Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by HWR_14 1744 days ago
I'm not sure why they would be more skilled than any random people off the street, or a coin flip, etc. There's no reason to think they produce a result better than whatever control group you can think of compared to any other subset of people.
1 comments

The modal random "qualified investor" is probably a dentist, not Kissinger.
And your point is you think Dentists (or Kissinger) should be presumed to be good at choosing a CEO?
I don't know why the person that started this subthread thought the CEO was chosen by the investors.

Holmes founded the company beforehand, then people gave her money. As far as I know.

So it seems a bit off to frame it as though someone else founded the company and hired her.

A company without investors is a bootstrapped small business. Investors without a company are venture capitalists. Without investors, a company never becomes a startup, never has front-page articles in newspapers and magazines, never gets invited onto cable news for interviews, never hires expensive talent, never buys sports cars for its executives, never spends millions of dollars on advertising, etc.

Without investors, Holmes never would have mattered. The investments are what enabled her to commit the fraud.

I don't see anything obviously incorrect about all that, but it's irrelevant to the fact (if I'm not mistaken) that the investors didn't get a business and hire a CEO to run it, they found a business with a CEO.