Digg

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

Engadget Knocks $4 billion off Apple Market Cap on Bogus iPhone email

techcrunch.com — "Apple’s stock promptly tanked on massive selling, going from $107.89 to $103.42 in six minutes (11:56 - 12:02). This wiped just over $4 billion off of Apple ’s market capitalization. A lot of people lost a lot of money very quickly."

Bury

dreaz 1 year 106 days ago, made popular 1 year 106 days ago

2806 diggs
digg it

180 Comments
Who Dugg It?
Blog It
Email It

sarclecom, on 10/11/2007, -28/+10Sell Short! Sell Short!
- gxcdesign, on 10/11/2007, -31/+11I bet Engadget will be sent Cease and Desist letter
- Cwo655321, on 10/11/2007, -45/+10ha ha ha ha ha ha, na na na na na na
- fober, on 10/11/2007, -21/+45I just sent Engadget a letter from my Gmail account stating that the Google Phone is being delayed until 2010.
  
  Get ready to buy some Google stock.
- lockfist, on 10/11/2007, -7/+154I doubt a single blog entry by Engadget could cause such a massive sell-off. I have a feeling that more than one emloyee passed along this information to the outside. I would also bet that more than one employee is going to find themselves in a little bit of trouble with the SEC for selling their shares on insider information.
- flashboy131, on 10/11/2007, -12/+59Internal investigation run by Apple, disinformation to track leaks.
- dulcimer, on 10/11/2007, -3/+28Not a bad strategy for the rumor sites. Short sell your Apple stock and release an erroneous email. Sure beats Google adsense. Only a tad bit illegal, though.
- sishgupta, on 10/11/2007, -7/+140What the hell? Why are people so shocked?
  
  NEWS FLASH!...rumors cause stock market fluctuations....a ton of gullible traders lose money...
- tazx, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5Lockfist, good point, especially re the SEC.
- zabaf, on 10/11/2007, -9/+14@Shisqpa
  
  The gullable people sold while it was at the normal price, they didnt lose money... the people who didnt sell lost money......
- Chompy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+70Welcome to the dangers of market speculation. Long-term investors will not be affected.
- macmcrae, on 10/11/2007, -13/+7I seriously doubt apple would release disinformation that might cause a drop in their stock price.
  Christ apple's stock is incredibly overvalued. Wallstreet is absolutely insane.
- Spuy767, on 10/11/2007, -6/+9Apple's stock price is not overvalued, it appears that you simply don't understant what give a stock value. Is Dell, Microsoft, Intel's stock undervalued? No.
- MasterDwarf, on 10/11/2007, -16/+7Marked inaccurate.
  
  I doubt the blog led to the stock tanking.
- phrstbrn, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6@ zabaf
  
  You have it completely backwards. People who are gullible, sold it now, and lost about $2-4 per share. People who are NOT gullible waited an hour, and the stock went back to normal. Did you even LOOK at the at the article? They have a nice graph for those who don't like to read :)
  
  Moral of the story, don't listen to the news when buying/selling stock. After ANY announcement, good or bad, is a VERY bad time to buy/sell stock (Don't sell after a bad announcement, don't buy after a good announcement). The majority of the time the stock will just normalize after a few days or weeks after all the excitement has died down. (Yes, there are exceptions, but those are exceptions, not the rule).
  
  Edit:
  Sell short after a good announcement to make some quick bucks. Watch the stock go up, sell short, wait for it go back down, and cash in :)
- Light11, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3what people might not realize is that these people probably had their cash in since it was at 60. so really the money they lost was just a slight percentage of their profits
- therightside, on 10/11/2007, -9/+2WOW a 3% drop. Shocking!!!
- griz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4BUY BUY BUY!!
- brian1625, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3According to Engadget, both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates at some point has called the site a main source for breaking tech news.
  [Source Engadget Podcast Episode 100]
  
  So Engadget is kind of a big deal.
- drakethegreat, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Why are people buying and selling stocks based upon engadget as their inside source? That just seems retarded to begin with.
- thefaithful, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Someone made a LOT of money in that half hour of panic.
IanBell330, on 10/11/2007, -97/+24Engadget needs to be sued to death for pulling publicity stunts like this. As one of the largest blogs out there, they need to set an example, they are hurting every blogger out there that is hoping for real credibility.
- sp00nz, on 10/11/2007, -10/+123Engadget shouldn't be responsible for people who are idiots.
- fkr3, on 10/11/2007, -6/+72Not to mention most of their content comes from other bloggers anyway.
- haastyle, on 10/11/2007, -10/+31its the internet don't believe it
- bobcrotch, on 10/11/2007, -2/+89The mentality of you thinking that someone should be able to sue over this is whats wrong here.
  
  People making major financial decisions from a blog who touts their information was from an 'authority' (note, no sources) deserves to lose any amount of money they did. Folks need to man up to their choices and take responsibility for their actions, not whine and cry like children and try to blame someone for their mistakes.
- saggygrandma, on 10/11/2007, -4/+17How can saying it came from Apple's servers be a legitimate excuse, it can be easily spoofed..... obviously so can engadget.....
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -28/+5Engadget shouldn't be responsible for being idiots? The rest of the world has to be responsible. What makes Engadget special?
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -12/+8@crotch, you clearly don't understand how automated trading, potentially involving millions of shares, can be affected by a relatively few individuals who get spooked by fraudulent information.
- feralkid, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9@haastyle
  "its the internet don't believe it"
  
  But nearly all information these days is available on the internet. Who can be believed? Only "approved" news sources? Breaking news quite often hits the world via the blogging world before it comes out of major news agencies.
  
  You need to be wary of any information regardless of it's source. We all have 20/20 hind-site vision as well, particularly regarding other peoples actions and decisions.
- Hooj, on 10/11/2007, -11/+6@feralkid
  
  If it isn't on Fox News, don't believe it.
  
  /sarcasm
- AnotherBrian, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10Re: streak
  Maybe the investors shouldn't rely on such touchy algorithms for their automatic trades.
- goodoldharris, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13Stock prices fluctuate. Day traders pay attention to them. Investors don't. And neither Apple or Engadget will be liable to people who lost money because they chose to buy or sell stock based on a blog post. Techcrunch is stupid to suggest there may be liability here.
- Chewie67, on 10/11/2007, -3/+12@spoonz - "Engadget shouldn't be responsible for people who are idiots."
  
  This is the problem with major blogs. On one hand, they want to be treated on par with "serious journalists", yet they don't act like serious journalists. These crap sites (Endadget, Gizmodo, MacRumors, etc.) post every peice of junk that hits their inbox without checking any facts. Did they call Apple to confirm the story? Did they have any other evidence besides one random email message? No.
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3@AnotherBrian, to the contrary, people should simply not engage in fraudulent activities. Rational markets depend on timely dissemination of accurate information, and laws exist to ensure this.
- griz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2What is sad is that people are making stock trades based on something that a blog says.
FyodorD, on 10/11/2007, -27/+51It's irresponsible blogging like this that's going to make it really, really hard for the rest of the tech-related blogosphere. Apple's going to feel the sting, other tech groups are going to rally for 'stricter controls and consequences' and Engadget's going to act all indignant, like they've got squeaky clean hands.

That said, anyone who instantly dumps the majority or entirety of his or her shares based on an unsubstantiated and, frankly, lame-ass rumor flat out deserves to lose the money. Call it Economic Darwinism.
- bobcrotch, on 10/11/2007, -7/+17Not to mention the douches who take their publications as authoritative source for financial decisions.
- FatHed, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8"It's irresponsible blogging like this that's going to make it really, really hard for the rest of the tech-related blogosphere."
  
  reallly hard to do what? be credible?
- Nowheredan, on 10/11/2007, -7/+6What was irresponsible about this? They got what appeared to be an official Apple email, which was a good enough fake to fool even Apple employees, forwarded to them, and they posted about it. What better source should they have had? It's not their fault they were fooled by a convincing hoax.
- Nogger, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11Did they have confirmation from a second source that was not based on this email? Professional journalism would require that.
- drgruney, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4@nogger
  
  Professional journalism is supposed to require that.
  
  There I fixed that for ya buddy.
  
  /just got out of college studying journalism and media.
- jonathan95060, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1talk to me about irresponsible bloggers when something news worthy actually happens. A company's stock price dipping for a few hours on a negative rumor is definitely not news.
  
  The only people who got hurt by this are the trigger happy gamblers^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H short term traders who deserve what ever happened to them.
  
  Now, if a blogger could cause people to permanently think that Apple was as worthy of our scorn as WorldCom (MCI) or Enron is that would be real damage and worthy of bitching about.
- dougmc, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2`frankly, anyone who uses the words "tech-related blogosphere" is a douche'
  
  Why don't you go write about it in your blag?
Studio7, on 10/11/2007, -20/+4Thats pretty hard core of them to mess around like that.
brandonking, on 10/11/2007, -50/+4Wow. Someone just lost their college fund thanks to a rumor. I would not be surprised it this kicked some type of legislation into action regarding company/product info leaks.
- acceptab1euname, on 10/11/2007, -8/+79Lost their college fund? Please. If you've got all your money invested in one company that's so vulnerable to one single ***** story then you're an idiot.
- Roscoe1976, on 10/11/2007, -30/+10It was a figure of speech dumbass.
- colincornaby, on 10/11/2007, -8/+38At a total loss of eighteen cents per share at the end of the day, I don't think anyone lost a college fund.
- brandonking, on 10/11/2007, -23/+5Yeah, because people buy just one share.
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -16/+7Exsqueeze me? Trading volume surged during the 4% downturn, with millions of shares trading hands in just a few minutes. I expect many people lost fortunes of various sizes, due to the fraud. Meanwhile, others made fortunes of various sizes. And none were deserved. Laws exist to prevent such market conditions, and the laws need to be enforced, with appropriately stiff penalties imposed.
- brandonking, on 10/11/2007, -6/+17Not to mention that dumping this one stock might cause other stocks to be dumped, portfolios changed, etc. Tanking a major stock by 3% is based on fraudulant activity is a BIG DEAL. Either Engadget has to be considered a reputable news source or a rumor mongering joke blog. There is no in between. It looks like people thought they were a serious news source. That has probably changed for alot of people now.
- EtherGnat, on 10/11/2007, -1/+141. Apple employees receive an internal e-mail and believe it (why wouldn't they?)
  
  2. Apple employee forwards e-mail to Engadget (and will soon be looking for work if caught)
  
  3. Engadget receives message and confirms it was distributed within Apple's internal e-mail system
  
  4. Engadget posts story, not unreasonable given the evidence
  
  5. Investors read story. Some sell their Apple stock (not stupid, a gamble)
  
  6. Other investors buy stock (again a gamble)
  
  7. Story turns out to be false. Gambling investors who sold lose 1-4%. Gambling investors who bought gain 1-4%. This is how the stock market works. If the story had been true the winners and losers likely would have been reversed.
  
  If they catch the bastard who sent the original e-mail he's in some hot water. Apple probably deserves a bit of the responsibility as well (morally if not legally) because it seems their internal e-mail system isn't secure enough (unless the hoax was sent by somebody with legitimate access).
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1By the way, AAPL share price dove by 4%, not the 2% or 3% being bandied about elsewhere. Do the math. As noted in the digg comments above, in just minutes, the price went from 107+ to 103+.
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1@EtherGnat, all investments carry some degree of risk. The problem here is the injection of fraudulent information into the market. And by your providing an itemized list, I believe you're fraudulently claiming to know things that you actually don't know.
- EtherGnat, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2streak wrote: "I believe you're fraudulently claiming to know things that you actually don't know."
  
  Information Week: "Apparently the email came from what Engadget calls a "trusted source" and was delivered from within Apple's internal email system, giving it the air of authenticity. Apple discovered the fake email quickly and 90 minutes later sent out a real email explaining that the first one was a fake:" http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/05/did_anyone_else.html
  
  Mac Observer: "Apple stock took a wild ride on Wednesday after what initially appeared to be a legitimate leaked memo claimed that the iPhone would be delayed until October, and Mac OS X 10.5 wouldn't ship until January 2008...How someone was able to create an internal email that looked legitimate to Apple employees is still unclear, and the company is looking into the incident." http://www.macobserver.com/stockwatch/2007/05/17.1.shtml
  
  Business 2.0: "Block's post was based on what appeared at first glance to be a real internal memo -- marked "Bullet News" -- sent to an unknown number of Apple employees and forwarded to Engadget." http://blogs.business2.com/apple/2007/05/fake_memo_roils.html
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1EtherGnat, while the articles are consistent with what you included in your bullet points, none of them actually substantiate your claims in #1 and #2. Everything we pretend to know about the situation has been effectively obtained from hearsay, which is why professional reporters are using words like "apparently".
- pcloadletter, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Here's a more accurate play by play.
  
  1. A large number of Apple employees received an email that spoofed an internal Apple email address but which was in fact sent from outside the company. (Apple's servers were not hacked, nor did someone internal send it.) The email's formatting was similar to much older email formats but had several immediately noticable differences. Those who questioned the email's veracity could easily tell it was fake either from the incorrect formatting and content OR by examining the email headers that clearly showed it was sent from outside the company.
  
  2. An Apple employee who was fooled by the fraudulent email forwarded the email to Engadget.
  
  3. Engadget read the message and should have been highly skeptical given the unlikelihood of the information therein. Engadget made one attempt to contact one Apple PR rep. Engadget did not try very hard to reach Apple PR via other means, nor did they wait to hear back. Engadget did not bother to see if the press release referenced in the email was, in fact, posted on Apple's website as all press releases are. Engadget did not ask their source for the full email headers to check the email's origins. Engadget did not compare the email formatting to other similar emails from actual internal sources. Engadget did not seem to find it suspicious that the release date information was so drastically different from that discussed not long before at the quarterly investor meeting.
  
  4. Engadget did not want to do the responsible thing to wait because someone else might beat them to the scoop. The story would be discredited about 1 1/2 hours after the email was originally sent.
  
  5. Investors read story on Engadget or other, more reputable news sites that picked up the story. Some sold their Apple stock. Other stock was sold automatically when triggered by the price drop.
  
  6. Seeing the price down, other investors bought stock.
  
  7. Hours after the false story was posted, the corrections spread slowly.
  
  Engadget is owned by a large media corporation and presents itself as a legitimate news site. This was not presented as a rumor but as fact. What's more, they have given many excuses for the mistake, none of which are reasonable.
  
  It will be interesting to see how the SEC proceeds.
Gee1004, on 10/11/2007, -19/+2If Apple wouldn't have delayed Leopard in the first place, none of this stuff would happen.
pdk0329, on 10/11/2007, -20/+10@ianbel330
Engadget got the email from APPLE'S INTERNAL SYSTEM. Click the link next time!
- Amoveo, on 10/11/2007, -6/+13I think this is really the point of the story. Engadget didn't make up a story or false accusations they got bad info FROM APPLE. I think the real question should be who at Apple accidentally tanked their own stock? This proves blogs are powerful, but reporting on an e-mail like this could have happened to any kind of media not just a blog.
- IanBell330, on 10/11/2007, -8/+17Sure they did. Anyone could fabricate a story like that. I got an email from MICROSOFT'S INTERNAL SYSTEM telling me Bill Gates is handing over all of his Microsoft shares to Steve Jobs. It must be REAL! Click the link next time! :)
- tazx, on 10/11/2007, -11/+20The mail was a deliberate hoax, likely designed to narrow down the source of an internal leak. Engadget was irresponsible going public with it so quickly.
- JimV, on 10/11/2007, -11/+10But Apple claims the email wasn't from them. I didn't see Engadget revealing how they knew it was from Apple's email system. Are they basing it just on the email address? Because anyone can fake an email from a given domain.
- bobcrotch, on 10/11/2007, -8/+9How is that irresponsible? They break tech news, it's their thing.
- tazx, on 10/11/2007, -5/+20It's irresponsible journalism to report a rumor as "having it on authority". Did they followup with a 2nd source at Apple? Confirm the story in any way?
- bobcrotch, on 10/11/2007, -7/+8I guess if you count blogs as true authoritative journalism then sure.. but it's a blog...
- sp00nz, on 10/11/2007, -11/+4What responsibility does engadget have to you?
- treed, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18You know, most mail systems have logs. If I was going to leak information, I sure as ***** would not do it from a company account.
- tazx, on 10/11/2007, -9/+5If Engadget represents themselves as a reliable source of information, they have a responsibility to ALL of their readers to do appropriate research. If that's too much bother, than they're as relevant as The Onion or LittleGreenFootballs.
- brandonking, on 10/11/2007, -10/+5Careful. Don't want the Endgadget gray-hat gestapo to Digg bury you for expressing a contrary position.
- eaasness, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10I've always considered Engadget to be more a rumor site than an actual news site, granted their rumors are right most of the time.
- Hooj, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15I got an email from Bill Gates telling me I would be paid $0.10 for every time the email was forwarded....
tazx, on 10/11/2007, -3/+21The only people who lost money was anyone who panic-sold when the news hit. Apple closed down 18¢ on the day, and it's been up and down all week.

And actually if you look at the trade volume, a lot of people made money grabbing it as it went back up. I just pity whoever had a broker that dumped stock just before noon based on a rumor.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=AAPL&t=1d

Innaccurate.
weeeeeeee, on 10/11/2007, -7/+10pfft. not like i can afford their stock anyway.
- macmcrae, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Wait a few months - you will be able to afford alot of it. It is absolute madness that apple stock is so high. The entire tech market is ripe for a massive fall.
  Tech bubble 2.0 is about to pop.
MadtownTim, on 10/11/2007, -6/+22Anyone who bases their financial future on eletronic or other blogs is a complete and utter moron who deserves to lose the money. If your money means that little to you, please contact me and I will be more than happy to provide you with my paypal address so you can send it to me instead.

Anyone can post anything on the internet and say that it came from an official source. Until you can verify information in a different way, you're setting your self up to lose.
- Qtip42, on 10/11/2007, -6/+9Right on.
- osarhan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I'm sorry, but tech stocks are not all that bad, there are companies out there with good fundamentals that have services and products that can easily tap in and work well with the theoretical market of over 1 billion Internet users. I don't think its fair to write off all tech stocks based on this classic example of misinformation.
- MrUnderbridge, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0"If your money means that little to you, please contact me and I will be more than happy to provide you with my paypal address so you can send it to me instead."
  
  OK. Which tube should I use?
vtrimmer, on 10/11/2007, -8/+2....Engadget needs some heads to roll!
RobotCitizen, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6It's pretend money based on nothing but human mood. That $4 bil will come back after a few clever words from Steve restore "comsumer confidence".
diggchow, on 10/11/2007, -15/+5Apple needs this. I ***** love SECRECY. Apple did this to themselves. Not engadget, no?
- PathDaemon, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8So Apple putting out a press release with the iPhone and Leopard dates a month or so ago wasn't enough? It has to send more messages confirming the dates every week or so to quell the rumorpeople?
m3mn0n, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5To note, I'm pretty sure the "internal e-mail" verification came from more than just looking at an @apple.com address. I'm sure they saw IPs and hostnames from the e-mail headers that were legit, or at least looked legit. CrunchGear seemed to imply they did this verification based on the address alone.

But still, without an official announcement, it should have been passed along as rumour, not fact.

His words: "we have it on authority that as of today..."
- eaasness, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4That sounds like someone passing on a rumor to me. I have it on good authority is just another way of saying I'm pretty sure. They didn't come out and make a definitive statement like "Apple announced the iPhone launch is being pushed back from June to… October (!), and Leopard is again seeing a delay,"
- MrUnderbridge, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"To note, I'm pretty sure the "internal e-mail" verification came from more than just looking at an @apple.com address. I'm sure they saw IPs and hostnames from the e-mail headers that were legit, or at least looked legit."
  
  Sure, because it's rocket science to spoof a header. Checking a header does not constitute diligence - especially when someone going to the trouble of faking this would probably go to the trouble of spoofing the header.
  
  Not to mention which, as already pointed out, nobody who's going to leak something would actually use their work account.
- pcloadletter, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Engadget didn't do their due diligence. The headers clearly reveal that the email was sent from outside the company and the apple.com email address was spoofed.
IanBell330, on 10/11/2007, -6/+16Looks like the Engadget fans boys are on crowd control, digging down anyone that says they should be responsible and supporting those that say they shouldn't.

@ spoonz "Engadget shouldn't be responsible for people who are idiots. " So they should beliebe anything everyone tells them?
- eplawless, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3'Anyone' here being Apple.
- sp00nz, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13With the sheer amount of times most techblogs are incorrect a week it's the persons own fault for trusting it. Do you beleive everything you read on the internet?
- bobcrotch, on 10/11/2007, -7/+13It's not engadget fanboys it's people sick of jerks trying to blame their mistakes on others.
- brandonking, on 10/11/2007, -12/+6Wow. Bobcrotch. How much does Engadget pay you each time you go down on your knees? Passing this off as "Oh boohoo. The internet is not a reliable source, blah blah" doesn't cut it. 1996 called. It wants its excuses back. Most trading is done by systems that detect trends and respond. ***** like this cost people millions in changes to mutual funds, etc.
- bobcrotch, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10The internet is a reliable venue for reliable news sources. Engadget is nothing more than a tech blog and it shouldn't be viewed as anything else.
  
  Hell I wish they were paying me.
- macmcrae, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1It is absolutely not engadget's fault that apple is so overvalued. Blame the moron apple zealots. In a few short months, alot of morons are going to be substantially more broke than they are right now. Real life is a bitch. It has no mercy at all.
Dumbledorito, on 10/11/2007, -8/+11"This st0ck 1z going t0 EXP10D3!!!!"
KnightMareInc, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18thats just awesome.Remember folks, everything you read on the internet is true.
- vtrimmer, on 10/11/2007, -10/+0Its not about the billions loss or made, blogging credibility is the issue!
- fowleryo, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10how can i trust you??
TheBullMarket, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11I agree, engadget may have posted inaccurate material, but retards who base their stock transactions on a BLOG should not be allowed to control their money because it obviously costs the rest of us money.
BrainInAJar, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3Am I the only one who's not a shady stock trader that thinks securities & exchange laws are odd?

Sure, a lot of people lost money, but the same could be true if Orange Inc. came out with a uPod tomorrow that destroyed the ipod.

So long as other non-securities laws weren't broken in the process, the government's intrusion on the market by having the SEC stick around seems just unnecessary to me
- Dumbledorito, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7I'm sure Ken Lay is smiling up at you from the spit he's roasting on in hell.
- BrainInAJar, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2@Dumble:
  
  perhaps, but I've seriously never seen a decent well thought out argument for securities laws that couldn't be repurposed as an argument against the free market in general, and I'd really like to, to be perfectly honest.
  
  I'm not saying there shouldn't be, but I'm not saying there should be either... I'd just like it if someone could point me to a decent essay on the topic
hungarianhc, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5I was an engadget faithful before the post, and still plan on being one after the post, but i've definitely lost some respect for ryan block.
pixel_jockey, on 10/11/2007, -8/+3thanks a$$hole whoever sent out the fake email.... you cost me some serious greenbacks
- hdtvdust, on 10/11/2007, -10/+4It dropped 4 points! Unles you have thousands of shares, it didn't cost you much.
  
  And honestly, if you have tens of thousands of dollars invested in Apple right now, you deserve to lose some money.
- ianweir, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5@hdtvdust
  Yes, clearly those with money don't deserve it.
  Ah.. I love the smell of communism in the morning.
- macmcrae, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Deserve has nothing to do with it. The point is that apple stock is at an outrageous high point.
  It is incredibly overvalued and about to crumble. If you can't see that, you are about to lose an ass load of money. Period.
FunkyWitDaSysTm, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7why do people even bother with engadget anymore?
jhugg, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Apple's stock has been lately. There were probably plenty of people who wanted to get out with their cash anyway. This probably just reminded them to.
thomas, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4It just shows how stupid people can be. One site posts an anonymous letter as fact and then it gets echoed around the internet so people assume it most be true and freak.
blamslamman, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5This is the funniest thing I have read about all week. LO ***** L.
hdtvdust, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5Honstly...anyone that thinks that there are enough people who visit Engadget to cause ANY flucuation in hte stock market is seriously out of touch with the reality of such sites as Engadget, and techcrunch, etc.

The vast majority of investors have NEVER heard of either of the sites I listed, plus several more than make it to the front page of Digg every day. (Or Digg itself for that matter.) The number of people that visit these sites on a daily basis in even more insignificant.
wilhoitm, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3These idiot investors don't know the difference between Microsoft and Apple!
laserblazer, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Three or four weeks ago I replied, "Pump and dump detected" on a Mac thread here on Digg.

I guess some people were busy playing fanboy, because I got Dugg down.

I look forward to the new Mac Guy vs. PC Guy commercial - "Hey, Mac. Hey, PC. Say, Mac, you're walking kind of funny today, what gives?"
ochimaru, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Everyday I think another Black Friday is emminant. Not just from the inflated markets, the crashing dollar or the unsurmountable war debt... but from stupid jumpy investors like this. What would it take to scare ALL investors enough to try to yank their money all at the same time? Stupid sheep. Then again, stupid me for not jumping in there to capitalize upon their stupidity.
Tenroh, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Simply amazing.
SupaFupa, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6My grandfather told me a little phrase to live by when I was very young: "Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear."

I understand that Apple Inc. takes its secrecy extremely seriously, it's a very shrewd and wise business practice, extremely for their sector. This only makes the email story more plausible. This isn't the first delay of leopard. The cell phone business is mostly uncharted territory for Apple, which cause hiccups somewhere, almost guaranteed.

Everything about this story is enticing and intriguing, like most Apple Rumors, and most good rumors in general. But the key phrase that should have popped into everyone's head, setting off red flags, is "Apple Rumors". If there was ever a situation that literally applied to my grandfather's words of wisdom, an Apple Rumor is that situation. Unless the "Authority" you claim to have exclusive information from is Steve Jobs, believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear.

Information like this is released all of the time. I realize that financial markets are extremely time sensitive, and fast paced, leaving little time (7 minutes in this case) to fact-check, but if the information was reliable 100% of the time, we wouldn't have investment advisers, because there would be no risk to be advised of. We would all be multi-grillionaires, and cars would be replaced by unicorns that traveled at the speed of light squared. Do you smell what Im cooking?

There might be lawsuits won over surrounding details, but I just don't see how engadget would be held liable. Investors' free will, as well as the inherent risks of investment on the whole relieve engadget of any liability.
- grumpyrain, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Your grandfather was/is a wise man.
  
  If you play the day-trading game, you will sometimes lose. Every second potentially costs you money, so you don't have the luxury of spending a week sourcing the truth. Apple is also notoriously tight-lipped when it comes to product announcements, so anything that even smells of credibility will probably be trusted. If Apple stock is not overvalued, it will be back up soon enough. A 3 month delay in Leapard or iPhone won't cause any long term damage to the brand.
- MrUnderbridge, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"If you play the day-trading game, you will sometimes lose"
  
  Not just that. The question is, as a day trader, why the hell *would* you, on average, do better than a long term investor? If you're just a regular Joe, you don't have any insider information. You may think you're smarter than 50,000 MBAs and PhDs on Wall Street, but you're not. After that, all you have is trading fees and short-term capital gains taxes (up to nearly 40%) killing you.
  
  I've seen a number of good studies showing that, for similar investment strategies, index funds almost always beat actively managed funds when one accounts for 'survivor bias' (the effect where only successful funds get to keep going, while unsuccessful ones are axed). Very few fund managers are smart enough to beat the market long term, most just get lucky (or unlucky!). When you add fees and taxes to that, low-fee index funds become a very good alternative.
  
  So if one realizes that actively managed funds are a bad idea, day trading looks positively braindead. Unless you do it as a surrogate for legalized gambling.
eaasness, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3This stuff goes on all of the time. Jim Cramer explained how he used to do stuff like this all of the time. Here is the NY Post article http://www.nypost.com/seven/03202007/business/cramer_reveals_a_bit_too_much_business_roddy_boyd.htm
osarhan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4wow, 6 minutes, impressive, someone either lost a good bit or made a fortune, guess the those who sold were only in it for the short term. Stocks are about more than the next 6-12 months.
zimsters, on 10/11/2007, -7/+3Interesting... shows that the people who are investing in apple stock have less faith in it than its cultish following.
With such a volatile stock based on the release date of upcoming products, it shows a company that is essentially riding out a bubble...
- undersky, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6LOL you know nothing about investment so why don't you stfu and stop confusing other people? some investors such as the technical analysis camp (10% of all analysts) actually do not look at what stock it is, what sector it is in, and how much does it cost. they only make their buy/sell/hold decision based purely on the chart.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_analysis
truthteller, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Engadget is run by assholes.
tomski, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I do not share any sympathy with those who lost money. Capital markets are all about greed and fear. You have to be aware of that and not complain if you loose money.
- MrUnderbridge, on 10/11/2007, -4/+0"I do not share any sympathy with those who lost money. Capital markets are all about greed and fear. You have to be aware of that and not complain if you loose money."
  
  Yeah....saving for retirement is 'greedy.' Your subscription to Pravda is in the mail, Komrade.
- tomski, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Saving for retirement means that you are a long term investor and do not care about day to day stock price fluctuation. You have a investment horizin of 30 years. Short term investors and traders have to be aware that they cann loose all their money. If you are not aware of this you do not belong into capital markets. And you will not find any insights in the your prawda! You can keep that one to yourself.
cyclonus5150, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Although I don't see any accountability on Engadget's part, I'd still love to see them roast over this simply because of their super snooty attitude. I can't even bear to listen to their podcast because it's so incredibly slanted. It's obvious who's camp they're in and anyone that questions it can look at the Zune love-fest they threw when it launched. It absolutely reeked of bias and absolutely turned me off to their site. It was as if they were scratching and clawing for any possible attribute of the Zune that they could promote over iPod. Sure, I'm an Apple fan and that's okay because I'm not passing myself off as an unbiased tech journalist. These guys jump on any chance they get to point out Apple's shortcomings and I think that's irresponsible journalism.
Floris, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2So they make fake news, buy some, wait for iphone to come out, sell them high. Quick buck .. blogging 21st century ..........
gafasiesornivek, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2Hahahahahaha. ***** you Apple. Can't wait until it hits 0.
- MacParrot, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Like your IQ?
CanadianGuy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Anyone buying Apple at over $100 deserves what they get. Microsoft one of the richest companies in the world is drastically undervalued at around $30. The Steve Jobs hype machine is going to burst sell while you still can.
- DCstewieG, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Someone doesn't know wtf they're talking about. The actual stock price means absolutely *nothing* when comparing 2 companies. For one, Apple's market capitalization is 93 billion...MS is 297 billion.
SiSePuede, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Welcome to the stock market. The level of ***** permeating the market is isnane.
foohookups311, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Sick... I would've liked to buy it up right before everyone found out it was a hoax. Would've had a sick gain in about a half hour
- DCstewieG, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2You would've been better off buying long ago. It's up 20% in just the last month alone. These little dips do almost nothing.
FuZi0nDET, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Just goes to show how unreliable blogs are. Any one that was dumb enough to sell off on account of this info deserves to loose money, I'm betting that some people bought a bunch of Apple shares knowing this was b/s. How many times has Engadget or any other site out there claimed that Apple would be releasing the new touch screen I-Pod?! For years same with the i-phone the only thing that shocked me is that they actually got it right this time, even though it was about the 20th time they had guessed it.
- michaelb1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1new product rumors are one thing. a Leopard and iPhone delay is another thing altogether.
n1pz, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3i dont care if i get dugg down. Engadget sucks!
bumblefoot, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1its great, one story on digg about a rumour effecting apples share prices and everyone thinks they're a damned expert on the stock market,

news flash guys,

rumours effect stock market value regardless of their source,
and NONE of you guys are stock market experts so be quiet with your rants.

I predict apple shares will regain their value shortly :-)
- michaelb1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Its not about the stock market.
  Its about bloggers that are self proclaimed journalists running wildly speculative rumors that would never printed by a real journalists.
  
  It gives serious and talented bloggers a bad name.
InklingBooks, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Moral: The next time Endgadget makes a prediction, ignore them. And the next, and the next....
biggrz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2How many people bought the stock as soon as it dropped?

Seems like it may be a good tactic to drop some bad news, get the stock to drop, and buy some up knowing it will raise back up in short time...
kidcodea, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2if a niche 3rd party website with an erroneous report can KNOCK OFF BILLIONS OFF A BRAND STOCK THEN ITS BECAUSE THAT STOCK IS SITTING ON HYPE AND SPECULATION.

you wouldnt believe the sadness i feel for speculators standing on shaky ground.
h3ndrix, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1True story, and kind of odd: I bought my first ipod yesterday.
totorototoro, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2It was a very nice play by the stock manipulators.

You don't even need to convince everyone, just a couple "key" players, i.e. a gullible source and an eager blogger with a desire to have the exclusive scoop on juicy news, and to beat out their blog rivals to the deadline. And if its wrong? Hey, its just one scrolling item on their site, right? Just goes to page 3 in a couple hours.
Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Engadget Knocks $4 billion off Apple Market Cap on Bogus iPhone email

Login or register to add a comment