Damn you, Indecision!

The stock market is stoooopid

Instead of people being all up in arms about Engadget posting that Apple e-mail that turned out to be a hoax (not going to link to it because I think it has had enough link “love”), they should be angry about the fragility of the stock market.  I totally agree that the Engadget posting could’ve been handled or worded differently so that it was characterized as more rumor than fact.  No question.  But when an offhand comment from a CEO, or some blog posting a rumor about the iPhone’s delay (it’s not friggin’ true, people, don’t start selling your Apple stock) can affect the stock market that much, wouldn’t it be more logical to question why the stock market is so ridiculously sensitive to rumor and innuendo?  And just so people are aware, I have felt this way about the stock market for a long time, not just because of all this hullabaloo with Engadget.

Example: a company posts its earnings, and while it profited this year and actually did really well, its stock will go down if that company didn’t make the profit that the analysts predicted.  WTH?  Why should a bunch of outside “experts” have any effect on a company’s financial well-being?  If these so-called analysts are off, do they get penalized?  Psh.

Scott Bourne posted that Ryan Block didn’t want to go on Apple Phone Show to tell his side of the story, as if that were black-and-white proof of Ryan’s culpability. (I’m not going to link to this either, since I think Scott’s post is just link bait.  You can look up Apple Phone Show and find the article yourself.) I call BS.  Did it ever occur to Scott that Ryan has been through the wringer enough and just wants the story to fade into the background (which I think it should, since it was a ludicrous story to begin with)?  Or maybe that he just doesn’t want to talk with Apple Phone Show?   Maybe if Mr. Block wanted to air his side of the story, he might choose a different podcast or news site.  Relax, Man.  You got your stock money back already.  Be angry at the people who posted the hoax e-mail at Apple in the first place!  For all we know, it could’ve been people within Apple trying to smoke out leaks in the company. ๐Ÿ˜›

Powered by ScribeFire.

Advertisements

5 responses

  1. Another Engadget fanboy site – oh well thanks for mentioning my show. By the way, can you point me to the paragraph where I said Ryan’s failure to come on the show was black and white proof of anything? That’s all you dude. I said nothing of the kind. In fact, I made no conclusion at all. I reported facts. If it’s YOU who decided Ryan lacks credibility because of his decision, oh well.

    May 25, 2007 at 12:26 pm

  2. First of all, I’m not a guy, Dude. ๐Ÿ˜›

    Second of all, I’m not an Engadget fangirl. I like the site, but I said earlier in my post that Ryan Block could’ve handled his post better so that it was more of a rumor than supposed fact. Without a doubt I think it could’ve been handled better. Does that sound like a fangirl? A fangirl/boy would’ve said something like, “I can’t believe Scott Bourne is ragging on Engadget! Engadget is the best site EVAR! LOLOMGWTFBBQ!!11!!1!1!” ๐Ÿ˜›

    Thirdly, the wording in your blog post was this: “On May 24th, I invited Ryan Block from Engadget to appear on the next edition of the Apple Phone Show to discuss his side of the debacle about the iPhone being delayed. He declined. Case closed. At least with me. I canโ€™t speak for the SEC.”

    What is that supposed to mean? Case closed for what? It implies to me that because he declined to talk to Apple Phone Show, the case is closed against him and his mistake. If you don’t want your words to be misinterpreted, you need to be more clear. If I’m the only one who read your post and supposedly misinterpreted it, then I’ll retract my rant against your blog post (not the rest of my rant against the Engadget backlash, though). I hardly think this is the case, though.

    I thought that your diatribe on the latest Macbreak Weekly was over the top. You sounded like you wanted blood. Leo and Merlin agreed that they would’ve gone with the story (although I think they would’ve worded their blog posts better). And as Merlin commented in that same podcast episode, you’re quick to embrace positive rumors about the iPhone, and even quicker to blast any negative iPhone rumors. Double standards much?

    Blogs are in the gray area as far as journalism is concerned, which is quite a double-edged sword. Blogs can often report on stories much faster (and increasingly more accurately) than so-called “mainstream media” because of a certain lack of bureaucracy. By the same token, it can be bad when blogs “post first and ask questions later”. I’m not saying there weren’t any mistakes made. I’m saying that this story has been blown way out of proportion, and posts like yours are capitalizing on this. Do you get this angry about every little rumor or negative news article that cause Apple’s stock to drop? You’ll have a heart attack.

    Rumors are posted about Apple’s comings and goings are rampant all over the web. I don’t see why Engadget was singled out. I don’t understand why the stock market is so impressionable that Engadget’s posts could affect it so much. Why not be mad at the person who posted the hoax e-mail in the first place? Why not be mad at the stupid investors who put too much stock (pun intended) in a single blog post?

    May 25, 2007 at 12:55 pm

  3. kyoung989

    Wow. Make an insightful comment about the stock market, read between the lines of a blog post, and put forth an utterly plausible explanation for Ryan Block’s snub, and suddenly you’re a fangirl??

    I commented to the same effect on the TWiT site, but is anyone else going to call out Scott Bourne for his blatant character assassinations of anyone with a differing opinion?

    Marginalize our opinions if you want, Scott, by calling us all “haters” or “fanboys.” I guess we can’t all be as perfectly objective as you, huh?

    May 25, 2007 at 2:53 pm

  4. I think it is hilarious that Scott Bourne:

    1) is calling someone a fanboy (totally ignoring all the Twitter from “Cheryl” on the right side of the blog) when he’s the one with a podcast about a phone that isn’t even on the market yet.

    2) thinks anyone needs a reason to decline speaking on the Apple Phone Show. Scott, seriously, your podcast is about a phone that no one has. Who’s your audience? Not iPhone users.

    May 25, 2007 at 7:59 pm

  5. That Ryan got the facts wrong was an unfortunate error, but there was no intended malice. The issue comes from the journalist’s need to post quickly, and he sounded as if he did the due diligence needed by attempting to gain confirmation, but he certainly didn’t want to be scooped. That he was so transparent about the problem and didn’t cover it up should be lauded. It was a bigger correction than anything I’ve ever seen in the mainstream media.

    May 25, 2007 at 9:29 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s