The intersection of the sunk cost fallacy and super-voting shares are the root of this ridiculousness. There's nothing unique about Neumann. Charlatans like him are everywhere.
What's interesting about this case is that both labor and capital were screwed by the willingness of an investor to accept the existence super-voting share with an extreme ratio.
I think Matt Levine made a good point, whether or not he was being serious - regardless of what you think of Neumann ethically, he, like an effective short-seller, provided valuable information to the market in the process of profiting for himself. The outcome seems to be that (a) WeWork is no longer going to waste money like it was, and (b) other investors and businesses may be deterred from following in their footsteps. The loss in purported market value is just the difference between the dreams of mania and their deflation.
As they say, if you can't be a good example, you'll just have to be a terrible warning.
What's interesting about this case is that both labor and capital were screwed by the willingness of an investor to accept the existence super-voting share with an extreme ratio.