Hacker News Reader

Comment by PragmaticPulp | Hacker News Reader

They installed displays in medical buildings that sold as space. Then they oversold the ad space, billing customers for ads that were never displayed from 2011 to 2017 and took investment based on the fake numbers.

I wonder how the scheme unraveled. It takes a lot of people to cover up a fraud at this scale, so presumably someone noticed and reported it?

I really dislike this company. I went to a doctor who had advertising tablets installed in every patient room. Getting blasted with drugs ads while your doctor is 20 minutes late put me over the edge. She was a terrible doctor who tried to prescribe a lot of unnecessary products and services that she, conveniently, sold through the front desk of her office. The ads were a great warning sign that she only cared about extracting as much money as possible from patients.

View on HN

The CEO, Rishi Shah, was a major rising star and was profiled by the Wall Street Journal in 2017. The journalist on the story thought something seemed fishy and started pulling threads, leading to an expose published in October of that year.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/outcome-a-hot-tech-startup-misl...

Such is the conundrum with the WSJ. The op-ed section is beyond parody at this point (see the recent article attempting to pin SVB's collapse on 'wokeness'). But at least the journalists remain committed to digging into stories.

The Theranos fraud was also discovered by a WSJ journalist who wasn't wowed by their ex-Pentagon and Beltway board members and puff pieces written about Holmes.

These guys should be awarded. That's fantastic

Yup, I get so mad at WSJ after reading one of their really stupid opinion pieces and then their real journalists will publish something really good. Almost like an abusive relationship. The FT is good but doesn’t always dig out the dirt like WSJ does (in the US).

Ironically, WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who invested $100 million in Theranos. According to the famous book, Bad Blood, Elizabeth Holmes tried to get Murdoch to kill the story but he refused.

Ironic indeed. Surprisingly ethical behavior from Murdoch - I wouldn't have expected such a person to take that kind of a hit on his $100 million investment.

He paid 50X that for the WSJ in 2007.

Maybe the real journalists from WSJ, NY Times, and the Economist could group up and make an actual news journal- with no editorials.

Forbes 30 Under 30 has a similar issue... I think over the last 10-15 years, people featured in that list have been convicted or accused of scamming more money than they've made, including Elizabeth Holmes, SBF and at least a couple more.

It would be fascinating to see the full numbers on this statement. Almost sounds like an ideal arbitrage opportunity - just short the 30 under 30 list and profit!

Meredith Perry from uBeam comes to mind https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/05/another-red-hot-tech...

I met this woman through friends of friends. Just kinda felt weird, and off.

Charlie Javice of Frank was indicted last week

https://www.theverge.com/2023/4/5/23671000/jpmorgan-frank-fr...

archive: https://archive.is/Iq0J2

I recall seeing a tablet on a stand in an examining room at one doctor's office, and the contraption was turned to the wall and shut off, and I wondered what that was about - some sort of diagnostic doohickey? Should I turn it on and see if it will take my pulse? I managed to resist, however. The doctor ignored it.

Ooooh - Ads! Of course. Still had to sit there waiting for 20 minutes. There should be a rule that you get to start playing with equipment after waiting 15. "Ah, found the lube! Now we're cooking!"

I had a similar experience at a doctor's office in my city. I was actually somewhat shocked to see ads in the actual patient room - it was an immediate turn-off.

I've since found another doctor.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com