I found this article and a little shocked with the biasdry. The author comparing Elizabeth Holmes to other entrepreneurs who probably done nothing wrong:
https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/03/10/opinion-why-holmes-should-be-released-on-bond-pending-her-appeal/By TIM DRAPER |
PUBLISHED: March 10, 2023 at 5:15 a.m. | UPDATED: March 10, 2023 at 5:23 a.m.
Opinion: Why venture capitalist believes Elizabeth Holmes should be freed :bullshit:
The media has turned her into a villainous caricature. This is just wrong. She is heroic 
for her efforts
Former Theranos CEO Elizabeth Holmes arrives at federal court in San Jose on Oct. 17, 2022. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, File)
By TIM DRAPER |
PUBLISHED: March 10, 2023 at 5:15 a.m. | UPDATED: March 10, 2023 at 5:23 a.m.
After 30-plus years in venture capital and seeding companies like Skype, Baidu, Robinhood, Tesla, SpaceX, Hotmail, and many others that were not so successful, I believe it is incumbent on me to do the diligence on any startup I back. If a company doesn’t work out, I take my lumps and move on. Startups by their nature are risky. *12 Investors know these risks when we write their checks.
Entrepreneurs, by their nature, are projecting a future that they want to accomplish and as my partner used to say: *7 The best entrepreneurs have a reality distortion field because they often believe that they have accomplished what they have set out to accomplish because they have done so in their minds.
*1 When I first met Elizabeth Holmes, she was 19 years old and told me she wanted to “change health care as we know it.” I could see how passionate she was. She is determined about what she feels is unconscionable: the system of health care in our country is expensive, unfair and *2 provides inadequate service, and it can be so much better with *4 new technologies she was attempting to build.
*11 We knew Theranos was a long shot when we backed it.[/b] *4 It was an ambitious project of incredibly advanced biochemistry and technological machinery that had never been conceived of, let alone buil*t, and it was trying to wedge into an entrenched, customer-controlling industry. But we took a purposeful, calculated risk with our investment and while Theranos failed, I do not regret my investment.
Although they have remained silent with respect to Elizabeth and Theranos, *3 venture capitalists have a very different attitude than what the media or the courts have to date espoused. We VCs know the risks. We know that entrepreneurs have a reality distortion field, and that is what makes them so critical to our world. It is hard to imagine a life without a smartphone , without a car, without indoor plumbing, without electricity. *9 It was entrepreneurs like Elizabeth who gave them to us.
*6 The public (and possibly the courts) has been heavily influenced by what they have read about Elizabeth in the media and the various books and movies about her. They have turned her into a villainous caricature. This is just wrong. She is heroic for her efforts, for all the challenges she has faced and pitfalls she has overcome to bring this technology to us to change our world. It is not our proudest moment as a country when we take down one who has tried to do so much for us.
I stand by my decision to invest in Theranos and Elizabeth Holmes – however unpopular that may be. Her vision for revolutionizing health care was only partially portrayed in her efforts at Theranos, and her ideas could save millions of lives over the course of the next few decades.
On Nov. 18, Elizabeth was sentenced to 11 years and 3 months in prison. But she is continuing to fight her case. *5I believe she is not only innocent :bullsht: , but also was almost heroic. Keep this woman free. *8 She has only tried to make the world a better place. :bullshit
Tim Draper is a venture capitalist who has founded 30 Draper venture funds, Draper University, Bizworld, and two statewide initiatives to improve governance and education. He is the author of “How to be the Startup Hero – A Guide and Textbook for Entrepreneurs and Aspiring Entrepreneurs.”
So here is what I gather, correct me if you think I am wrong?
*1 So they were friends.
*2 So did her machines that she provided to Wallgreens.
*3 That's aright then, because the author of this article met her in person and he is her friend and he thinks it is okay for entrepreneurs to get away with his sort of stuff and the courts make an exception.
*4 As I recall from a documentary in 2020 and employee interviews; it was not incredibly "advanced", from what I see it just had a motherboard in it (from what I see), robotic arms to handle the glass tubes and stuff to spin the liquid and blood but they complained of it being unsafe where the glass use to break easily. Also I remember them saying that they were being built after they got a deal from Wallgreens.
Joke: Bullshit buzzword
*This technology... robots, arms and needles never existed before and can only be developed by her or someone like here, like it is magical inside nevermind how it works and change things for the sake of it had they got their way and continued operating.
*5 So because the author thinks she is "heroic" that makes her innocent.
*6 Is he saying, the witnesses who came forward, Erika Cheung, who made a deal with prosecutors to testify because she was being harassed by Holmes Lawyer Bois after she left the company, is all wrong and are effectively lying and so is Tyler Shultz?
*7 What about career criminals who were only setting out what they do in their minds?
*8 So he means she made it *look* like a better place though that turtle neck and image and her cliams. No she didn't she was living off of Theranos that paid for her lifestyle, her health and legal fee's before Fortress Investments put a CFO there in 2017 who put a stop to it and cut her off then she had a fit. Not very heroic was it?
She is heroic for her efforts, for all the challenges she has faced and pitfalls she has overcome to bring * this technology to us to change our world. It is not our proudest moment as a country when we take down one who has tried to do so much for us
Heroic? her efforts? I thought she was only successful because her backers believed her claims and invested money into her company.
*9 He compares her as being successful and the blood testing work. As I can understand she didn't give the world anything but a lab mockup of her vision, a blood testing machines that didn't work (despite being told many years earlier why it was not practical to do it at the present time by her own college) and she went ahead and then later lied that it worked properly when it didn't.
*10 How can he compare to her other entrepreneurs?
Did they sell knowingly inaccurate blood testing services to the public.
*11 I see so he and his partner backed the project.
*12 They may do but from what i gather they did no checks and just happen to believe and invest in her.
She puts on an image of Steve Jobs with that black turtle neck, but did he deceive investors? I read something that after his comeback to Apple employers were afraid of using the lifts incase he met and sacked them if he found they had something to do with his redundancy. At least he came up with something valuable with his operating system before running out of money.
companies like Skype, Baidu, Robinhood, Tesla, SpaceX, Hotmail, and many others that were not so successful ,
Not successful? Well didn't Microsoft buy out Skype, and Hotmail renamed to Outlook to go with their Office 365 package. Doesn't mean they failed. So because Elizabeth Holmes put out a good image is he saying that automatically means she is successful and her blood testing machines worked?
I don't see anything wrong in someone spending a lifetime studying and pursuing something even if it may never work but for anyone to justify what she did was acceptable with what she put her staff through and the blood testing and I think this article came out of his backside.
What do you think?
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
