13 ms·
Just for once I’d like to see such a statement look like, “You sheep probably want a comment on today’s news. We’re not doing that. We’re just content to buy up
by SilasX 3y ago
Just for once I’d like to see such a statement look like, “You sheep probably want a comment on today’s news. We’re not doing that. We’re just content to buy up all the shares you’re panic-dumping. Looking forward to flipping them back to you next week when you panic in the other direction.”
(Assuming they have some plan that gives them the flexibility to trade shares directly on the market like that. I think $GME had something like this?)
Edit: And, of course, actually mean it, unlike Caroline Ellison and the $22 FTT: https://twitter.com/carolinecapital/status/1589287457975304193 https://twitter.com/carolinecapital/status/15892874579753041...
- bmitc 3y agoIt's hilarious that people are commenting about Microsoft being "down". It's up over a $100 per share since the beginning of the year and at an all-time high.
- jliptzin 3y agoRetail didn’t move MSFT stock yesterday on that news. It was HFT bots reacting to the news. Nobody panicked.
- SilasX 3y agoNobody panicked? I suspect that's beyond what your current evidence, plus general knowledge of market behavior, can justify.
- jliptzin 3y agoPeople may have panicked, but the move happened too quickly for a human to react in time
- SilasX 3y agoYou still can't justify a claim that nobody panic-sold, given what you know. Let's try to stick to claims we have a basis to believe, instead of fighting noise with noise. A more reasonable claim from your epistemic state could be something like, "There was no major crash from the news, as might be seen in a general panic."