How the Inventors of Dragon Speech Recognition Technology Lost Everything

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How the Inventors of Dragon Speech Recognition Technology Lost Everything

Posted by samzenpus on Sunday July 15, 2012 @07:55AM from the all-the-eggs-in-one-basket dept.

First time accepted submitter cjsm writes "James and Janet Baker were the inventors of Dragon Systems' speech recognition software, and after years of work, they created a multimillion dollar company. At the height of the tech boom, with investment offers rolling in, they turned to Goldman Sachs for financial advice. For a five million dollar fee, Goldman hooked them up with Lernout & Hauspie, the Belgium speech recognition company. After consultations with Goldman Sachs, the Bakers traded their company for $580 million in Lernout & Hauspie stock. But it turned out Lernout & Hauspie was involved in cooking their books and went bankrupt. Dragon was sold in a bankruptcy auction to Scansoft, and the Bakers lost everything. Goldman and Sachs itself had decided against investing in Lernout & Hauspie two years previous to this because they were lying about their Asian sales. The Bakers are suing for one billion dollars."

11 of 606 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Ironic by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-15 07:59 · Score: 5, Funny

I thought Goldman Sachs were the good guys?
1. Re:Ironic by jo42 · 2012-07-15 08:15 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Since when has Wall Street (Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, AIG, et al) done anything other than for themselves?
  They take the little guys money and bend them over (without a tube of Vaseline).
One! by 50000BTU_barbecue · 2012-07-15 07:59 · Score: 4, Funny

billions! It's so much money even the singular takes an "s"!

--
Mostly random stuff.
Re:Why civil? by Farmer+Tim · 2012-07-15 08:19 · Score: 4, Funny

If corporations are people, then they're responsible for the relationships between the different thoughts in their heads.
Couldn't they claim diminished responsibility due to multiple personality disorder?

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
Wellllllll by Anonymous Coward · 2012-07-15 08:26 · Score: 4, Funny

"After consultations with Goldman Sachs,..."
That's your problem right there.
Re:Why civil? by Smallpond · 2012-07-15 09:10 · Score: 5, Funny

For example, a bank should not be allowed to combine with another bank. Mergers should only take place between different types of financial institutions as God intended.
Re:Two lessons here by pitchpipe · 2012-07-15 09:11 · Score: 4, Funny
If you're a first time entrepreneur ... you're gonna get raped.
By someone named Gold Man-Sacs no less!
Let's see, names for our new "financial business":
1. Dewey, Cheatham & Howe - Already taken
2. Skrewar, Widdow & Childe - Nice ring, but nah
3. Roper, Bender & Raper - Too obvious
4. Gold Man-Sacs - By Jove old chap, brilliant!
--
Look where all this talking got us, baby.
Re:They are the good guys by lennier · 2012-07-15 09:50 · Score: 5, Funny

"We guided them to a completed transaction."
As the lion said of the zebra.

--
You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
Re:there is no wall at goldman sachs by Dun+Malg · 2012-07-15 12:10 · Score: 5, Funny

I do believe the phrase he was looking for is "palsy walsy"

--
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Re:there is no wall at goldman sachs by kennykb · 2012-07-15 14:20 · Score: 4, Funny

Whether it was wishy-washy or palsy-walsy, the point is that there was hanky-panky going on.
Re:there is no wall at goldman sachs by haruchai · 2012-07-15 17:19 · Score: 4, Funny

More like Hanky-Paulsy
No bailout for the Bakers', I guess.

--
Pain is merely failure leaving the body