A Wall Street Genius's Final Investment Playbook-Chapter 63

The moment when my long-term plan finally comes to fruition is here.

Since the beginning of my tenure, I have nurtured my connection with Rachel, which allowed me access to information about Theranos.

Three days after our meeting at the Metropolitan Club, I called Raymond to accept his offer.

That is, to temporarily take on a consulting role at the family office.

"I'm okay with it, but I'm not sure if Goldman will approve. I heard moonlighting is prohibited…?"

"Don't worry about that,"

Raymond's voice over the phone was full of confidence.

He meant that he would handle it himself.

And indeed, Raymond smoothly resolved the issue, in a slightly unusual way.

The name of the family office introduced by Raymond was

‘Heritage Partners Group.'

Heritage Partners requested specialized advice from Goldman, for which Goldman formed a dedicated team.

Raymond had me staffed in that team.

It took about two weeks to finalize all procedures, but it was done in a way that was legally and internally sound.

Finally, I was able to proudly look into the portfolio of Heritage Partners.

Specifically, the corporate information of Theranos.

Clicking on the folder, I involuntarily swallowed dryly.

I was a bit excited.

If I could just expose Theranos's scam, a whopping 10 billion dollars could fall into my hands.

Proving the fraud wouldn't be hard.

I already had a precise understanding of their deceit.

Theranos's main product was ‘Newton,' a medical diagnostic device that incorporated innovative technology.

They had been aggressively promoting Newton, claiming it could diagnose hundreds of diseases with just a single drop of blood.

But,

‘It's all a lie.'

Such technology does not exist, so I decided to focus on the technology-related documents.

There must be a flaw somewhere.

That was all I needed to find.

With this mindset, I scrutinized the documents all night long.

One day, two days, three days…

I meticulously reviewed the relevant documents and conducted further investigations.

But, the results were quite different from what I expected.

After three days of dedicated effort, I was left staring at the screen, stunned and deflated.

‘This is it…?'

The technical evidence provided by Theranos consisted of two main parts.

The first was partnerships with major pharmaceutical companies.

[For the past 7 years, we have been collaborating with 10 of the top 15 large pharmaceutical companies to validate our technology.]

It wasn't a lie.

Indeed, since 2006, Theranos had been carrying out numerous joint projects with major pharmaceutical companies.

Primarily, they introduced their product into clinical trials…

Simply put, it meant providing Theranos's ‘Newton' device to patients participating in the trials.

With this device, patients could perform blood tests at home.

Just a single drop of blood was needed.

Immediate results would be available, which would be automatically sent to their doctor.

The doctor could then check for side effects based on the test results and adjust medication dosages accordingly.

This could lead to quicker interventions than regular medical appointments, potentially preventing severe side effects early.

It was a great idea.

But as I mentioned…

‘There's no such technology in reality.'

Theranos provided collaboration documents with various pharmaceutical companies as evidence, but all these documents merely stated that the collaboration had begun.

There was no information on how these collaborations concluded.

Probably, they fell through midway.

The partner companies must have realized the reality of the product and pulled out.

Of course, this was merely speculation.

To prove fraud, I needed to verify the facts, so I contacted each pharmaceutical company…

It was not easy to find related documents.

"Currently, there is no data confirmed regarding the collaboration with Theranos."

"Does that mean there was no collaboration at all?"

"No, that's not what I mean. You mentioned the documents from 2006, right? If the project was discontinued then, it would have been transferred to cold storage three years later. It might be there."

Cold storage, meaning buried in a vast tomb of data.

"So, being in cold storage means that the agreement failed."

"Yes, but just because a project failed doesn't mean there was a problem with the product. There are various reasons why collaborations fail."

"Is there a way to obtain those documents?"

"That's difficult. Since it involves proprietary technology information, access is not possible without going through Theranos, the contract party."

Proprietary technology cannot be accessed casually, even by Theranos's investors.

This route was blocked.

So, I followed the next clue.

The second piece of evidence Theranos provided.

It was none other than research commissioned by my alma mater.

[In 2010, we disclosed our proprietary technology to Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and requested a feasibility study. The researchers evaluated it as innovative technology…]

The report excerpt provided by Theranos listed five professors' names.

I tried to contact them directly but failed every time.

I left my number with their secretary, but it was unlikely that the professors would contact me first.

The most certain way was to visit them in person.

However, it was impossible to go to Baltimore during Goldman's working hours.

So, I used another method.

Several seniors who had been kind to me during medical school were still at Johns Hopkins Hospital, and I decided to contact one of them.

"What's up? How's it going, Wall Street hell?"

Although we had not interacted for a long time in a previous life and our relationship had cooled, it had been less than two years since I graduated from medical school now.

One particularly meddlesome senior willingly went to find the professor and even persuaded him to talk to me about this important matter.

Thanks to him, I finally got to speak directly with the professor.

He was a professor of clinical toxicology.

He remembered the meeting with Theranos well.

"It was quite an interesting approach. The data they showed had the potential to be innovative."

"Professor, do you think that technology was viable?"

"Well, I don't know about that. I only saw the data Theranos provided. A proper evaluation would require a third party to conduct separate experiments. That's why I requested they send the product for a comparative study, but they kept delaying and eventually the contact was lost, probably."

It ended inconclusively.

When I told the professor that Theranos was already using his name in their marketing, he was furious and sent me a document.

It was a copy of the meeting report summarized by Johns Hopkins School of Medicine.

It clearly stated the university's disclaimer.

"The above evaluation is based solely on the data provided by Theranos and is not the result of independent verification of the technology by this university."

At the bottom of the second page, there was even this phrase:

"Nothing in this report should be interpreted as an endorsement of the product or service by Johns Hopkins School of Medicine."

Despite this warning, Theranos quoted only the phrase ‘high potential to be innovative technology' from this report.

They used only the favorable parts to mislead as if they had received endorsement from an authoritative university.

Just looking at the circumstances, this was already suspicious.

If there had been real results, the professor would have welcomed a third party conducting objective experiments, as he requested.

But Theranos did not do so.

‘This is clear evidence.'

Yet, I still felt uneasy.

If you ask what was so unsettling…

‘It's too… sloppy.'

This was not the method of a professional con artist.

Perhaps if they had bribed a proper research institution to manipulate data.

Making such blatantly detectable lies is something a child might do.

Could they really have deceived the entire world with such a shoddy trick?

It seemed unlikely.

This made me even more suspicious.

How could Theranos have achieved a corporate value of 10 billion dollars with such flimsy evidence?

There must be another reason.

Then, a thought suddenly struck me.

‘Raymond couldn't possibly be unaware of this…?'

The Raymond I met was not a foolish man.

It means that he couldn't have believed in Theranos's potential based solely on such documents.

I need to meet in person to verify.

I sent Raymond a carefully crafted email.

But the reply that came back was unexpected.

<I have business at Goldman tomorrow, how about dinner?>

So the next evening,

I found myself sitting across from Raymond at a restaurant near Goldman.

As soon as we ordered, he placed his smartphone on the table and asked,

"May I record this conversation? It's my principle to record all official meetings."

At his words, I suppressed a smirk inwardly.

Such a principle seemed improbable.

Who would readily speak in front of a lawyer who starts recording right away?

It seemed he thought I was an easy target.

I responded with a calm smile, just as he did.

"Then I should record as well."

A slight wrinkle formed on Raymond's forehead.

He seemed not too keen on me recording the conversation.

I calmly explained with a smile why it was necessary to record.

"Raymond, you will remember exactly what I say based on the recording, but I must rely on vague memories. This could lead to misunderstandings. It's to prevent that."

Raymond seemed to ponder for a moment, but then he nodded.

He must have judged it wasn't too big a risk.

Thus, we both pressed the record button and continued our conversation.

I got straight to the point.

"Some companies' data is insufficient. Especially for Theranos, key information is missing."

"There should be an abundance of data for Theranos."

"There's a considerable amount, but most of it concerns marketability."

The volume of data provided by Theranos was enormous.

However, most of it was related to product launches.

Contracts with large distribution chains, agreements with the Department of Defense, etc.

If all the signed contracts were successful and deliveries completed, they could record sales of 100 million dollars by the end of the year…that was the main point.

So, ‘most' of the data related to Theranos was factual.

But there was a crucial problem.

‘There's no product.'

More precisely, there are only empty cans without any function.

Such technology does not exist in the world.

"The most critical technical evidence is missing."

"There must be a reason for that."

I observed Raymond's facial expressions as I laid out all my findings.

I started with my contacts with the pharmaceutical companies, and he responded calmly with an expressionless face.

"If it was a project from a long time ago, it naturally would have failed. Theranos's product has been improved over a long period through various trials and errors. Especially in the early stages, there were many failures."

"Then, I need the most recent successful clinical data."

Raymond brought up something unexpected.

"Just a few months ago, we also requested those documents from our side."

As a lawyer, he had necessary due diligence steps to take.

He realized there were missing documents and contacted Theranos directly.

"They asked if the documents were urgently needed. They mentioned that the documents might have been lost due to several office moves and said they needed to focus on product launches now and would look for them later."

"And after that…?"

"We didn't receive the documents. Instead, we got verification in another way."

"What method was that?"

"A professor on the board made a verification statement."

This meant that the professor had bypassed the need for technical proof with just a ‘trust me' kind of statement.

Normally, this wouldn't make sense, but…

"It's Professor Carrington from Stanford. He's a member of the board and serves as a technical advisor for Theranos."

Carrington is one of the star professors at Stanford.

He also served as a director and technical advisor for Theranos.

If so, he must have thoroughly examined Newton's technology.

The professor reassuring that the technology was sound was enough reason for them to wait until Theranos sent the documents.

Thus, they ended up waiting indefinitely and it fizzled out, and then I also mentioned the case of the clinical toxicology professor from Johns Hopkins University, but he remained unfazed.

"That was also in 2010. Since then, Theranos's technology has greatly advanced."

"But Theranos is using documents with disclaimer clauses as technical verification documents. This poses a problem."

"There might have been a mistake. As I said, there is no problem with the technology. Professor Carrington guarantees it."

"We still need proper evidence."

"You'd have to speak directly to Theranos to get that."

That was unlikely.

As before, they would probably drag it out until the request fizzled.

I looked Raymond straight in the eye and said, "These are documents I absolutely need to fulfill my duty."

"What do you want me to do about that? I'm just the client's lawyer."

Indeed, Raymond's reaction is concerning.

It seems clear that he, too, is suspicious of Theranos.

However, it appears he has reasons he cannot openly discuss.

‘I can somewhat guess what those reasons might be…?

If my guess is correct, Raymond won't be able to easily divulge this information.

In that case, there's only one way to go.

I took a deep breath.

"Understood. I'll handle this matter myself. Actually, there was another reason I wanted to meet with you today."

"What is it?"

"I need legal advice for a personal matter."

At my words, a curious smile appeared on Raymond's lips.

"Do you want to hire me as your lawyer?"

"Yes, that's right."

"Is it a matter where there might be a conflict of interest with me?"

"Well, even if there is a conflict of interest, I still want to hire you."

"Then, we should stop recording."

Raymond quietly turned off the recorder.

I also pressed the stop button.

The conversation from this point on should not be recorded.

By hiring Raymond as my lawyer, a special right has arisen.

Specifically, the attorney-client privilege.

From now on, the conversations between Raymond and me are legally protected.

Even if the police come, we don't have to speak, and not even a court can force us to speak frankly.

For this reason, now that we can talk just between us without external interference, I looked Raymond straight in the eye and began to speak.

"If Holmes turns out to be a fraudster, what do you intend to do?"