Tim Draper, One of Theranos' First Investors, Says He Would Back Elizabeth Holmes Again as Chief Science Officer (theoutline.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Despite all her alleged crimes, Elizabeth Holmes, the former CEO of the biotech company Theranos, can rest assured she still has someone who'll go to bat for her. At a panel discussion on growing startup ecosystems at the Montgomery Summit yesterday, Bloomberg reporter Sarah McBride asked Tim Draper -- a venture capitalist, enthusiastic Bitcoin supporter, and one of Theranos' first investors -- whether he would back Holmes again. Draper responded to the question by saying, "I'd back her as chief science officer, not CEO. Good question."

Comments

The ruling class stick together

[rsilvergun]

wish I could say the same about my class.

Re:The ruling class stick together

[rudy_wayne]

Chief Science Officer? She dropped out of college at 19 and has no science background. What a moron.

That was all part of the Theranos scam. Nobody on their board of directors or in top management had any science or medical background.

Re:The ruling class stick together

[Anonymous Coward]

Who, the deplorables? The cultural distance between progressives and working class people is now vast and I see little reason why that should change.

The fact that you believe that working class people and progressives are automatically disjoint sets is well part of the problem. There have been so many lies for so long that you have "working class people" defending insane policies. The fact that someone with this home could put on a hat and make working class people think, he's my guy, is so insane as to be practically the definition. Of course his first step to make people think he was their guy was to first start an insane racist lie about the then president. After all to much of his base, well, hating on the uppity black man just proves his credentials, much the same way not denying David Duke did. Add in Charlottesville and he pretty much got a home run in his racist credentials checklist.

Re: The ruling class stick together

[anegg]

Howie Carr: 2020 Democratic candidates share non-working-class background https://www.bostonherald.com/2... (Via Boston Herald)

Re:The ruling class stick together

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing you don't understand is that the progressives abandoned the working class, beacuse the working class are too "white heterosexual cisgendered and male." Working class raise issues and are silences or shouted down. Talk about immigration, you are racist. Talk about hate crime laws, you are a bigot. Talk about diversity quotas, you are a sexist. Etc.

Trump didn't win because he tricked the working class into thinking he was one of them. He won because he talked about issues the working class are deeply concerned about. Combined with how bad of a candidate Hillary was he was a shoe-in to win.

Your post reeks of "working class are too stupid, that's why they voted for Trump." You are part of the problem. This sentiment is why the working class will never listen to you, or vote for a candidate that acts like you. Your "soilidarity" with the working class is predicated on deep condesencsion and the assumption that they will always vote your way regardless.

Re:The ruling class stick together

[drainbramage]

That's all fine for a monarchy, if you want a monarchy.
Wasan't the founding of the U.S.A. concerned about turning away from such a system and its class system.
Before the U.S.A. school system was federalized they often demonstrated that ANYONE could move in or out of the political system.
Now we're taught that only a magical 'ruling class' has the ability to lead. Wow.
Now we're taught in Martin Luther King High School to judge based on skin colour, not the content of someone's skin colour.
Now I'm off to my rewritten history class where they will tell me who to vote for, love my school.

Re:The ruling class stick together

[drsquare]

Wasan't the founding of the U.S.A. concerned about turning away from such a system and its class system.

It was more about keeping slavery and being able to tear up British treaties with the natives that were stopping colonial expansion. The 'founding fathers' were all rich slave owners who wanted to keep their privileges, they didn't even let ordinary people vote.

Ethics (or lack thereof)

[tomhath]

In other words, he only cares about making money. Putting people in danger isn't a concern.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[Darinbob]

Well, I think with his logic he only cares about losing money.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[ceoyoyo]

From all reports Holmes was a fairly brilliant CEO (she could convince people to give her lots of money) and completely hopeless at the actual science. If you actually wanted to make money you'd think you'd want to switch the roles: make her CEO and appoint a CSO that reported independently directly to the board.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[gweihir]

Sounds very American to me.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[magarity]

From all reports Holmes was a fairly brilliant CEO (she could convince people to give her lots of money)

OK but fundraising is only brilliant for CEOs of charitable organizations and early startups. And you seem to have not heard the part about the corporate jet and the huge mansion paid for by the company. The wild spending kind of cuts back on the usefulness of fundraising ability.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[AntronArgaiv]

The woman spent two or three semesters at Stanford, then decided she knew all she needed to know.

I wouldn't trust her to science her way out of a paper bag.
When I graduated I knew just enough engineering to know what I didn't know. And that's after getting a Masters. I learned a lot more on the job, by watching more experienced people and asking questions. Something I doubt Miss Know-it-all has ever done.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[gravewax]

A brilliant CEO doesn't commit blatant fraud that leads to the destruction of their company. She was a brilliant conman.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[ceoyoyo]

Everybody wants to be a startup these days. Particularly one that goes from zero to 9 billion in a few years. Nobody cares about wild parties, mansions and jets.

Now, with a brilliant CEO like Holmes you need to pay some attention to your exit strategy, thus the independent CSO. Your guy on the inside, who is not an undergraduate dropout, says things are about to blow, so you make your exit. Modern business at it's finest.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[ceoyoyo]

While reading your post I got to "when I graduated I knew just enough engineering to know what I didn't know" and was just about to tell you that you must have been an unusually gifted undergraduate.

When you come out of undergrad you think you know everything. Grad school teaches you that you really don't know anything. A postdoc teaches you that nobody else does either.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[Brett Buck]

Some of what was reported about her behavior seems so over-the-top that it's hard to believe. Letting the dog run around in the lab? What the hell, she should never be allowed within 100 miles of anything important.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[VeryFluffyBunny]

Isn't this how VC funding works: Pure RoI from whatever's in fashion at the moment & nothing else matters? I'm not at all surprised by this story. In fact, I'd bet even if Draper had moral objections to Holmes' prior conduct, he wouldn't be able to say them out loud, let alone to the press, for fear of being ostracised in the world of start-up financing.

Re: Ethics (or lack thereof)

[Anonymous Coward]

He must just like her a lot. Like a whole lot. Like way too much for us mere mortals to imagine

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[Anonymous Coward]

When I graduated I knew just enough engineering to know what I didn't know. And that's after getting a Masters. I learned a lot more on the job, by watching more experienced people and asking questions.

I don't doubt you learned a lot after graduating, but consider this perspective. You spent your time in school learning how to learn. You gathered knowledge and skills to prepare for life after graduation, without necessarily knowing how to put it all together. Doing the latter is a continuing exercise that spans a lifetime.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[93 Escort Wagon]

I work with engineering faculty, grad students, and post docs every day. The majority of them seem to think they’re experts in every field - including stuff like graphic design, sales, and interpersonal relationships.

The ones who don’t think that way, though, are what occasionally makes academia the greatest work environment in the world.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[Krishnoid]

They'll fix that on the next pass. I hear they're tweaking the retrovirus on the cloning tank and v.2 will be ready to present venture pitches sometime early fall, with improved science experience and slighly bigger eyes.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[ceoyoyo]

Dunno... a good proportion of the highest paid CEOs seem to do exactly that. Maybe the fraud is a little more on the down low in most cases. I keep hearing how the highest paid CEOs are paid that much because they're the best.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[rudy_wayne]

From all reports Holmes was a fairly brilliant CEO (she could convince people to give her lots of money)

That's not a brilliant CEO. That's a con artist.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[rudy_wayne]

but he lost millions by backing her fraud. That he supported her all along so far as to go on interviews defending her obvious lies shows that he is a fraud as well and deserves prison time.

It's one thing to take a chance on a startup. VCs often lose money on startups. That's why they write a contract that pays them a lot money if the company is successful.

Theranos however, was a completely different story. Read John Carreyou's book. It's quite fascinating. Theranos was completely fraudulent, almost from day one.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[ceoyoyo]

Send 'em to me. I specialize in convincing physicians that they aren't actually demigods. Some of them actually turn out fairly well, once they realize that a mere PhD might know a few things they didn't learn in that six month research fellowship they did.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[ceoyoyo]

Ha ha, bravo. Not only did you detect the dripping sarcasm in my post, you one-upped it. V.2 still prefers black turtlenecks I hope?

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[ceoyoyo]

So you're saying Holmes would also make an excellent board member?

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[Anonymous Coward]

But she *identifies* as a scientist! Science is about spectrums, so she can choose where she is on the spectrum/ Any objection to this is science-phobic and anti-science!

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[gravewax]

No they are much more careful about it, usually keeping it in the grey areas of the law to keep themselves out of the shit. She completely failed at doing that, publicity plus poor management and blatant lies that can't be brushed away made her a fucking awful CEO.

Re: Ethics (or lack thereof)

[jdoeii]

I've met Draper personally, had a couple of conversations with him. I think his problem is not ethics. It's basically medical.

His mental picture of the world is very different from everyone else's: in his world anything he wants to be true is true. He wants Holmes to be a prosecuted genius and in his world she is. Then he acts on this fact.

When people praise or attack him for what he says it just feels misplaced. He needs help.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[fahrbot-bot]

A brilliant CEO doesn't commit blatant fraud that leads to the destruction of their company. She was a brilliant conman.

Next thing you know, she'll buy and bankrupt a few casinos and be the next Republican President of the US ... no, never mind, we're not *that* stupid.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[thegarbz]

No. If he cared about money then as an investor he wouldn't back bankruptcy a second time. The real conclusion you can draw from this: "Man with crap judgement declares his judgement remains crap after being burned."

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[serviscope_minor]

Then the faculty job teaches you that it doesn't really matter because you're going to spend the rest of your career going paperwork.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[jcr]

By that measure, Ponzi was even better!

-jcr

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[ceoyoyo]

I was curious whether you're correct. Wikipedia says Ponzi took his "investors" for $20 million in 1920, and Holmes took hers for $700 million in 2013. Ponzi's take in 2013 dollars would be about $233 million. Presumably Holmes had some actual operating expenses to make the thing look good, but CEOs like to talk about revenue as if it was profit, so I think it's fair to say that by CEO-quality metrics Holmes out-Ponzied Ponzi.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[careysub]

". A postdoc teaches you that nobody else does either."

How about put your money where your mouth is. Go to your boss and tell him before everyone else: "You know nothing"

That's what i thought.

That hardly means it isn't true.

Re: Ethics (or lack thereof)

[illiac_1962]

You didn't hear? She was the victim.

Re: Ethics (or lack thereof)

[illiac_1962]

There is no help. We used to keep people like that in a room, or drown them.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof)

[Strudelkugel]

Maybe a friend will give Mr. Draper a copy of this book

If fraud is ever detected at any Draper backed company from now on, investigators will reference his interview with Sarah McBride. A lot of financiers read Bloomberg. A cold chill just blew through Wall Street.

Re:Ethics (or lack thereof) - @ TRUMP ADMIN?

[Anonymous Coward]

No no, I'm sure he's just expecting to run the corporation like Republican leadership has shown : The Chief Science Officer is an entirely HONORARY position, predictably to fudge the numbers in favor of business. GOP Capitalism, baby.

No rules.

Her lying about science was the problem

[SmaryJerry]

How could you ever trust her to tell the truth on her research again?

Re:Her lying about science was the problem

[thegarbz]

Because people with bad judgement typically continue to make bad judgments?

he's lost it

[crgrace]

This guy is all in for Bitcoin as well even after it's big drop. I just think he can't accept that he's not the Master of the Universe and his judgement is not infallible.

Re:he's lost it

[HornWumpus]

He just really really really really wants to fuck her.

Everybody's been there, usually not THAT expensive.

Re:he's lost it

[HornWumpus]

Up and down your arms, not across. Get the job done.

Re:he's lost it

[Jarwulf]

Can you blame him? She's not that shabby looking especially when she was younger. Drop the fake man act ie talk in her real voice (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9lp73GNqxE 55 second mark) get some makeup on and ditch the steve jobs outfit and make me forget she's a psychopath and she's quite conventionally attractive.

Some people do not learn

[gweihir]

Excellent example.

There's a family connection

[real gumby]

Holmes is a childhood friend of his daughter's, or daughter of his childhood friend or something like that, so he has known her all her life. I can't see how she could have been funded any other way.

Though this is america where people don't give jobs or security clearences or such to their relatives and friends.

Re:There's a family connection

[_merlin]

I think you missed the sarcasm. The US likes to pretend to be a meritocracy, while still having these "old boys networks", political families like the Bushes, and every other kind of nepotism and cronyism.

To quote Daffy Duck

[quonset]

Shoot him now! Shoot him now!

NOT a brilliant CEO!

[Anonymous Coward]

a fairly brilliant CEO (she could convince people to give her lots of money)

That makes her a brilliant CON ARTIST! A brilliant CEO can direct a company and develop a strategic plan that will enable it to succeed in the future. Unfortunately, I can not think of any contemporary CEOs off of the top of my head that fit that description.

Re: NOT a brilliant CEO!

[illiac_1962]

Larry Culp. I just hope his most recent undertaking is humanly possible.

#InternationalWomansDay

[supercell]

Lets not mentions this today. It's counter to the propaganda you know.

Probably because

[John Napkintosh]

That man has something to hide.

www.webroot.com/safe

[KevinSmith6599]

webroot com safe – With the development of the digital world, online protection is crucial. It is extremely important to protect your PCs, Mac, computers as well as mobile devices and tablets with webroot com safe. http://www.safe-webroot.com/

Cocaine is a hell of a drug.

[jcr]

This dude needs rehab, pronto.

-jcr

60% of the wealth in America is inherited

[rsilvergun]

And thanks to recent changes to tax law that percentage is increasing. We're not too far off from Monarchy as is.

You're misunderstanding what working class is

[rsilvergun]

it's not "poor". Working class means the majority of your income is derived from work. The ruling class, OTOH, derives their income from ownership. e.g. "rent seeking".