1. lol so are you saying no one goes to Seattle unless getting a truckload of money? …maybe he was just there for regular business meetings.

    1. He tweeted from the street he was on (a well known street for the VC company they got funding from) and something like, great meeting, great day. I never said 2+2 added up to 5 😛

  2. I’m not sure of the validity of the inference that you’re making here Laurel. I get ASIC and the SEC’s requirement that publicly listed companies need to add social media monitoring to their conventional media monitoring, so they can more quickly identify any rumours, leaks or hacks which might be driving unusual trading activity.

    And as we saw in Australia with the ANZ press release hoax in relation to whitehaven coal, anyone who trades on HotCopper message board rumours in the absence of formal disclosure has only themselves to blame. Professional investors don’t make these kinds of mistakes and even amateurs generally know better.

    But none of this means corporates themselves need to set up social accounts. Any clarifying statements need to be posted to the announcements platform of their relevant securities exchange, which is the source of truth for all investors. I’m also not sure of the connection to financial advisers.

    What does socially-driven misinformed trading in publicly listed shares have to do with whether your adviser is on Facebook? Surely you can’t be suggesting that an adviser should be on social to pick up on rumours so would be in a position to tell you whether to buy or sell a share?

    If so, you’d be one of the victims of the ANZ prank!

  3. ps….and i think that you are improperly conflating any connection of social media to the examples above, with share price impact. It’s not Twitter that’s impacting the share price because its penetration isn’t high enough in the investment communities. It might be an amplifier of, or catalyst or, a rumour. But it’s the existence of rumours in the mainstream financial press and general street talk that leads to share price movements – not just because a rumour is swirling around social media. This is why it’s not accurate to express surprise to say that Twitter didn’t realise how powerful social media was. In fact, the Twitter exec was an idiot for an egregious leak and should have known better. This is really just an illiustration of his stupidity rather than the inate power of the medium to move markets. And in the case of Apple, the tech paper isn’t really social media, it’s a digital publisher. Saying Endgadget is social media is like saying the SMH IT section is social media, simply because readers can comment on stores

  4. Bob on your first point I want to point out that without monitoring you would be unaware until traditional media got hold of the story,and without an account, you have no right to reply. On the second one: I’ve watched stock drop as news broke on twitter but not yet on traditional media (Woz’s tweet on Toyota was an example). And Apple’s response to Engadget was “we don’t respond on social media” not “we don’t respond to traditional media with comments sections”. Thanks for commenting but I haven’t changed my mind…if you don’t at least monitor, you are screwed by the time the Evening News breaks it. cheers 🙂 Laurel

Comments are closed.