4 ms·

Headline is a bit sensationalist. They closed last Friday down 6-7% on the week and bounced back today to almost exactly where they were a week ago.

• anothergoogler 9y ago
  A bit? MSFT is a few points below its two week high!
  • mikeash 9y ago
    Nearly every article that attempts to explain the movement of a stock price is sensationalist. There are occasional times when there is a clear cause and effect, but usually there are a million different things going on and trying to tie it back to a single cause is hopeless. I notice that they are careful to phrase it in a way that does not explicitly describe cause and effect. Here, the headline merely states that one thing happened, then another. Any causality is inferred by the reader. But of course the reader will infer causality, and the writers know it, and cultivate it.
• Rebelgecko 9y ago
  Just like most stocks did. One of my pet peeves in articles like this and the Facebook one on the front page that assume every single change in a company's stock is a direct result of something a company did that week. Pretty useless when they don't take into account what the market in general is doing.
• zombieprocesses 9y ago
  That's financial news every day. They make up nonsense to associate with stock/market movements. Last week, it was FB being down because of issues. Nevermind the entire market was down. And if the dow is down .05% for the day, they'll make up something to state the reason for it. Everyday on bloomberg, cnbc, etc, they said "the dow or some stock" is down for X reason but that's nonsense. If the talking heads at bloomberg, cnbc, etc knew the reasons for daily stock/market moves, then they wouldn't be working as journalists. They'd be making bank on wall street.
  • executesorder66 9y ago
    They'd only be making bank on wall street, if they knew the reasons before hand. Not after it happened.