Then, it was like “oh, I guess insurers are paying for it? Well, I don’t get it, but respect to them for getting through that tough a sales process.”
-
-
The natural comparison to uBiome is Theranos, because that’s another female-founded health-tech fraud. But the types of fraud are actually very different.
Show this thread -
Theranos’s tech would have been unquestionably valuable (to patients, drugstores, insurers, etc) had it worked. And something like it probably could have worked. It just didn’t. Elizabeth Holmes lied to everyone about the tech, and went to extreme lengths to avoid discovery.
Show this thread -
That means that, to avoid being fooled by a Theranos, you’d have to do a bunch of due diligence. Tracking down the extent of the deception was hard.
Show this thread -
uBiome was a different kind of fraud: long before you had any evidence of a specific scam, you should have been able to tell that *the product just isn’t useful enough to enough people* to justify the valuation unless something shady is going on.
Show this thread -
Perhaps the investors *did* know and were trying to find a greater fool? Or perhaps they just thought “she’s a great salesman, she’ll figure it out” and didn’t realize that one way to “figure it out” is to cheat?
Show this thread -
I have met several people who evaded my questions about “how is this startup going to make money?” and “how will this be useful to customers?” and said that didn’t matter, go away little nerd, you don’t understand business. They were never right.
Show this thread -
If a founder, when pressed, straight up denies that business is about mutual benefit, RUN.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.