9 ms·

It still baffles me that Walgreens got into this partnership in the first place. A complete failure of due diligence.

tuna-piano 10y ago
How many of us could name the current or former Walgreens CEO? I've seen a certain mentality in people, including managers in the more "boring" companies in our economy. Silicon Valey companies are glamorous. There's a certain star mentality about it. Silicon Valley is in the news, the founders are rock stars. I think the management of "boring" companies is as star struck as the rest of us are. They shouldn't be- they run huge companies employing many people, doing complex things and making profits. In this case, the star power blinded them and they'll pay a large price.
- adw 10y ago
  Stefano Pessina. One of the most impressive European entrepreneurs. And he's CEO because the pre-existing management, who got them into this mess, were terrible.
  - oneloop 10y ago
    Out of interest, what is it that you do in your life that you're informed about such unusual knowledge?
    - rjsw 10y ago
      The Walgreens Boots Alliance group have been in the news recently because of accusations of charging for unnecessary drug reviews for customers by the Boots part.
    - adw 10y ago
      Professionally I'm a data scientist, but vocationally I'm interested in how the world works, and "real industry" is an important part of that. Also, I'm British, and the Alliance Boots deal was big news.
      - oneloop 10y ago
        Are you in London?
- godzillabrennus 10y ago
  These big companies have good reason to be afraid. They fall from grace faster and faster all the time. Look at the turnover in the Fortune 500: http://www.wired.com/2012/06/fortune-500-turnover-and-its-meaning/ http://www.wired.com/2012/06/fortune-500-turnover-and-its-me...
ChuckMcM 10y ago
Well yes and no. Remember that they have a really well connected board of directors and a lot of people put their reputation out there based on information they believed to be true. The managers at Walgreens don't know how to design, validate, and certify laboratory tests and procedures so they are kind of at the mercy of the folks who tell them they do. And while it would have been within their rights to send an outside pathologist on site to audit the entire workflow, to come up with that idea you have to at least suspect that they might be trying to pull a fast one on you. I speak from experience when I say that it is easy to be fooled into believing people when those people actually believe they are telling the truth. Bottom line is this is all on Theranos, and not Walgreens.
- foobarian 10y ago
  It's still surprising that it was possible at all to start doing this without some proof of work. There are better checks and balances for something as mundane as selling lettuce or holding money deposits; why not blood testing?
  - godzillabrennus 10y ago
    Bernie Madoff held the SEC at bay for years because of who he knew. What makes this any different?
- enraged_camel 10y ago
  The board of directors should have someone with sufficient background and subject matter expertise to be able to read the description of a technology the board is considering and say, "wait a minute, this sounds too good to be true." That should trigger due diligence, which can involve, among other things, sending an outside party to audit Theranos. The fact that Walgreens has no such person on their board is their failing, in my opinion.
- ploxiln 10y ago
  Then Walgreens should fail and come to be replaced by a pharmacy chain which one way or another depends on input from a competent pharmacist (whether they are equivalent of "CTO", or board of pharmacist advisors, or whatever works). But according to a very relevant ArsTechnica article[0], they thought to do due diligence, failed to do so, and then in a fit of unicorn mania did the deals anyway: Theranos failed to hand over an Edison to researchers hired by Walgreens to kick the tires and ensure it worked correctly, despite initially agreeing to do so. The young company, initially valued at $9 billion, didn’t even allow Walgreens executives to enter its lab or walk around the company’s headquarters without a chaperone, the WSJ reports. Theranos did provide an Edison prototype and sample testing kits to a Walgreens executive. But the machine only spit out test results such as “low” and “high” so that Walgreens couldn’t compare the results to standard blood testing equipment. Nevertheless, Walgreens moved forward with a deal, partly out of anxiety that Theranos might partner with a competitor. [0]: http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/05/walgreens-failed-to-vet-theranos-tests-that-patients-are-now-suing-over/ http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/05/walgreens-failed-to-v...
marincounty 10y ago
Wallgreens will try anything to make a buck. They sold out a long time ago. They don't do anything well. I think their corporate mission is literally open up shop in the sketchy part of town, and stock the shelfs with Chinese crap that only a person on drugs would buy? Oh yea, mark up the stuff people actually need--maybe they won't notice? As to their Pharmacy services; they don't even do the bare minimum. I kinda understand not filling out a TAR request. I get it, but I hope the state comes down on you hard. I don't get not contacting doctors for refills. I have never met a doctor who literally didn't say this, "Walgreens has giving me the most trouble over the years." If there's a doctor on this site who disagrees, please speak up. Enough said on the wonderful Wallgreens.

How many of us could name the current or former Walgreens CEO? I've seen a certain mentality in people, including managers in the more "boring" companies in our economy. Silicon Valey companies are glamorous. There's a certain star mentality about it. Silicon Valley is in the news, the founders are rock stars. I think the management of "boring" companies is as star struck as the rest of us are. They shouldn't be- they run huge companies employing many people, doing complex things and making profits. In this case, the star power blinded them and they'll pay a large price.

adw 10y ago
Stefano Pessina. One of the most impressive European entrepreneurs. And he's CEO because the pre-existing management, who got them into this mess, were terrible.
- oneloop 10y ago
  Out of interest, what is it that you do in your life that you're informed about such unusual knowledge?
  - rjsw 10y ago
    The Walgreens Boots Alliance group have been in the news recently because of accusations of charging for unnecessary drug reviews for customers by the Boots part.
  - adw 10y ago
    Professionally I'm a data scientist, but vocationally I'm interested in how the world works, and "real industry" is an important part of that. Also, I'm British, and the Alliance Boots deal was big news.
    - oneloop 10y ago
      Are you in London?
godzillabrennus 10y ago
These big companies have good reason to be afraid. They fall from grace faster and faster all the time. Look at the turnover in the Fortune 500: http://www.wired.com/2012/06/fortune-500-turnover-and-its-meaning/ http://www.wired.com/2012/06/fortune-500-turnover-and-its-me...

ChuckMcM 10y ago

Well yes and no. Remember that they have a really well connected board of directors and a lot of people put their reputation out there based on information they believed to be true. The managers at Walgreens don't know how to design, validate, and certify laboratory tests and procedures so they are kind of at the mercy of the folks who tell them they do. And while it would have been within their rights to send an outside pathologist on site to audit the entire workflow, to come up with that idea you have to at least suspect that they might be trying to pull a fast one on you. I speak from experience when I say that it is easy to be fooled into believing people when those people actually believe they are telling the truth. Bottom line is this is all on Theranos, and not Walgreens.

foobarian 10y ago
It's still surprising that it was possible at all to start doing this without some proof of work. There are better checks and balances for something as mundane as selling lettuce or holding money deposits; why not blood testing?
- godzillabrennus 10y ago
  Bernie Madoff held the SEC at bay for years because of who he knew. What makes this any different?
enraged_camel 10y ago
The board of directors should have someone with sufficient background and subject matter expertise to be able to read the description of a technology the board is considering and say, "wait a minute, this sounds too good to be true." That should trigger due diligence, which can involve, among other things, sending an outside party to audit Theranos. The fact that Walgreens has no such person on their board is their failing, in my opinion.
ploxiln 10y ago
Then Walgreens should fail and come to be replaced by a pharmacy chain which one way or another depends on input from a competent pharmacist (whether they are equivalent of "CTO", or board of pharmacist advisors, or whatever works). But according to a very relevant ArsTechnica article[0], they thought to do due diligence, failed to do so, and then in a fit of unicorn mania did the deals anyway: Theranos failed to hand over an Edison to researchers hired by Walgreens to kick the tires and ensure it worked correctly, despite initially agreeing to do so. The young company, initially valued at $9 billion, didn’t even allow Walgreens executives to enter its lab or walk around the company’s headquarters without a chaperone, the WSJ reports. Theranos did provide an Edison prototype and sample testing kits to a Walgreens executive. But the machine only spit out test results such as “low” and “high” so that Walgreens couldn’t compare the results to standard blood testing equipment. Nevertheless, Walgreens moved forward with a deal, partly out of anxiety that Theranos might partner with a competitor. [0]: http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/05/walgreens-failed-to-vet-theranos-tests-that-patients-are-now-suing-over/ http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/05/walgreens-failed-to-v...

marincounty 10y ago

Wallgreens will try anything to make a buck. They sold out a long time ago. They don't do anything well. I think their corporate mission is literally open up shop in the sketchy part of town, and stock the shelfs with Chinese crap that only a person on drugs would buy? Oh yea, mark up the stuff people actually need--maybe they won't notice? As to their Pharmacy services; they don't even do the bare minimum. I kinda understand not filling out a TAR request. I get it, but I hope the state comes down on you hard. I don't get not contacting doctors for refills. I have never met a doctor who literally didn't say this, "Walgreens has giving me the most trouble over the years." If there's a doctor on this site who disagrees, please speak up. Enough said on the wonderful Wallgreens.