Marc Hochstein is the managing editor of CoinDesk.Â
The following article originally appeared in CoinDesk Weekly, a custom-curated newsletter delivered every Sunday exclusively to our subscribers.
âInnovators who seek to revolutionize and disrupt an industry must tell investors the truth about what their technology can do today, not just what they hope it might do someday.â
That quote, from the director of the SECâs San Francisco office, Jina Choi, referred to Theranos, the blood-test company and one-time Silicon Valley darling that the agency charged with fraud last week.
But you could be forgiven for thinking it was about the cryptocurrency space, given the frenzied fundraising through initial coin offerings (ICOs) for projects with little more than grand visions, a buggy prototype, zero users and plenty of speculators betting it can work.
To be sure, a cryptocurrency is not equity in a business (at least, itâs not supposed to be), and an open-source project is not the same thing as a company. But the Theranos case, in which founder and CEO Elizabeth Holmes paid a $500,000 fine and was barred from serving as a public company executive or director for 10 years, offers several sobering lessons for the blockchain community.
Some of them may seem obvious, but they bear repeating. The first two apply to investors:
For those who donât spend their days on crypto Twitter, that stands for âdo your own research.â
You know how Google Ventures figured out it didnât want to invest in Theranos? According to an investigative article published in Vanity Fair in 2016, Googleâs venture capital arm sent one of its associates to Walgreens, the pharmacy chain that had a partnership with the startup.
Supposedly, the âwellness centersâ Theranos had set up in the stores were showcasing the companyâs technology, which it claimed could test for hundreds of diseases just by taking a tiny bit of blood from the fingertip. But, according to Nick Biltonâs expose, âas the VC sat in a chair and had several large vials of blood drawn from his arm, far more than a pinprick, it became apparent that something was amiss with Theranosâs promise.â
It would later turn out that Theranos was using its vaunted Edison machine in only a sliver of the tests it sold to consumers.
Whatâs the crypto equivalent of âjust go down to Walgreens and see whatâs up?â Well, if a blockchain network is up and running, you can start by buying a tiny amount of a coin, downloading the software and playing around with it to see if the thing works as advertised.
Thatâs how I figured out bitcoin was legit early on, and if the cryptocurrency youâre looking at is anything like bitcoin, you wonât have to buy a whole unit (and if you do, well thatâs a red flag right there). Better to blow $50 on initial due diligence than $10,000 on someoneâs assurances.
However, that âtry it yourselfâ approach may not be sufficient if, say, the network is running on a small number of nodes manually controlled by the development team, with a promise to eventually take off the training wheels. And for a token sale thatâs funding a yet-to-be-built blockchain, one that theoretically could do awesome things in the futureâ¦well, the homework is going to be a lot more involved.
Holmesâ Steve Jobs-style turtlenecks, Stanford-dropout backstory and change-the-world rhetoric made for great magazine copy. And like her idol Jobs, Holmes was reportedly secretive and imperious, largely forbidding even Theranos employees from communicating with each other about their activities.
Unlike the iPhone or the Mac, however, Theranosâ devices didnât work the way Holmes led investors and patients to believe.
You would think that in cryptocurrency, a field whose own founder (or founders) remain unknown and where decentralization is one of the highest ideals, cults of personality wouldnât be much of an issue. But then there was Josh Garza. So donât pin your investment decisions on a single charismatic individual.
Of course, just because someone is charming doesnât mean theyâre a fraud, either. It just has little relevance to the merit of the project. Until some future time when weâre all disembodied brains, we have to learn to discount these superficial distractions.
(On a related note, ignore âgravitas.â Theranosâ board included two former secretaries of state, a former secretary of defense, a retired Marine general and two former senators. Lots of gravitas. Not a whole lot of medical expertise, though. It was perhaps a more highbrow version of the celebrity-endorsed ICO phenomenon.)
The other two takeaways from this affair apply to token issuers, entrepreneurs and developers seeking to raise money in this space. And they may be even harder pills to swallow, as it were:
Many may find it unfair that Holmes paid only a six-figure fine considering the size of the fraud ($700 million), especially in light of the harsh treatments given over the years to some crypto entrepreneurs who operated in good faith, simply because they did not ask for regulatorsâ permission.
(Holmes did not admit or deny wrongdoing in the settlement agreement; according to the Wall Street Journal, a criminal investigation of Theranos is still ongoing.)
And it may well be unjust. But it shows the advantages of working within the system rather than outside it. Theranos paid millions for high-powered lawyers well before the government started investigating the company.
Even as a sham enterprise, it had resources to defend itself.
âYou pay for things one way or the other, upfront or down the line,â said Joe Colangelo, a New Jersey entrepreneur and longtime bitcoin enthusiast.
Coming nearly three years after cracks started to show in Theranosâ facade, the SEC charges show that enforcement actions can take time. Just because the government hasnât gone after someone for possible violations doesnât mean it wonât.
âWhatever statute of limitations you think exists, it does not,â Colangelo said. âThey will catch up to you eventually.â
Teams who thought they could âdo an ICO really fastâ because there were âso many they canât possibly punish all of usâ were mistaken, he said.
âYou might be getting charged with crimes associated with your ICO in 2023,â Colangelo added. âYou have to be ready to spend the next five years thinking about this.â
Ouch. That smarts worse than a needle in the arm.
Elizabeth Holmes image via Shutterstock