Posted on 11/18/2016 11:38:20 PM PST by CorporateStepsister
It's worth asking why Elizabeth Holmes is still leading the embattled blood testing company Theranos Inc. But there may be a good reason why she still is in charge, one that has little to do with the scandal-ridden company's performance to date.
Forget what venture capitalist Tim Draper — one of the first to invest in the Palo Alto company — implied this week that Holmes is being attacked because she's a young, female entrepreneur. The simple fact is that Theranos has not been able to deliver on its technology from a commercial, scientific or regulatory standpoint, and that falls on Holmes, its founder, CEO and chairman.
(Excerpt) Read more at bizjournals.com ...
This is a good UK background story on her. Dropped out of Stanford after 2 years and took her tuition money to start her company. Seems to me the company promised a lot and can’t deliver on the promises.
The follow up question is, “Why is Theranos still in business?”
If their basic premise of a quick unconventional test was fraudulent, shouldn’t they be history now?
Theranos is going to die a natural death and probably very soon. The situation will take care of itself.
The trouble with these Elizabeth Holmes posts is that they avoid the real issue: Would Laz hit it?
You’ve gotta believe that if Trump nominates Mattis that this is going to come up during confirmation hearings.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.