No, I think that their use of existing technology is exactly the heart of the issue. They claim to have made a breakthrough in how blood tests are conducted that allows them to run a large set of blood tests on a tiny fingerprick blood sample. An investigative journalist then reported that they&#x27;re not using this technology at all, and all the tests they sell commercially are regular venous blood draws run through testing machines purchased from other companies.<p>If Theranos is not using their fingerprick blood testing technology, then they are not using their technology commercially at all. So if this is true, then they&#x27;re a company that&#x27;s been in business 11 years, has a massive valuation, and has not developed a commercially viable technology yet. It&#x27;s as if a web search company like Google had been around 11 years, was worth &gt;$1 billion, and then was found to be <i>exclusively</i> using and rebranding Microsoft&#x27;s search technology instead. It&#x27;s a scandal.<p>Theranos&#x27; valuation cannot be sustained anywhere near its current value simply by selling blood tests conducted on equipment manufactured by other firms. Theranos&#x27; claim to fame is a breakthrough in fingertip-prick blood testing technology, and they have no way to differentiate themselves in the market without this breakthrough technology - their investment value cannot be sustained simply by reselling technology made by other firms.