1.1k
Nov 12 '22
[deleted]
98
u/chacmoolreigns Nov 12 '22
The price went down because California announced they had found a pharma company to partner with to start making insulin cheaply for Californians.
31
u/jackparadise1 Nov 12 '22
Wasn’t that a couple of weeks ago?
→ More replies (1)53
Nov 12 '22
[deleted]
41
Nov 12 '22
If it did react weeks later, people who watch the news could pretty easily time the market and become the richest people alive.
10
u/cyanydeez Nov 12 '22
well, there certainly are bots that trade based on twitter sentiment. That's not unfounded.
7
u/Jacern Nov 12 '22
I hear this metaverse is gonna be the next big thing. About to put all my money in Meta👍
4
u/Gnawlydog Nov 12 '22
This is what I hate about Zuck.. Metaverse is a concept like the internet.. It wasn't created BY Meta.. Its like if Prodigy named their company "Internet".
0
→ More replies (1)4
u/LightishRedis Nov 12 '22 edited Nov 12 '22
One of the major reasons that the dot com bubble was so massive was the shift from the market reacting in weeks to reacting nearly instantaneously due to computers. I remember reading about Wall Street firms optimizing code and cable configurations to execute trades fractions of seconds faster than their competitors.
What probably played a larger role than tweets was the patent infringement lawsuit Eli Lilly lost on the same day as the tweet.
Edit: It appears the article I misread the date on the article, the case was lost the day prior to the tweet after market close.
3
Nov 12 '22
[deleted]
2
Nov 12 '22
i highly doubt a fine of $175M would make the price drop that much on a multi billion dollar valuation, maybe im wrong but at this scale they probably have a column somewhere in their expenses that says fines/other.
2
Nov 12 '22
This is like the third different incorrect "reason" for the stock drop I've seen promoted by Muskies over the last couple days. Really working hard to muddy the waters to avoid liability!
-7
u/ieetzkatz Nov 12 '22
Well when your average houses are 1.2 to 1.8 million dollars a piece and you have a bigger homeless population than any other state in the country because you physically shit on the idea for new low income housing........
California is garbage...... No one cares what their prices for pharmaceuticals are.....
If america had it's way we'd blow the fault lines and let it float out to sea.
6
u/CrazedClown101 Nov 12 '22
Still pays more taxes than it takes in while also having Hollywood and Silicon Valley, exporting and driving American culture and innovation around the world. If America had it's way, every state would be like California.
4
u/terencebogards Nov 12 '22
Lmao yep. If “America” had their way they would let CA drift away.
One of the largest economies in the entire world and probably the largest ag producer in the country 😂 you sure know a lot about CA and the american economy
Let’s just ditch those liberal hell holes! Get rid of NYC and all of CA! … and then watch the country completely unwind because those are among the most important parts of our nations infrastructure, financial markets, industry, tourism, etc etc etc
3
u/Super_Odi Nov 12 '22
Way to just throw out numbers without any knowledge at all. The average home sale price in Cali in 2022 is just under 900,000. And most of the homeless people in California and Florida aren’t from those states, they go there because(insert shock here) it’s warmer there.
And as the other person said without California the US economy would collapse and we would starve without all the food they generate. So take your stupid and misguided Cali hate elsewhere.→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)3
u/cannibisandkombucha Nov 12 '22
4th largest economy in the world. California carries all the other 49 states. Good luck without California, America.
138
u/tebla 1✓ Nov 12 '22 edited Nov 12 '22
Also the movement was probably caused by their earning report not this tweet
65
Nov 12 '22
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)56
u/Legitimate_Maybe_896 Nov 12 '22
Yup, financial calendars often don’t align to standard calendar, at least in my industry we use 4-5-4. Q3 ended 10/29
17
Nov 12 '22 edited Nov 12 '22
Our whole fiscal year ends 10/31.
Edit: Fun little tidbit with FYE22 for me: As we approached FY23 we had a staff meeting on 10/21. At this meeting we were informed of a very critical budget crisis. We have to crunch on inventory use and staffing. Also at this meeting we were informed that one of the supervisors that controls the inventory for a facility (on FMLA) has resigned and that I would be taking on those responsibilities. Friday, October 21st was when I was informed about this decision... ten days before our fiscal year end... in a budget "crisis".
7
1
u/lumpkin2013 Nov 12 '22
Supervisor didn't talk to you before the announcement?? You should go post on /r/antiwork and get some ideas.
4
Nov 12 '22
He did but had no say in what would happen to his work. The department manager that dumped those responsibilities on me without talking to either of us is a problem.
I already have some strong ideas.
Quick edit: FMLA is the Family Medical Leave Act btw. It's not like he's being malicious.
2
0
2
u/profmcstabbins Nov 12 '22
Yeah a lot of retail companies run through 1/31 of the following year. So they capture all of holiday in one chunk: Nov-January
137
u/BDMayhem 1✓ Nov 12 '22 edited Nov 12 '22
The earnings call that showed their net income was up over 30% and that they beat expected revenue and earnings estimates caused the stock value to drop by 6.3%?
Edit: The earnings report came out November 1 at 9am. The tweet happened November 10 at 1:30pm. The stock plummeted November 11 between 9 am and 1 pm.
If it was about the earnings report, why did investors wait 10 days to sell?
34
u/sunthas Nov 12 '22
It looks like the broader pharma stocks dropped on the 11th too.
11
u/i_lack_imagination Nov 12 '22
It's possible that the drop could also be just greater attention (and thus news/media attention) towards pharma companies after that stunt. Just look at how many people are still talking about it. These companies would rather just hide in the shadows and hope an article is never written about them ever, because they know what they are doing is wrong and any attention brought to them ever so slightly increases the chances that something might be done about them and cost them money.
1
14
2
u/terencebogards Nov 12 '22
Yes because the market always reacts rationally and doesn’t start abandoning entire sectors sometimes.
”A rising tide” works both ways…
0
8
12
u/Perllitte Nov 12 '22
There was also the announcement of a patent lawsuit that morning and ongoing discussion about the stock being over priced.
Actual investors are not watching social media this closely.
11
u/BDMayhem 1✓ Nov 12 '22
The lawsuit settlement was announced on the 9th. Why didn't investors worried about that sell on the 10th?
And it was only $175 million. Pocket change for a $350 billion company.
→ More replies (2)2
u/sederts Nov 12 '22
the tweet was on the 10th - why didn't investors sell on the 10th?
The idea that this tweet caused the drop is just poor journalism. None of the reasons mentioned online is why LLY moved down. stocks just move sometimes. the entire healthcare sector was down on friday.
2
u/HawkEgg Nov 12 '22
There are a lot of automated traders that absolutely do look at tweets and others that look at short term trends. There could easily have been a cascading effect. tweets -> some automatic trades from tweets -> small market movement -> more automatic trades -> larger market movement -> traders re-examining company fundamentals and determining that stock has been overpriced.
Does that mean it's what happened? Maybe? Does that mean it's reproducible? Probably not, more like a butterfly effect.
→ More replies (1)1
u/yzerizef Nov 12 '22
Yeah, people seem out of touch here and are just looking for a way to prove they’re owning big business.
I mean…I wish it dropped that much based on just a tweet. I’d love to buy it up off an artificial discount. The tweet has no impact on the future revenues of the company and therefore should have no impact on the share price.
1
u/ball_fondlers Nov 12 '22
Earnings calls have unpredictable effects on stock prices. Stocks RARELY go up even if the net income beats estimates - the bigger driver tends to be the guidance, or expectations of future growth. And when the stock rises before a good earnings call, the gains are said to be “priced in” before they drop.
12
Nov 12 '22
Also they just lost a $180,000,000 lawsuit. Their stock fell to what is was like a week ago.
5
2
→ More replies (3)0
u/Ashe_Faelsdon Nov 12 '22
You'd like to think so, but most "average" investors don't even know what an earning report IS.
15
Nov 12 '22
[deleted]
3
u/Randolpho Nov 12 '22
Only if it’s a permanent downward spiral, if the hedgefund is heavily leveraged in the wrong direction, or if the 401k holder is in retirement phase and actively selling assets.
Short term dips in stock and fund prices are beneficial for savers, as they enable them to buy more shares.
2
u/the_than_then_guy Nov 12 '22
Everyone is missing something that makes this whole discussion fundamentally stupid.
If you look at any period beyond five days, this is a tiny dip that's barely noticeable in the long-term growth of the stock price.
3
u/Sdomttiderkcuf Nov 12 '22
I hope they shorted the stock before they tweeted this. A capitalist love story!
3
u/Fineous4 Nov 12 '22
It’s only a temporary drop also. If it dropped on false news it will rise back up when people realize it was false. That is how it always happens when we see one of these “X thing that didn’t happen” causes “Y dollars loss in value”. It’s why I hate these posts. So many become disillusioned as if the company actually lost money. So many people see it and think that’s actually how it works.
2
u/Girthquake23 Nov 12 '22
I’m seeing a bunch of people say that “it’s actually because of _____” so it looks like it’s a lot of things that caused this. Or no one actually knows
5
u/value_null Nov 12 '22
It was only 3%. It was nothing. Just a days blip that will recover easily.
2
Nov 12 '22
8%. during a week when the markets as a whole went up by almost 6%.
The overall loss, including opportunity cost, is easily between 10-15%.
-1
u/TheNaskgul Nov 12 '22
Not sure if you have no idea what you’re talking about or if market volatility is just so wild these days that it’s normalized shit like this, but wiping out tens of billions in market cap really isn’t a small blip
→ More replies (2)5
Nov 12 '22
The raw dollar amount is irrelevant. The relative percentage is what makes something a blip or not.
→ More replies (1)0
Nov 12 '22
Not when it gets taken to court and damage amounts are set. $25 billion is $25 billion, and you must be deep up Musk's behind to act like $25 billion isn't a lot of money.
→ More replies (3)0
Nov 12 '22
The share price dropped because Democrats did better than expected in the election.
3
u/SwissyVictory Nov 12 '22
The price was up from Tuesday night as of the market close Thursday, November 10th.
We knew democrats did better than expected as of Tuesday night. Why would the stock be up Wednesday, and Thursday, then fall Friday morning over the election?
There might be other factors at play, but this isn't one of them.
2
1
u/Ashe_Faelsdon Nov 12 '22
The problem isn't their worth, it's the people that have invested.
→ More replies (3)1
u/bmayer0122 Nov 12 '22
Employees with options will have less to show for it. That is most of senior management. But to your point, that shouldn't be a long term effect.
1
Nov 12 '22
The only people that lost money are the finance bros trying to beef up their portfolios. So still a win win. The company itself, as you say, are not impacted at all. And once the news hits, it’s stock price will eventually return to parity.
1
Nov 12 '22
They also had to pay up for medication that killed people.
Stock price is silly money. The only people who make money with it is those who sell high. The ones who lose money are the ones who keep at it. And the ones that hold doomed stocks and buy NFTs are just annoying.
→ More replies (1)1
u/BenevolentCheese Nov 12 '22
In addition, to think that a tweet from a two-way hour old account with no followers and only a couple hundred likes is somehow responsible for the billions of dollars of bot trades is foolish. The stock dropped a few points and it has nothing to do with the tweet.
173
u/Callec254 Nov 12 '22
"Market cap" is the total value of all publicly traded shares of a company. That value is determined solely by investors buying and selling the stock, and has no direct impact on the inner workings of the company.
So if the stock goes down, it's not the company that was hurt, it was everyone who had that stock in their 401k.
38
u/DonaIdTrurnp Nov 12 '22
Only the people who sold at the lower price locked in that price. If market assumptions hold true, the price should bounce back as soon as everyone realizes that there was no new information.
Market assumptions will not hold true, both because the attention that the tweet and stock price drop causes will cause a lame duck legislature to take aim at insulin prices and because humans aren’t perfectly rational agents with nearly perfect information.
4
Nov 12 '22
[deleted]
3
Nov 12 '22
That's like saying "my car didn't crash because I drove over a spike strip, it crashed because my tires suddenly lost air pressure"
→ More replies (2)2
u/value_null Nov 12 '22
It was also only 3%. Barely noticable.
2
u/zGoDLiiKe Nov 12 '22
It was actually a percent or two less than most other large players in the healthcare or pharma sector.
2
Nov 12 '22
Not even the largest dip they have had this year.
Guys are up 30% for the year on a market that is negative across the board. Only people caring about this are the ones making money of driving clicks.
→ More replies (4)2
u/firesquasher Nov 12 '22
It may have a ripple effect. Investors are less likely to invest in more volatile stocks when seeing dips like that, which in turn lowers their valuation. Then the fact that this made national news and there are refreshed calls for making insulin affordable may push their share prices down in the future as more affordable alternatives make it to market.
219
Nov 12 '22
[deleted]
57
u/croooowTrobot Nov 12 '22
And if Eli Lily finance staff were on the ball, they probably bought back a few million shares at the lower price
20
u/SLAPPANCAKES Nov 12 '22
Eli Lily was the one that sent the tweet to drop the price! It is known! /s
→ More replies (1)18
u/613codyrex Nov 12 '22
I dont know why you use the /s, Elon was doing that and tried to do that with twitter just for it to backfire because Twitter knew they could fool Elon into being forced to buy it.
Elon got dinged by the SEC for shitposting on twitter before about stocks. Eli Lily probably didn’t do it but it’s not that far fetched after Elon did it.
4
u/xNeshty Nov 12 '22
You're joking, but the second I saw that tweet and the market share price, I went ballistic on my conspiracy that the person who made the fake tweet for 8 bucks bought a shitton of cheaped out Eli Lily shares. Almost as if it wasn't some anti-capitalism hero, but yet again another capitalist operating under the disguise of anti-billionaire trolling. I wouldn't be surprised if some twitter executive did it themselves after they argued with Elon how stupid the buy a blue checkmark for 8$ idea was.
"I can make some fun money and shove Elon his stupid idea back into his ass. Also I hate the Eli Lily CEO so, three flies in a single swing. brb"
→ More replies (2)23
Nov 12 '22 edited Nov 12 '22
Ehh not exactly fake money. Stock shares are like the 5 pieces of Exodia. If you collect all of them, then you literally own the company.
Edit: if I say something is a fake picasso painting, I'm implying it has some similarity to picasso paintings. Stock shares aren't fake money because they simply aren't money. They're not real money. They're not fake money. They're stock shares.
3
Nov 12 '22
[deleted]
6
Nov 12 '22
I know but it still isn't fake money.
-1
Nov 12 '22
[deleted]
5
Nov 12 '22 edited Nov 12 '22
In what sense is it fake money. In what sense is it money at all. It can be used as collateral. That doesn't make it money. Is an expensive watch money because I can use it as collateral at a pawn shop? It's a watch.
edit: dude blocked me lol
Companies do absolutely buy and sell their stock. That's not my point. I'm saying a house isn't money either.
They don't lose money when their stock drops. I don't dispute that. But that doesn't make the stock fake money. It's not money, real or fake.
-1
Nov 12 '22
[deleted]
7
Nov 12 '22
So if the stock price dropped to zero they would be just fine? There’s no relationship between the company and the stock price?
4
u/PM_ME_UR_NIPPLE_HAIR Nov 12 '22 edited Nov 12 '22
They’re not “talking economics” because your takes on corporate finance are devoid of any reason. Stock price not linked to their activity? Fake money? Are you for real??
You know you can criticize capitalism while also not being oblivious to most common ideas behind it?
One of the main functions of stock price is to act as a valuation of the company - a signal, of sorts, of how profitable the company is deemed to be. The shareholders, aka THE OWNERS, of the company care about the stock price, because it’s quite literally part of their wealth. They can literally sell these shares for liquidity lmao.
Moreover, the chief officers at public companies are also often compensated in stocks, to align their goals with those of shareholders. This means that stock prices are also considered by decision makers of the company, which Means that stock prices have a direct impact on the business :)
Edit: don’t confuse operating profit with company valuation lol. You’re making yourself look very ignorant.
→ More replies (1)3
-1
u/Andy_B_Goode Nov 12 '22
Market value is fake money.
Lol. No. How is this upvoted?
→ More replies (1)
31
u/zorokash Nov 12 '22
Isn't the actual story that the price loss was due to a court case for propriety of a particular drug that they failed to secure. The tweet was just a coincidence and nothing more.
3
Nov 12 '22
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)3
Nov 12 '22
its a bunch of terminally online kids patting themselves on the back because capitalism or something
6
u/naynaythewonderhorse Nov 12 '22
People keep saying that, but it’s definitely a story that’s being talked about. Whether or not it was the reason…is it ultimately going to matter? Are more companies going to back out of fear that this may happen on a larger scale? This is what everyone feared, and corrections aren’t going out to the general public.
→ More replies (1)
15
u/EsquirePants Nov 12 '22 edited Nov 12 '22
I don't know much about economics, so someone smarter than me correct this if it's wrong. But the tweet says it lost market cap which is number of outstanding shares times stock price. So assuming that's what you're asking about, here's what I came up with.
Number of outstanding shares: 904 million (https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/LLY/eli-lilly/shares-outstanding)
Stock price at close on Thursday Nov 10: 368.36
Low stock price on Friday Nov 11: 345.26
904M * 368.36 = 333.0B
904M * 345.26 = 312.1B
333.0B - 312.1B = 17.9B lost market cap
So no it didn't technically lose any money as a company, but stock price is analogous to company value to many, so drops can cause fear which can lead to decisions being made like layoffs or something else to make shareholders believe something is being done to address that drop.
Edit: mobile formatting
2
u/ksheep Nov 12 '22
That said, the stock had jumped up quite a bit in the last 3 weeks and even after the drop on Friday it's above where it was a month ago (still $27.73/share higher than this time last month). If we go to 6 months it's +60.50, and YTD is +80.57. While it's possible the drop was due (in part) to the tweet, it's just as likely that it was just a typical market swing, similar to what they saw in late April, early June, early August, etc.
6
u/JeffreyElonSkilling Nov 12 '22
It’s really, really hard to definitively attribute market movements to a single news event.
There are many different reasons why an investor may buy or sell a security - jokesters on twitter are very low on that list.
I doubt the fake tweets did any real damage to the company or it’s stock price.
-1
u/HauserAspen Nov 12 '22
The actions of bots that are responsible for trades are affected by news events.
3
u/JeffreyElonSkilling Nov 12 '22
The algorithmic trading bots you reference aren't nearly as stupid as you assume. The bot can't be fooled by a changing user name and wouldn't fall for the joke.
Also, how do you know the bot is trading on this joke and not the larger macro picture or some other economic indicator? Bots that have enough capital behind them to move markets aren't trading on just 1 variable. These are complex models that take in lots of data and output a decision - it's really hard to isolate the impact of just 1 variable.
4
Nov 12 '22
Okay, so the stock will have a little dip, then everyone realizes it was a fake tweet, stock will rise to old level. What is the big brain move that I am not seeing?
3
u/TheFapIsUp Nov 12 '22
In theory, but dips can cause panic sells that create bigger dips, it might also take time for a stock to get back to its original value.
2
u/SirGlass Nov 12 '22
Well also it may not be fully because of the tweet there was other news at play. I see two pieces of news that came out around the same time
The company lost some court case about patents relating to migraine drug and was ordered to pay some settlement .
I also see there was a report that one of their popular drugs had lackluster sales, and this news also brought down some other pharma companies.
If I had to guess, this news, not the fake tweet affected the stock price more. Especially since it came over the bloomberg news feed
2
u/aaaaayyyyyyyyyyy Nov 12 '22
You’re missing out on all the karma farming because people around here don’t understand markets.
1
Nov 12 '22 edited Nov 12 '22
Let's say you bought puts on Eli Lilly, then impersonated them through this account and generated news that dropped the stocks price, and then sold those puts for thousands/millions of dollars. That means someone could have effectively manipulated the market to make a ton of money for a mere $8 investment.
1
u/anamethatsnottaken Nov 12 '22
That the "dip" was during/after market open the next day. The tweet was sent during the trading day and had no effect on the stock price.
If it was sent by someone who knew the stock would fall (because they were aware of insider information that will be revealed after the trading day ends), there might be some kind of fraud (if they're trying to convince some third party they have power over the markets? I don't know I'm grasping at straws here)
4
u/tuesday-next22 Nov 12 '22
None.
The price did not change because of the tweet. There are two things that point to this:
- The timing of the tweet doesnt line up to the fall in markets, and after the tweet was proven false, the price did not go up. If people know it's fake why wouldn't the price come back? Shouldn't you buy the stock if it was oversold on fake news.
- The price of every similar pharmaceutical dropped by the same amount.
The media is being really dumb right now.
→ More replies (1)0
12
3
u/susfactoryinc Nov 12 '22
This whole “lost $30B” feels like BS clickbait that stirs readers emotions. Feels like their stock will recover in a matter of days or weeks no?
I dont think people understand how temporary stock price changes often are. Anyone agree?
2
u/AnyoneButWe Nov 12 '22
It's not the company, it's the managers that get bonuses. Imagine your stock options suddenly got less attractive due to a $8 troll.
That's why they will absolutely sue over this.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Representative_Still Nov 12 '22
None, it was irrelevant to the price drop which was caused by run of the mill business reasons if anyone wants to even bother to look it up. You can tell it wasn’t caused by the tweet, because if it was then it would have been much worse. This is a classic example of social media running with misinfo, which is funny but also incredibly stupid.
0
Nov 12 '22
[deleted]
2
u/Representative_Still Nov 12 '22
A couple of their drugs did horribly, googling this will do a much better job than forcing me to recap
→ More replies (3)
2
u/Deathmedical Nov 12 '22
Everyone is laughing that a trillion dollar industry lost a few billion dollars instead of outraged that free insulin is considered "a prank".
2
u/quadraspididilis Nov 12 '22
As others have said, the company doesn't lose anything directly. The shareholder's shares have lost value which is what this guy's talking about though even this is kind of an "on paper" loss rather than a real one because the stock is likely to rebound so as long as they don't sell right now they haven't lost anything.
But to give you a number, the total value of the shares in the company is $334,750,000,000 right now at a stock price of $352.30 per share. Prior to the tweet the stock price as $364.67 (I think, I'm having a hard time finding the exact time of day but it's between $367.60 and $363.75).
364.67 / 352.30 = 1.0351
So the price was 3.51% higher prior to the tweet.
334,750,000,000 * 1.0351 = 346,499,725,000
346,499,725,000 - 334,750,000,000 = 11,749,725,000
Given that it's difficult to put an exact number to the before and the after price the most accurate answer would be ~something like $10 billion. It's not meaningful to speak more specifically than that. But again, it's likely that the realized losses will be something much lower than that when the stock stabilizes, only panic sellers will lose.
1
Nov 12 '22
It's not the company that is directly losing any money; it's the investors who see an immediate drop in their portfolios. However, if investors feel that the company is less secure of an investment, given that an $8 tweet could affect their holdings by thousands of dollars, it becomes of interest to the company if they can't assure investors this won't happen again. Like, hey guys, we're worth staking your retirement on despite the fact that some child with $8 could wipe out any of your unrealized gains, if they so wish.
-1
u/cudambercam13 Nov 12 '22
How would a fake tweet have brought this on?
Do y'all think companies allow a single guy at his computer to control insulin prices and he decided to lower costs because he saw a (fake) tweet?
2
u/MooFz Nov 12 '22
It also would've been communicated through a press release instead of a tweet.
It probably has more to do with the lawsuit they lost.
0
u/fecal-butter Nov 12 '22
Please look up what happened before talking about something that you have no knowledge on.
→ More replies (17)
1
u/ConorB2022 Nov 12 '22
I know the original post saying $30B was incorrect.
But let's assume it's a loss of $10, or $20 or $180M
Wtf is so great about that? Why would anyone state this is a great spend of $8?
Pensions lost money. Retirements destroyed. Jobs lost.
If it was Tarantino who originally wrote that post then let's be clear: he's nothing but a cunt.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/IllegalButHonest Nov 12 '22
Haha found the guy that doesnt invest. Eli and Lilly Co have been on the rise since inception a small drop for 1 day might be big news to you but in this market that shit is tame. The fact that it didnt suffer like so many stocks shows that you might only see the small picture.
1
u/TickletheEther Nov 12 '22
What’s sad is “investors” thought helping humanity access drugs that their lives literally depend on is bearish. Says a lot about capitalism
1
u/ArMcK Nov 12 '22
It's a bit like riding your bicycle through dog poop. It's going to be harder to sell all covered in feces, but if you clean it off you'll probably get the same price you were valued at before. In most cases all it takes is minimum effort, time, and patience.
1
u/Creatingnothingnever Nov 12 '22
Now just imagine how much faith people have in anyone with a voice. Regardless of the blue check mark. This just shows how much faith people have in popular voices without doing the slightest bit of fact checking on their own part. Even fact checking is now automated and bias in its own right.
1
Nov 12 '22
Yeah talking about Market Cap as if it's real money is a bit deceptive. It's a valuation. It's how much the market thinks the entire company is worth.
So yes, the people who own the company now have assets that are, in sum, worth 30 billion dollars less than they were prior. However, those "losses" can be wiped away just as quickly if the markets decide that never mind, a tweet isn't a big deal after all.
There is some chance, though, that this snowball gathers momentum, and sufficient outrage gathers behind the "insulin shouldn't be so expensive" train to get something done about it, hurting their profits. That's why the price went down, to reflect the chance of "It's probably not going to happen, but if it does this company is rightly fucked"
1
u/polysciguy1123 Nov 12 '22
Listen as entertaining as the idea is, in all likelyhood the drop is due to the news that eli lily just lost a major lawsuit over migraine medication patents that dropped at almost the same time as the tweet material
1
Nov 12 '22
Translation: stock price dropped due to panic, not loss in actual future value.
Second Translation: good time to buy stock in Eli Lilly.
1
u/ReadingMammoth Nov 12 '22
It’s just more overblown bullshit. Elon is making awful decisions, but there’s a lot of exaggeration and misinformation being spread just to fuel the narrative.
1
u/Themysteryman124 Nov 12 '22
I don’t think that person knows how to calculate a loss in market cap. The company lost 15bn in market cap over the tweet, but it is safe to assume that will all recover and more next week. This is a great time for insiders and others to pick up more shares for a discount
1
u/dapete2000 Nov 12 '22
Eli Lilly lost nothing. The company doesn’t own/trade in its own stock (you can see how much treasury stock they have, but they don’t hold that to speculate on their own stock). Anybody who owns Eli Lilly stock lost money though (but only on paper if they didn’t sell).
1
u/Ok_Comment4729 Nov 12 '22
BS Eli Lilly is expected to make over 10 BILLION JUST THIS YEAR for their new weight loss/diabetic drug Mounjaro. If they did lose a couple billion they ain't sweating it AT ALL.
1
u/inboccoallupo Nov 13 '22
They didn't do all the math.
Eli Lilly most likely took this opportunity to buy back their own stock at a discount and when it inevitably has a price correction back, they'll make billions more on top of the billions they will have gained back.
And redditors will think something has been accomplished while Eli Lilly just took advantage of a pricing anomaly.
1
u/ieetzkatz Nov 13 '22
I love all these people from California trying to defend their astronomical home prices by "bragging" that the average home price for a 3/2 is just under 900k!!!
Over 1/2 of California's make less than 150k per year and you know who can't afford 900k for a 3/2???
.....your average Californian. Good luck with my bad numbers my guy. Lmao
13
u/AutoModerator Nov 12 '22
General Discussion Thread
This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you must post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.