice. So the deep voice is fake. Just like pretty much everything she did. (Her voice gets deeper during the interview. As if she remembers she has to sound older.)

https://us.ivoox.com/es/episode-18-26-u ... 935_1.html



User avatar
JohnPCapitalist
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:29 pm
Location: Wall Street
Occupation: Investment management in the financial industry. Deep knowledge of stocks, tech and economics.

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#32

Post by JohnPCapitalist » Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:17 am

Somerset wrote:
Sat Jun 16, 2018 1:56 pm
Theranos founder Holmes, President Balwani indicted on wire fraud charges

Theranos Inc founder Elizabeth Holmes and the blood testing company’s former president, Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, have been indicted by a federal grand jury in California on charges of wire fraud, the U.S. Justice Department said on Friday.

According to the indictment, Holmes and Balwani encouraged doctors and patients to use the company’s blood testing services even though the defendants knew Theranos was not capable of consistently producing accurate and reliable results for certain blood tests, the department said in a statement.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ther ... SKBN1JB2Y5

I read Bad Blood by John Carreyrou last week. Highly recommended. As JPC mentioned upthread, if the board of a medical company is populated by the likes of Henry Kissinger and George Shultz, you might want to think twice about investing in it. She and her asshole boyfriend are facing 20 years.
I'm about halfway through "Bad Blood" at the moment and it's a great story. It also shows just how sociopaths can ruin so many lives. While most of those who cycled through Theranos have since repaired any career damage that resulted from their association with the company, the human cost in needless suffering to feed this woman's twisted ego is immense.

The book is extremely well written and clearly carefully researched by someone who knows his stuff. It's a testament to perseverance when Theranos turned its guns on the author, and it's a testament to the need to weed out sociopaths and narcissists and keep them away from any real power in our society. She ripped off $1 billion. Yeah, her investors should have known better, but that money could have gone to a company or two that actually brought something valuable into the world.



User avatar
tencats
Posts: 267
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 10:09 pm

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#33

Post by tencats » Mon Jul 09, 2018 12:24 pm

Thanks to all here for the heads up on the book. Placed my order today for the book with Amazon $16.97

Found this recent review of the book here. https://www.ft.com/content/20855a62-803 ... 1a0846c475
Bad Blood: Secrets and Lies in a Silicon Valley Startup, by John Carreyrou
:snippity:
Ms Holmes’s delusions seem to know no bounds. In a speech at the office Christmas party, recounted by Carreyrou, she tells employees that the rudimentary blood-testing system “is the most important thing humanity has ever built” and that anyone who disagrees should quit. The laboratory where it is developed is named Normandy in homage to the D-Day landings of the second world war.

Despite its protagonist’s obvious flaws, the book eschews the simplistic (and sexist) conclusion that the Theranos founder is a femme fatale who bewitched her associates — almost all of them men. For a start, there is the central role paid by the comically odious Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, the company’s ex-president, who went from being Ms Holmes’s lover to her co-defendant in the recent fraud charges. Then there is the large cast of establishment figures who should have known better. From Jim Mattis, a former director who now serves as US defence secretary, and who thinks Ms Holmes has “the most mature and well-honed sense of ethics” he has encountered, to the then chief executive of Safeway, Steven Burd, who loses interest in selling groceries and dreams of launching a venture with the group.

The book is also a blistering critique of Silicon Valley, a kind of nonfiction corollary to Dave Eggers’s The Circle. In Carreyrou’s telling, the Bay area takes its cue from two quintessentially American institutions — the religious cult and the university fraternity, which preach omerta and loyalty over facts and ethics. Ironically, it seems to be Ms Holmes’s paranoid insistence on absolute secrecy that convinces investors to part with cash: all the CCTV and keycode door locks at Theranos HQ — along with the non-disclosure agreements — make them think the company has something worth hiding.

https://www.ft.com/content/20855a62-803 ... 1a0846c475



User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10399
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#34

Post by Notorial Dissent » Mon Jul 09, 2018 1:02 pm

Well, obviously they did have something worth hiding, it was a scam. My question is did it start out that way or did it devolve in to one?

I didn't follow this from the start other than to wonder what they thought they were doing when I first heard about it since what they were doing didn't really make any sense to me and then I lost interest, so now I'm playing catch up. Now. at least I know why it didn't why it didn't make any sense.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
JohnPCapitalist
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:29 pm
Location: Wall Street
Occupation: Investment management in the financial industry. Deep knowledge of stocks, tech and economics.

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#35

Post by JohnPCapitalist » Mon Jul 09, 2018 1:46 pm

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Mon Jul 09, 2018 1:02 pm
Well, obviously they did have something worth hiding, it was a scam. My question is did it start out that way or did it devolve in to one?

I didn't follow this from the start other than to wonder what they thought they were doing when I first heard about it since what they were doing didn't really make any sense to me and then I lost interest, so now I'm playing catch up. Now. at least I know why it didn't why it didn't make any sense.
Hard to tell, but my bet is that it was a scam almost from day one. The overwhelming consensus from qualified professionals was that the approach could not possibly work, for so many reasons that they took her only marginally seriously, and dismissed her as a flake. And like all good narcissists/sociopaths, proving herself right by any means against those who so casually dismissed her became the primary focus of the business. No amount of lying and fraud ("cutting corners" justified by her messianic beliefs of her own brilliance) is too much.

I would suspect that she was bent to fraud almost from the beginning, even if she was honest in her belief when she conceived the idea that it could have worked. Secrecy, loyalty oaths, compartmentalization, and a fear-based corporate culture are all part of a toxic stew that clearly was intended to obscure the fact that top management knew it was a fraud.

It's unclear whether Silicon Valley will tighten up in the wake of this. My guess is that there are a lot of major frauds out there that will blow up. I'm thinking Uber is one of them. Several experts in transportation economics have written convincing papers that show that the only reason Uber could thrive to the level it is today is that a) the drivers don't understand their true cost of providing the service, b) the company is subsidizing providing the service, which is driving their huge operating losses in an attempt to buy market share, and c) it counted on local regulators being asleep at the switch at first and then reluctant to regulate retroactively once the service was entrenched. But there is a revolt -- the enormous London market shut the company down (an appeal is in progress and should be decided soon) and regulators elsewhere are taking a hard look. If Uber lied to investors in its marketing materials or offering documents, people will go to jail, especially if the company collapses due to the flawed economic model.



User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#36

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Mon Jul 09, 2018 2:13 pm

I disagree with that review about Bulwani (based on what the book and contemporaneous newspapers stories have written). Holmes was the person who got the big investments for Theranos. And I suspect a lot of those who invested were smitten with her. That was also true of her blue ribbon, no-knowing board of directors including the credulous George Shultz.

Bulwani came on a few years after Holmes had started her fraud and become little more than her enforcer, her muscle. Holmes was the mastermind of this massive fraud. Give credit and blame where it is due.



User avatar
JohnPCapitalist
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:29 pm
Location: Wall Street
Occupation: Investment management in the financial industry. Deep knowledge of stocks, tech and economics.

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#37

Post by JohnPCapitalist » Mon Jul 09, 2018 3:15 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Mon Jul 09, 2018 2:13 pm
I disagree with that review about Bulwani (based on what the book and contemporaneous newspapers stories have written). Holmes was the person who got the big investments for Theranos. And I suspect a lot of those who invested were smitten with her. That was also true of her blue ribbon, no-knowing board of directors including the credulous George Shultz.

Bulwani came on a few years after Holmes had started her fraud and become little more than her enforcer, her muscle. Holmes was the mastermind of this massive fraud. Give credit and blame where it is due.
Agree that it was Holmes all the way, and that Bulwani was a useful idiot and a thug. In the epilogue at the end of "Bad Blood," the author unambiguously dismisses the idea that Bulwani corrupted the fair blond maiden, not just because of the timeline of when the fraud started versus when he came aboard, but because of her own tendencies. Money quote:
There's no question that Balwani was a bad influence. But to place all the blame on his shoulders is not only too convenient, it's inaccurate. Employees who saw the two interact up close describe a partnership in which Holmes, even if she was almost twenty years younger, had the last say... And with actions that ranged from blackmailing her chief financial officer to suing ex-employees, she had displayed a pattern of ruthlessness at odds with the portrait of a well-intentioned young woman manipulated by an older man.
Bulwani was an incompetent idiot with the ability to intimidate but little else. The "Bad Blood" book gives several examples of where he was completely inept with even basic high school science concepts, and where he lied egregiously about his coding ability at Microsoft. He claimed he wrote a million of lines of code there, but under their fanatically strict code review process, a top developer might realistically get up to 1,000 lines of code per year into a core product (several former colleagues from my software engineering youth are execs in the MSFT R&D organization, so I have some informed perspective). So anybody that's worked for a company like that knows he's full of shit, with claims so preposterous that he's not even a good liar. So not only was Bulwani a software geek out of his element in biotech, he was a software geek out of his element in software.

Bulwani's stupidity and arrogance is not sufficient to have turned his personal incompetence into a massive corporate fraud. Only Holmes could have done that.

Interestingly, she dumped him as her boyfriend very soon after the bad press came out, tossing him aside like yesterday's news. I wonder if that's enough motivation for him to try to cut a deal to rat her out or whether he will go down with the ship.



User avatar
tek
Posts: 2436
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 6:02 pm
Location: Happy Valley, MA
Occupation: Damned if I know

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#38

Post by tek » Mon Jul 09, 2018 5:27 pm

JohnPCapitalist wrote:
Mon Jul 09, 2018 1:46 pm
It's unclear whether Silicon Valley will tighten up in the wake of this.
No, it won't.

The angels and VCs are all smitten with each other. Very few do any nurturing and mentoring of the business and/or the people. It is all make a buck and beat feet.

The techies are easily seduced. Hold the carrot of a $$ pop in front of them and they will say and do anything.

I've been in this game for longer than I care to think about (was in my first startup in 1984)..

To borrow from Dave Barry: "I'm generalizing here, but as is often the case when I generalize, I don't care."

/rant


Digging the snow and the rain and the bright sunshine.

User avatar
JohnPCapitalist
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:29 pm
Location: Wall Street
Occupation: Investment management in the financial industry. Deep knowledge of stocks, tech and economics.

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#39

Post by JohnPCapitalist » Mon Jul 09, 2018 8:56 pm

tek wrote:
Mon Jul 09, 2018 5:27 pm
JohnPCapitalist wrote:
Mon Jul 09, 2018 1:46 pm
It's unclear whether Silicon Valley will tighten up in the wake of this.
No, it won't.

The angels and VCs are all smitten with each other. Very few do any nurturing and mentoring of the business and/or the people. It is all make a buck and beat feet.

The techies are easily seduced. Hold the carrot of a $$ pop in front of them and they will say and do anything.
I've done both VC investing and post-IPO publicly traded equity investing. In both cases, there's a huge tendency towards herd instinct. VC's spend a lot of time sucking up to each other so they don't piss anyone off and get frozen out of the next Google or Facebook. But back in the day, VC's used to do some actual due diligence, and it was the post-IPO guys that tended to be more shallow on that front and they got ripped off more often. But it's changed... now, the VC's are all doing absolutely absymal due diligence on both people and on technology.

It would have taken one guy an hour or two to go to Theranos and say, "who's your program manager at the Pentagon? I want to call them to check how many units they've got deployed in Afghanistan." Nobody asked and nobody was smart enough to say "if you won't even tell me that, we're done here." It's not rocket science. These days, public market guys are a lot smarter about due diligence, which is amusing since they don't have internal access to company documents the way a VC who already has a piece of a company would. And absolutely nobody in the VC community demanded source documents. I was always notorious for looking at source documents. If one of my companies got involved in a patent suit, I'd get a copy of the patent, a copy of the suit and have a patent attorney who knew something about the industry look at the patent and assess the company's chances. VC's are too lazy to do this today. I don't feel sorry for any of the morons who lost money on Theranos nor the guys who are going to get clocked on Uber or Tesla, or the mother of all frauds, Bitcoin.



Somerset
Posts: 3708
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 5:52 am
Location: Silicon Valley
Occupation: Lab rat

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#40

Post by Somerset » Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:12 pm

JohnPCapitalist wrote:
Mon Jul 09, 2018 1:46 pm
Notorial Dissent wrote:
Mon Jul 09, 2018 1:02 pm
Well, obviously they did have something worth hiding, it was a scam. My question is did it start out that way or did it devolve in to one?

I didn't follow this from the start other than to wonder what they thought they were doing when I first heard about it since what they were doing didn't really make any sense to me and then I lost interest, so now I'm playing catch up. Now. at least I know why it didn't why it didn't make any sense.
Hard to tell, but my bet is that it was a scam almost from day one. The overwhelming consensus from qualified professionals was that the approach could not possibly work, for so many reasons that they took her only marginally seriously, and dismissed her as a flake. And like all good narcissists/sociopaths, proving herself right by any means against those who so casually dismissed her became the primary focus of the business. No amount of lying and fraud ("cutting corners" justified by her messianic beliefs of her own brilliance) is too much.

I would suspect that she was bent to fraud almost from the beginning, even if she was honest in her belief when she conceived the idea that it could have worked. Secrecy, loyalty oaths, compartmentalization, and a fear-based corporate culture are all part of a toxic stew that clearly was intended to obscure the fact that top management knew it was a fraud.

For me, it's usually one small thing that tells me about someone's personality. In her case, it was the assertion that she had to be fluent in Mandarin to get the internship at the Genome Institute of Singapore. This sounds plausible to someone who doesn't know A*STAR and it makes her seem knowledgable, but it's total bullshit. Yes, Mandarin will help there because there are a lot of PRC researchers who will have conversations in Chinese with their colleagues. But there's also a lot of Indian, German, Dutch, French, American, etc. staff there, so everyone speaks English. If someone is dishonest about something like this, they're likely to be dishonest about many other things.*

I think she honestly felt she was going to change the world, and she fancied herself as being able to create miracles by sheer force of will. Her own version of Job's "reality distortion field" if you will. The difference is that Apple is a data driven company and hard data seems have been an anathema at Theranos. "Where's your data" is something I heard often at Apple, to the point where people often made meaningless measurements just to have lots and lots of numbers in their spreadsheets. Apple also knows when to kill something that isn't working, even if it's a magical idea that would be great if it worked. I'm not sure sociopath is really the right label for Holmes, but at least delusional and incredibly irresponsible with other people's money, as well as cavalier with medical test results.



*As an aside, I saw the same thing in Judge Roy Bean. His line about "the CCD in a drone" is similar. It sounds knowledgable and seems to lend credibility to his arguments, unless you happen to know a bit about camera modules and image sensors. CCDs haven't been commonly used for several years and no consumer drone uses them in their cameras. Too slow and expensive. CMOS image sensors dominate the market today. He was trying to sound smart about something he knows nothing about, which has proven to be the case in more of his postings.



User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10399
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#41

Post by Notorial Dissent » Mon Jul 09, 2018 11:45 pm

OK, now I know why I had the flashback response to the penny stock days and dismissed it, too too familiar and it all falls in place now.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
woodworker
Posts: 2609
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 2:54 pm

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#42

Post by woodworker » Tue Jul 10, 2018 1:02 am

JohnPCapitalist wrote:
Mon Jul 09, 2018 8:56 pm
tek wrote:
Mon Jul 09, 2018 5:27 pm
JohnPCapitalist wrote:
Mon Jul 09, 2018 1:46 pm
It's unclear whether Silicon Valley will tighten up in the wake of this.
No, it won't.

The angels and VCs are all smitten with each other. Very few do any nurturing and mentoring of the business and/or the people. It is all make a buck and beat feet.

The techies are easily seduced. Hold the carrot of a $$ pop in front of them and they will say and do anything.
I've done both VC investing and post-IPO publicly traded equity investing. In both cases, there's a huge tendency towards herd instinct. VC's spend a lot of time sucking up to each other so they don't piss anyone off and get frozen out of the next Google or Facebook. But back in the day, VC's used to do some actual due diligence, and it was the post-IPO guys that tended to be more shallow on that front and they got ripped off more often. But it's changed... now, the VC's are all doing absolutely absymal due diligence on both people and on technology.

It would have taken one guy an hour or two to go to Theranos and say, "who's your program manager at the Pentagon? I want to call them to check how many units they've got deployed in Afghanistan." Nobody asked and nobody was smart enough to say "if you won't even tell me that, we're done here." It's not rocket science. These days, public market guys are a lot smarter about due diligence, which is amusing since they don't have internal access to company documents the way a VC who already has a piece of a company would. And absolutely nobody in the VC community demanded source documents. I was always notorious for looking at source documents. If one of my companies got involved in a patent suit, I'd get a copy of the patent, a copy of the suit and have a patent attorney who knew something about the industry look at the patent and assess the company's chances. VC's are too lazy to do this today. I don't feel sorry for any of the morons who lost money on Theranos nor the guys who are going to get clocked on Uber or Tesla, or the mother of all frauds, Bitcoin.
Yeah, a thousand times that. I am still waiting for someone to explain to me how Uber is supposed to make money.

As to whether Silicon Valley and the VC community will learn from this -- Juicero. Theranos was founded in 2003 and investors had plenty of time to realize this was a giant scam. Juicero was founded in 2013, ten years later, and still raised over a hundred million, for a product that, if anyone had asked their five year old child, was such a stupid idea. Yeah, I understand the Xerox copier model, but you can't make a toner cartridge by just squeezing your hand.

And if anyone can explain Uber's business model to me, please send me a pm.


Pence / Haley -- 2020 "I Won't Call Her Mother" and "We Will Be The Best Team Ever, But Never Alone Together"

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10399
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#43

Post by Notorial Dissent » Tue Jul 10, 2018 2:08 am

MOFWIW, Uber makes money by screwing their drivers who don't know any better, screwing their customers, and ultimately by screwing their investors.

Consider how many of their drivers have criminal records, how many have actually harmed passengers, what insurance covers you if you are in an accident and injured, and who regulates them? Then think real hard the next time you think about calling them. Also, consider the MASSIVE data breaches they have had, and the inappropriate data use and collection they have been charged with.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

boots
Posts: 2847
Joined: Sat May 16, 2015 5:23 pm

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#44

Post by boots » Tue Jul 10, 2018 2:35 am

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Tue Jul 10, 2018 2:08 am
MOFWIW, Uber makes money by screwing their drivers who don't know any better, screwing their customers, and ultimately by screwing their investors.

Consider how many of their drivers have criminal records, how many have actually harmed passengers, what insurance covers you if you are in an accident and injured, and who regulates them? Then think real hard the next time you think about calling them. Also, consider the MASSIVE data breaches they have had, and the inappropriate data use and collection they have been charged with.
I don't have anything to do with Uber or Lyft or any related service.

But I serious disagree with most of this and most of the criticisms about them. I recently lived in a semi-rural area where Uber was not available. When my classic car wouldn't work, I would have to catch a regular, old-fashioned cab to go pick it up in town at the mechanic. The cab drivers were sketchy, engaged in activity such as driving well below speed limits, not following directions for shorter routes, etc., which I suspect (or perhaps, infer) were designed to run up their tab. And their cab company bill was far more expensive. Often I would then take an Uber from the mechanic back to my home, so I had a direct comparison over the same route.

But the biggest difference is that Uber, when it has been available, has drivers I'd much rather be in a car with than the typical cab driver. When it is available, it is cheaper, faster, better in every single way.

The Uber drivers have to carry insurance and more than just the minimum required of drivers in my state. I've personal known a couple of people who did driver for Uber to earn extra cash, and it was a great thing for them.

Want to know what cabbies are sometimes like? https://www.ocweekly.com/orlando-bruce- ... y-6450881/

Finally, I agree that Theranos was a fraud, and that Juicero was a bad idea. I can even see many good and bad qualities about bitcoin and crypto. But I don't see how Uber falls into that category.

Cabs charge what they charge because they run, in effect, a government-assisted limited competition business model, which allows them to charge elevated rates. Eliminate that, let the drivers be their own boss, and there's still plenty of room to both charge less and still make a profit. I'm not seeing why that is so hard to believe, or why it is the same as any of those other things discussed in this thread. And I'm going to continue to use Uber over the overpriced creepy slow driving local cab companies every damned chance I can get.



User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 5976
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#45

Post by Sam the Centipede » Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:49 am

Boots: i think the criticisms of Uber are not about its service but rather about its financing model. It has been pumping huge amounts of money into opening up new markets and keeping prices low so that other competitors wanting a return on their investment cannot compete.

In fact, quality of the product (decent drivers, direct routes, low fares, etc.) are part of the attempt to be numero uno.

The Uber model of transport will survive. The question is whether Uber itself will be part of that structure or will it go under as its debts accumulate?



User avatar
Till Eulenspiegel
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:55 am
Location: France
Occupation: Lawyer (retired )

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#46

Post by Till Eulenspiegel » Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:35 am

Sam the Centipede wrote:
Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:49 am
Boots: i think the criticisms of Uber are not about its service but rather about its financing model. It has been pumping huge amounts of money into opening up new markets and keeping prices low so that other competitors wanting a return on their investment cannot compete.

In fact, quality of the product (decent drivers, direct routes, low fares, etc.) are part of the attempt to be numero uno.

The Uber model of transport will survive. The question is whether Uber itself will be part of that structure or will it go under as its debts accumulate?
It will not survive (if it has ever lived there )in France and Germany and likely most other parts of Europe. You can circumvent legislation aimed at workerprotection only for a limited time.


„Er aber, sag’s ihm, er kann mich im Arsche lecken!“ - J.W. Goethe - Götz von Berlichingen

User avatar
woodworker
Posts: 2609
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 2:54 pm

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#47

Post by woodworker » Tue Jul 10, 2018 12:21 pm

Yes, my comment about Uber is solely how does it intend to ever make money, not it's drivers, etc. As I understand Uber's business model, the plan is to essentially build up their business in an area until it so dominates an area that it can then raise prices to a profitable level. The big problem I see with that is that the barriers to entry for new competitors, whether individual or small competitors, or Lyft size competitors, are low, thus, IMHO, making it difficult for Uber to ever raise its prices enough to become profitable. I have no doubt that in some areas they will make it work. But in cities where there is a large consistent demand for cab-like services, I view it as too easy for competitors to deny Uber the pricing levels they need.

And yes, they treat their drivers like crap -- but even so Uber still loses money on just about every ride.


Pence / Haley -- 2020 "I Won't Call Her Mother" and "We Will Be The Best Team Ever, But Never Alone Together"

User avatar
Till Eulenspiegel
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:55 am
Location: France
Occupation: Lawyer (retired )

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#48

Post by Till Eulenspiegel » Tue Jul 10, 2018 12:23 pm

I pity the poor shareholders.


„Er aber, sag’s ihm, er kann mich im Arsche lecken!“ - J.W. Goethe - Götz von Berlichingen

User avatar
much ado
Posts: 1388
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:56 am
Location: The Left Coast

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#49

Post by much ado » Tue Jul 10, 2018 12:50 pm

Carl von Ossietsky wrote:
Tue Jul 10, 2018 12:23 pm
I pity the poor shareholders.
It was never publicly traded on the retail market. The shareholders were supposed to be sophisticated investors.



User avatar
Till Eulenspiegel
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:55 am
Location: France
Occupation: Lawyer (retired )

Re: Theranos- medical lab testing

#50

Post by Till Eulenspiegel » Tue Jul 10, 2018 1:52 pm

I pity them even more....


„Er aber, sag’s ihm, er kann mich im Arsche lecken!“ - J.W. Goethe - Götz von Berlichingen

Post Reply

Return to “Science & Technology”