Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

None of the top VC firms were invested in Theranos. Was this intentional on Theranos’ founders part? Were they evaluated by top VCs and found lacking?



Yes, top VCs did pass. There was a good article about how Google Ventures was initially interested but passed when they didn't see any evidence of functioning product.


Do the top VCs really play in biotech?


Biotech/medical venture capital is a completely different and only slightly smaller industry than software VC but yes the top late stage firms, like Sequoia Capital, generally invest in both. It's hard to find companies to invest tens or hundreds of millions of dollars into (each) and biotech companies can easily require that much in an industry with proven exit strategies (and greater annualized returns than software according to some studies). Since pharma largely outsources R&D to the startup world, there are many exit paths including technology or talent acquisition (people, techniques, and equipment), patent acquisition (before and after approval), and even pre-revenue IPOs which are surprisingly common in the life sciences to this day.


Getting funded by VCs doesn't mean what you think it means. It isn't validation or lack thereof, it is perceived portfolio fit plain and simple.


This is just not true. When a VC invests, they are betting this company will aggressively grow in value. All do some amount of due diligence. Clearly in some cases, not enough.


You are basically implying that if someone does due diligence and decides not to invest, that the company is invalid.

Its okay, that is a common sentiment.

Incorrect though


You're 100% correct.

Source: VC friends and the VC's I've pitched.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: