She had a proof of concept that turned out didn&#x27;t scale.  If you think it&#x27;s &quot;useless&quot; to discuss whether and how it&#x27;s possible for such a CEO to pivot we have nothing further to discuss.  I will say that I expect any and every world-changing CEO to be at risk of being in such a position now and in the future, and that the development of a game plan by the startup community for when (not if) this happens again is the difference between billions of dollars of value and the statement &quot;unfortunately I have to say no to changing the world because I only have a working proof of concept.  Personally I do not want to run even a 1% risk of ending up in the position that Perry ended up in - and in my conservative opinion I have a 20-90% chance of that.  Oh well -  I&#x27;ll put this proof of concept aside and go do something else. &quot;<p>Well,  okay. But I hope it&#x27;s blindingly obvious that we all lose. . That pre-CEO and the world.<p>EDIT: Whoever is downvoting me doesn&#x27;t get it.  She had a proof of concept.  The proof didn&#x27;t scale.  She raised money - millions - anyway.  To me this is all fine.  The question is whether she HAD to stick with this non-working concept, or whether she could have pivoted, when she had all that money in the bank and learned that the concept does not work&#x2F;scale.  You guys just don&#x27;t get the question.