Holmes' two favorite phrases came from Thomas Edison and Yoda of "Star Wars" respectively: "I haven't failed. I've simply found 10,000 ways it doesn't work" (paraphrased, referring to the incandescent light bulb), and "Do or do not. There is no try".
Holmes seems to have ignored the core essence of both statements, in particular, the Edison statement. According to the documentary, she wanted to believe the Edison machine, the blood test device created by her lab techs at Theranos, worked when it didn't. She didn't allow that it might take dozens if not 100's of tries before it became functional and marketable. Maybe thousands. She insisted on a certain size which was not only impractical but disobeyed the laws of physics considering what she wanted it to do!
The other question it raises: why in the world were investors taking a chance on a 20-year-old who lacked a college degree and no medical experience? Because she had big mesmerizing eyes and the kind of charisma we often associate with a Tucker Carlson or a Sean Hannity? Okay granted she had an interesting idea, but it needed to work! Giving a 20-year-old nearly a billion dollars should be a test-case in a simple fact: 20-year-old's don't know anything and she had no experience in the field.
Holmes would often cite Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. They were college drop-outs and often told they couldn't succeed in computers. What's the difference? Why couldn't Holmes succeed like Jobs and Gates?
The difference is, Jobs and Gates were tinkering with computers when they were in junior high and high school. They were studying code and hardware for many hours every week for 10 years. They got their 10,000 hours of experience outside the classroom when there was nearly no computer instruction for young people at that time. It doesn't sound like Holmes was constantly going to medical labs at a university or hospital and seeing how blood-testing was actually accomplished. She came up with an idea in her head and it was almost like the idea itself was worth billions.
While still at Stanford, she approached a Stanford professor of medicine and explained her idea. The professor tried to tell her that her idea, while innovative, was impossible, at least in terms of its original vision. But Holmes was not deterred. But instead of working at the Stanford medical labs and getting a better understanding of blood testing, she dropped out of school and founded a company that failed miserably. She failed at creating a blood-testing machine. She succeeded at convincing investors her idea was worth billions.
Instead with the investment money she built a huge complex with plush offices and labs as if Theranos were already a hugely successful company. In 2014, Wall Street was touting the company was worth billions. By 2016 it was worth nothing. Holmes and business partner/lover Sunny Balwani were eventually indicted and convicted of fraud. By comparison Apple didn't create a big office complex until they had substantial cash flow.
Elizabeth Holmes has the kind of self-assurance and charisma we might associate with some of the talk-show hosts who occasionally blatantly lie right on the air. They're believed because they look and sound so confident in what they're saying. Holmes has big penetrating eyes that seem never to blink. They're hypnotic. And it appears it was very easy for investors and others to get enraptured by her persona to the tune of $900 million which was ultimately lost. She received endorsements from likes of George Schultz, Henry Kissinger, and James Mattis, none of whom were qualified at rendering an objective judgement on the feasibility of a small device to test 200+ aspects of blood from a small sample. And yet because of their endorsements, investors flocked to Holmes.
Much of the documentary shows her speaking on talk-shows, being on the cover of financial magazines, and giving speeches. But she didn't seem to be working on her product herself that much. Which shows the imbalance. Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniac were constantly working on their computers before they went out into the world. Yes, Jobs did make big presentation speeches but ultimately his computers did function. Theranos' machines didn't.
Late in the documentary, she is shown being asked if the blood tests were being completed by the Edison machine, the device invented by the Theranos lab techs at the direction of Holmes and her partner, Sunny Balwani. She claimed they all were. It was an outright lie. The Edison machine was not working properly, and they were using machines they had bought from other companies and even were out-sourcing blood analysis to other labs.
The documentary essentially depicts Holmes as a great marketer and spokesperson for her company but a terrible leader when it came to creating her product. When it wasn't working she and Balwani would say the problem was with the attitude and/or qualifications of the workers! And often if there was a problem brought forth by the lab techs, they didn't want to hear about it.
At one point, one of the lab techs, only 23 at the time, went to Balwani and told him the results produced by Edison were erroneous. She was told she wasn't qualified to make such an assertion, even though she had degrees in the field. Balwani had no degrees in medicine or lab work to speak of. It's a microcosm of the dysfunctional culture of Theranos.
As related by former employee Tyler Schultz, grandson of George Schultz, Sec of State under Pres Reagan, there was the carpet world and the tiled world at Theranos. The carpet world was the external "face" of Theranos where Holmes was a kind of tech rock star. Everything seemed neat and clean. The tiled world, the labs, was chaotic as the devices were not working properly. And Holmes went to a lot of trouble to ensure no one from the outside actually saw the labs. Sort of reminds me of Bernie Madoff and the ponzie scheme on the "other floor".
Holmes seems to have ignored the core essence of both statements, in particular, the Edison statement. According to the documentary, she wanted to believe the Edison machine, the blood test device created by her lab techs at Theranos, worked when it didn't. She didn't allow that it might take dozens if not 100's of tries before it became functional and marketable. Maybe thousands. She insisted on a certain size which was not only impractical but disobeyed the laws of physics considering what she wanted it to do!
The other question it raises: why in the world were investors taking a chance on a 20-year-old who lacked a college degree and no medical experience? Because she had big mesmerizing eyes and the kind of charisma we often associate with a Tucker Carlson or a Sean Hannity? Okay granted she had an interesting idea, but it needed to work! Giving a 20-year-old nearly a billion dollars should be a test-case in a simple fact: 20-year-old's don't know anything and she had no experience in the field.
Holmes would often cite Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. They were college drop-outs and often told they couldn't succeed in computers. What's the difference? Why couldn't Holmes succeed like Jobs and Gates?
The difference is, Jobs and Gates were tinkering with computers when they were in junior high and high school. They were studying code and hardware for many hours every week for 10 years. They got their 10,000 hours of experience outside the classroom when there was nearly no computer instruction for young people at that time. It doesn't sound like Holmes was constantly going to medical labs at a university or hospital and seeing how blood-testing was actually accomplished. She came up with an idea in her head and it was almost like the idea itself was worth billions.
While still at Stanford, she approached a Stanford professor of medicine and explained her idea. The professor tried to tell her that her idea, while innovative, was impossible, at least in terms of its original vision. But Holmes was not deterred. But instead of working at the Stanford medical labs and getting a better understanding of blood testing, she dropped out of school and founded a company that failed miserably. She failed at creating a blood-testing machine. She succeeded at convincing investors her idea was worth billions.
Instead with the investment money she built a huge complex with plush offices and labs as if Theranos were already a hugely successful company. In 2014, Wall Street was touting the company was worth billions. By 2016 it was worth nothing. Holmes and business partner/lover Sunny Balwani were eventually indicted and convicted of fraud. By comparison Apple didn't create a big office complex until they had substantial cash flow.
Elizabeth Holmes has the kind of self-assurance and charisma we might associate with some of the talk-show hosts who occasionally blatantly lie right on the air. They're believed because they look and sound so confident in what they're saying. Holmes has big penetrating eyes that seem never to blink. They're hypnotic. And it appears it was very easy for investors and others to get enraptured by her persona to the tune of $900 million which was ultimately lost. She received endorsements from likes of George Schultz, Henry Kissinger, and James Mattis, none of whom were qualified at rendering an objective judgement on the feasibility of a small device to test 200+ aspects of blood from a small sample. And yet because of their endorsements, investors flocked to Holmes.
Much of the documentary shows her speaking on talk-shows, being on the cover of financial magazines, and giving speeches. But she didn't seem to be working on her product herself that much. Which shows the imbalance. Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniac were constantly working on their computers before they went out into the world. Yes, Jobs did make big presentation speeches but ultimately his computers did function. Theranos' machines didn't.
Late in the documentary, she is shown being asked if the blood tests were being completed by the Edison machine, the device invented by the Theranos lab techs at the direction of Holmes and her partner, Sunny Balwani. She claimed they all were. It was an outright lie. The Edison machine was not working properly, and they were using machines they had bought from other companies and even were out-sourcing blood analysis to other labs.
The documentary essentially depicts Holmes as a great marketer and spokesperson for her company but a terrible leader when it came to creating her product. When it wasn't working she and Balwani would say the problem was with the attitude and/or qualifications of the workers! And often if there was a problem brought forth by the lab techs, they didn't want to hear about it.
At one point, one of the lab techs, only 23 at the time, went to Balwani and told him the results produced by Edison were erroneous. She was told she wasn't qualified to make such an assertion, even though she had degrees in the field. Balwani had no degrees in medicine or lab work to speak of. It's a microcosm of the dysfunctional culture of Theranos.
As related by former employee Tyler Schultz, grandson of George Schultz, Sec of State under Pres Reagan, there was the carpet world and the tiled world at Theranos. The carpet world was the external "face" of Theranos where Holmes was a kind of tech rock star. Everything seemed neat and clean. The tiled world, the labs, was chaotic as the devices were not working properly. And Holmes went to a lot of trouble to ensure no one from the outside actually saw the labs. Sort of reminds me of Bernie Madoff and the ponzie scheme on the "other floor".