The latter half of that paragraph is articulating what I think Theranos is currently doing, not what I think they should have done.<p>What I said they should have done is described to their investors the business model that would act as a stop gap measure (gain market share and revenues by using existing technology) while allowing them to develop their proprietary technology to a point where it can get regulatory approval and can replace the already existing tech they&#x27;re currently using.<p>&gt; Leading investors to believe that you have technology that will be ready in 2011 when in reality you expect it to be ready in 2016 is not flipping a start up business model... It&#x27;s just lying to get investor money<p>I&#x27;ve not seen any indication that rounds were predicated on certain delivery dates of the tech (what tech? what is the &quot;success&quot; percent? can the tech be augmented with more traditional tools?). If terms did get that specific, then there would be grounds for potential fraud.