One tweet didn't wipe $8bn off its value, the results did. If the results were released next day, it still would have lost value ffs. I feel angry reading through this and realizing it was a waste of time fluff.
Say what you will, its evident that HN crowd loves sensationalism more than content, as seen again and again.
Your comment is just as sensational as the headline.
I'll ask the same thing I asked someone else: You're saying if Twitter released their earnings as planned after closing that today after opening they would have still lost $8Bn? That is the relevant fact reported by BBC, and I highly doubt Twitter would have dropped by that much if investors slept on the news.
I think the point of the article is that disappointing earnings minus investor relations PR spin cost twitter much more than the normal scenario for bad earnings, which does include IR spin. And that nobody would have known about it, except for this tweet.
I don't know how much truth is in those two points, particularly the latter, but that's what the article is about.
It's definitely sensationalist, but the fact remains, that single tweet represented prior knowledge causing a large, unexpected shift near the end of the trading day. Being unexpected, it seems to have triggered a fear-based selloff that may not have been as bad as if if the stock moved either direction after the earnings report.
One tweet didn't wipe $8bn off its value, the results did. If the results were released next day, it still would have lost value ffs. I feel angry reading through this and realizing it was a waste of time fluff.
Say what you will, its evident that HN crowd loves sensationalism more than content, as seen again and again.