Have
We Already Forgotten Who Wrecked WeWork?
Thoughts
on the rehabilitation of Adam Neumann
BY HOWARD
TULLMAN, GENERAL MANAGING PARTNER, G2T3V AND CHICAGO HIGH TECH
INVESTORS@TULLMAN
A while ago I wrote about my fondest
theatrical wish, which was that no one in Hollywood would be stupid enough to make a
tech-porn movie aggrandizing Elizabeth Holmes and conveniently
neglecting to remind us of her fraudulent schemes and her willingness to
heedlessly risk the lives of thousands of patients using her fake blood testing
equipment. (See .) Certain stories have no happy endings and certain crooks and
scumbags don't deserve any attempts (fictional or otherwise) to restate and
rehabilitate their misdeeds and their soiled reputations.
The main message of that INC. piece was that
the entire morally-bankrupt Silicon Valley culture of "fake it 'til you
make it" had led hundreds of entrepreneurs and millions of investors down
the slick and shabby slope from passion to perjury and from fanciful fictions
to outright fraud. And Ms. Holmes was one of the poster people for the whole
sordid mess right alongside Adam Neumann, the drug- and drink-addled scam
artist from WeWork. It felt to me like any attempt to rationally explain or
present both sides of their basically bullshit stories was like trying to pick
up the clean end of a shit stick or polish a turd. They were crooks - plain and
simple - and glorifying their lies and ignoring the people they hurt and
deceived was a service to no one.
The pandemic for the moment has sidelined the
Theranos film (sadly, along with the Holmes trial and prosecution), but the
ugly specter of WeWork has lately arisen (right in time for Halloween) in a
most unlikely and unfortunate location. Lo and behold, my morning treadmill
read of DealBook was rudely interrupted by the image of a new fundamentally
laudatory book on WeWork and Neumann calling him the "Billion Dollar
Loser" which was accompanied by a short promotional interview with the
author.
The author is so enthralled with Neumann's
miraculous and epic rise that he gives short shrift to the company's abrupt and
long overdue fall from grace which - just to be clear - wasn't due to any
heroic miscalculation or grand ambitions. These were scammers who were finally
found out with fake financials and with too many hands in the cookie jar. The
DealBook "interview" feels more like a bought-and-paid for PR release
and utterly neglects to even mention that Neumann was every bit as big a fraud
and liar as Holmes and the rest of their ilk. It's a complete crock and gives
you the feeling from time to time that the author actually feels bad that it
happened to such a nice guy who only meant well. Gag me.
Starting with the softball question about
Neumann's sincerity, the author reports that he came to think that Neumann
"believed" that he was changing the world and was more qualified than
governments to solve the world's problems. To even see this crap in print in a
publication run by Andrew Ross Sorkin - one of the world's most lovable and
polite cynics - was worse than heresy. It was abject flackery.
Next came an embarrassing question about
lessons to be learned. Nowhere was there the slightest mention of the fact that
inventing your own fake financial statistics and trying to foist those on the
public and the SEC might be the height of stupidity, cupidity and fraud. Nary a
word about excessive spending, wasteful side adventures, self-dealing, and abundant
drug use and drinking as a standard and often required business practice.
Instead, there's a self-serving humble brag by
the author that he hopes people won't read this tripe as a how-to guide to be
an ambitious entrepreneur although he modestly admits "it could be read
that way". I suppose it could be interpreted like that if you were an
arrogant man-child surrounded by sycophants and enabled by PR and financial
types all looking to ride your coattails while the hype lasted and trying to make
as much money as they could before the bubble burst. Sounds frighteningly like
the White House these days.
Another trenchant observation and useless
"lesson" the author shares is that it's worth thinking about taking
risks and knowing when to stay the course. Yes, to be sure. It's also good to
work hard, wash your hands, and wear a mask. These utterly pedestrian and
vacuous thoughts lead to the stirring sentiment that you can build very nice
businesses without trying to be a world-famous billionaire. Hard to argue with
that.
But it's the closing thought of this most
observant "interview" that is actually the most embarrassing. Asked
whether the tag "loser" is a temporary judgment, the author says that
still-young Adam - once he dries out and gets off the drugs - won't retire
early. He concludes that "people will give him a second chance".
Maybe it was just the absurdity and the timing of this comment that really
struck me.
As the entire nation confronts the very same
issue about giving a narcissistic man-child who's clearly intent on killing
civility in our country a "second chance", we have a writer who
obviously learned nothing from his own process and investigation trying to
rewrite, excuse and justify the wanton waste, wretched excess, and frauds perpetrated
by the scammers and grifters at WeWork. The flatulent folks at Fox could learn
a thing or two from this guy.
