"PT Barnum in a Jobs turtleneck" has so far been my favorite comment about Holmes.
I feel like a broken record, but Theranos really reminds me of Terraliance Technologies. If you havent heard/read about that company, I highly recommend the following:
It is tempting to look at big VC and names like Kissinger and think "these people are too smart to get conned". Truth is so much of their success is riding on past acheivements and they make great targets because getting one of them to support something starts a feedback loop akin to highschool social dynamics.
We know of examples where companies have wildly exceeded their hype, even though we later find out that the hype was unjustified at the time. There are also examples where it can be argued that shareholders did so well because founders maintained unusual levels of control through slippery methods, then made decisions that no one else in their right mind would have made.
I don't have a prediction about the future of Theranos, yet when new information confirms shadiness in one context or confirms that it is in the mould of other successes in another context, then thinking that it proves the context is the definition of confirmation basis.
It is a story gaining traction - you will hear a lot more about Theranos. Not because they are worse in any practice than the rest of the herd, but because they have spotlight. One of the things about getting past 30 is spotting patterns in the newscycle. Theranos is indeed a juicy target so expect a lot of dirty laundry to see light of day.
