This interview with John Carreyou on Theranos is a great read. His diagnosis of what ailed the company is likely applicable to many an ill-conceived startup that fails to pass the most perfunctory bullshit test
It was a combination of fraud and hubris. She and Sunny Balwani [Theranos’ president] didn’t even have the curiosity to see what competitors were doing and how they were innovating. There was zero curiosity on their part and therefore zero knowledge about what others were doing to innovate in the space.
The lack of curiosity and knowledge about the very space people are trying to innovate in is pervasive. To that end, you read the elevator pitch of the wannabe next cool thing you have to wonder if the founders had any commonsense at all. Did they take the trouble to do a very basic Google search to "discover" prior art.
It seems that an average person without any subject matter expertise whatsoever could easily find that the "innovation" is not new or novel. A person with more relevant background would see all the reasons why it is dead on arrival. Yet, these truths are not revealed unto the founders for the longest time.
Investors it appears, do not want to know the truth as long as the story is a good one - can continue to attract money and publicity. Everyone is willing to go along with the charade and not probe too deep. As a result, a Ponzi scheme balloons generating a tidal wave of hype in its wake. Some of them like Holmes get swept up very high by it. The rate of crash and burn thereafter, depends on many factors.
It was a combination of fraud and hubris. She and Sunny Balwani [Theranos’ president] didn’t even have the curiosity to see what competitors were doing and how they were innovating. There was zero curiosity on their part and therefore zero knowledge about what others were doing to innovate in the space.
The lack of curiosity and knowledge about the very space people are trying to innovate in is pervasive. To that end, you read the elevator pitch of the wannabe next cool thing you have to wonder if the founders had any commonsense at all. Did they take the trouble to do a very basic Google search to "discover" prior art.
It seems that an average person without any subject matter expertise whatsoever could easily find that the "innovation" is not new or novel. A person with more relevant background would see all the reasons why it is dead on arrival. Yet, these truths are not revealed unto the founders for the longest time.
Investors it appears, do not want to know the truth as long as the story is a good one - can continue to attract money and publicity. Everyone is willing to go along with the charade and not probe too deep. As a result, a Ponzi scheme balloons generating a tidal wave of hype in its wake. Some of them like Holmes get swept up very high by it. The rate of crash and burn thereafter, depends on many factors.
Comments