back to article Twitter shares soar after buyout story appears on bogus Bloomberg site

Twitter's shares jumped four per cent this morning after a fake news story claimed the biz had received a $31bn buyout offer. The reason for the jump was that it appeared to come from respected newswire Bloomberg – but the piece was instead hosted at, and not on the news organization's "Twitter …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    An ICANN spokesman told us: "We are not commenting right now."

    Call me a pedant but is that not a comment?

  2. Chris Miller

    Is it not a minimum $190,000 to get a TLD? This clearly wasn't being done just for laughs (sorry, LOLs).

  3. Roq D. Kasba

    .market is the TLD, is second tier and staggeringly cheaper.

  4. Terry 6 Silver badge

    I know it shouldn't ought to be allowed but

    I can't help the feeling that it's Big Business that created the domain shambles, Big Business that gambles on share movements and Big Business that got caught by falling for a fake Big Business news item that pretended to be a Big Business news site, but with a different TLD.

    So, deep down I just can't stop the feeling that It serves them bloody well right


    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I know it shouldn't ought to be allowed but

      Yeah, but big business in this case is likely gambling with your money, or is a company in which your pension fund has a stake. It's always the punter that pays ...

  5. Graham Marsden
    Thumb Down

    "That is also the only URL that exists under the dot-market website"

    But now, no doubt, a whole bunch of others such as and will need to be defensively registered before the scammers go for those...

    .... Kerching! Trebles all round, lads!

    1. Mage

      Re: "That is also the only URL that exists under the dot-market website"

      Maybe ICANN registered it and ... no they wouldn't be that clever.

      All these new TLD are stupid.

      Can't we start a campaign for ISPs to block them from their DNS? Then for most internet users they wouldn't exist.

      Probably too simplistic.

  6. x 7

    OK so you create a new website over a weekend, populate it with pages hacked from another site, and by tuesday enough people are reading that new site to affect share prices?

    Sorry but I smell bollocks here. The timing is too fast. Its too quick for that number of people to have discovered the site. Google isn't going to give the site a high ranking. More likely there was share manipulation going on anyway and the website is simply there to confuse the trail.

    1. James Loughner

      1)Only takes one connected person to stumble over it then it is emailed to all other connected shisters

      2) automated systems scan all web for key words bingo found set auto trade into gear set off frenzy.

      1. dan1980

        Much trading is now done at very high speed, to capitalise on changes in the market. It's not about buying some shares and watching the company grow, it's about developing the most effective algorithms and getting information to feed into them the quickest.

        It's a bit of an arms race and what you can see is when there is some spike, other algorithms will kick in to buy stock that is trending up quickly - the assumption (by the algorithm's creators) being that there is some good news in the market driving that.

        So, not all the people forcing that price up necessarily had the news in question.

        That said, there are services that will scour everything and publish it so some who did see this news didn't necessarily see it from the website. Traders also forward stories to each other so it all gets around.

        AND, the point is that it really doesn't matter if the story was fake or not - to the big traders. What matters is that there were two changes in th share price, both of which could be capitalised on if one has the right algorithms and gets the information quickly enough - there are plenty of those who would have sold it higher than they bought it an earned a tidy gain.

        Longer-term investors would have been unaffected as the price corrected so it's really only the high-speed traders who weren't quite speedy enough or whose algorithms were set differently who would have been negatively affected.

      2. Frank Bough


        Why wait for someone to stumble over it when social media exists?

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    pump and dump

    What's awesome is how big bad and scary they make the SEC (nah Madoff is legit) to be during required corporate training on avoiding insider training and stock scams but you then read the headlines and laugh. Then you take ethics training where they really warn you bribing foreign officials is a serious crime but then you realize you are never actually in contact with them as you are not that important and wonder if the executives in your former companies (not current at least) were also required to take the training. Funny how even post FIFA shitstorm Nike is still smelling like a rose. Don't misinterpret the rules or you might find yourself in the C Suite and rich.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    You can bet...

    ...that someone cashed in on the ruse.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Hey Tim

    What does the miracle of the all-knowing market have to say about this shambles?

    Or what does this shambles have to say about the miracle of the all-knowing markets?

    Take your pick (assuming the mods let it through; I've already got three posts waiting for up to five hours!?)

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like