Disagree. Elon Musk had no domain experience in payments, cars and rockets. Fresh eyes can be invaluable. And it's not that hard to avoid "pulling a Theranos". Theranos should not be an excuse to discount lack of domain experience.
Theranos shouldn't be an excuse to discount domain experience because fundamentally the impeding failure of Theranos isn't due to lack of domain knowledge. It was pushing their product before it was ready and misleading doctors and the public as to the accuracy of that product.
Elon would be "pulling a Theranos" if he obscured failed launches and solicited launches without being transparent on SpaceX's capabilities.
I think its also worth to keeping in mind that SpaceX nearly went bankrupt in the process. I wouldn't be entirely surprised if the rational behind Theranos's actions were caused by financial pressure. But that's just my speculation.
Theranos, on the other hand, appeared to not have done that. Or at least not on a scale necessary to succeed, especially in something like healthcare.
Contrast with Elon Musk and SpaceX. One of Musk's first hires/co-founders for SpaceX was Tom Mueller, who at the time was already widely regarded as one of the best rocket engine designers in the world [1].
Case in point, http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/13/11674590/tesla-vehicle-pro...
So Tesla's autonomous driving technology couldn't endanger a life? The fact is, driving an automobile is the most dangerous thing a person does on a daily basis (outside of simply being alive).
Given the number of safety recalls we're witnessing in the automobile industry right now, the number of deaths that occur every year from automobile wrecks, and given how inherently dangerous it is to manually drive a 3,000+ pound piece of metal down the road at 70 mph, I'd say your premise is very off base.