| IMO The Theranos basic concept is viable, but their implementation is flawed. There have been somewhat recent cases of the SECDEF firing a General or Admiral if a development or acquisition goes awry. The JSF Program Executive Officer, MG David Heinz [0] was one example. I doubt a senior officer would risk a $10Bn acquisition program on unverified technology. Development programs are another story. The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) [1] are known for being rigid when it comes to the units meeting contracted specifications. They also require technical documentation, so trade secret wouldn't be an excuse. If DCMA are on vacation, then no deliveries take place. This happened during federal shutdowns. If Theranos sold the DoD a device that was faked and didn't meet specifications, It's entirely likely DCMA would reject the delivery. Development programs with DoD funding sometimes (often?) go awry, and sometimes specifications get changed (e.g F-35) but the unit must meet contractual specifications. [0] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Contract_Management_Ag... |
Can you point to any sources indicating that the basic concept is viable?