Comment by javierluraschi 3 days ago
She (the CEO) has a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders. Intentionally driving a company into bankruptcy for personal gain is a massive breach of that duty and opens her up to all kinds of legal trouble. So I would think that's a very bad idea.
I'm just arguing that she can't let the company go bankrupt when she placed a bid for $0.40. Even if she could, she could loose control of the company when all shareholders get wiped out, not sure the court will let her keep 70% through bankruptcy.
Acting as a fiduciary would entail seeking a buyer at the best price possible, not a low "take private" offer. Can the CEO demonstrate they're working to find someone to buy them?
Edit: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/23andme-ceo-wojcicki-open-thi...
> A special committee formed by the company rejected Wojcicki's previous proposal, deeming it insufficient and not in the best interest of the non-affiliated shareholders.
If we agree that public market are the closest we can get to realtime market value, it's hard to argue it's easy to find a better offer. Otherwise, many other companies that are down 95% from their 2021 highs should just find a buyer of their companies to maximize shareholders value.
I think we are disappointed that the market is giving $ME and many other companies non-ZIRP valuations at 95% discounts, and we don't have the cash to buy them at the bottom, like she can.
Unless the data turns out to be fraudulent (ugh!), then 23 & Me seems like it has actually promising products currently going through their development process(es).
nah. 23andMe actually works. they use real science to do genome sequencing, and that's provable. Theranos never worked, and was nothing but lies and hype.
But having working science does not make a successful business plan.
They're going bankrupt because they're almost out of cash [1]. The CEO is holding public investors hostage with the low ball take private offer LarsDu88 mentioned. The stock, NASDAQ: ME, currently trades at 29 cents/share [2] and will be delisted shortly [3]. Their failure to secure their customer DNA data with MFA cost them a $30M fine they must pay [4].
My comment you replied to was attempting to communicate that, because the CEO holds most of the control over the company, it is preferable to let it slip into bankruptcy (where equity and their control will be wiped out) vs continuing allowing them the control they have, which is not leading to a favorable outcome for the enterprise. This is potentially superior to recapitalizing the existing enterprise and continuing to allow the CEO to light capital on fire.
[1] https://investors.23andme.com/news-releases/news-release-det... (draw your attention to quarterly burn rate and cash on hand)
[2] https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/ME/
[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-10/strugglin... |https://archive.today/yTo01
[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41536494