Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

endpts.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 222 posts

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#131

Post by shapefrog »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #121
shapefrog wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> His assertion that lords and peasant system needs to be dismantled is absolutely correct, however. But what if the entire business model was/is actually a lord and peasant system. Whereby lords can, while verified and identified as lords, communicate with the masses of pesants without any other gatekeepers. The peasants having their chit chat on the side isnt the point, that is the noise and the lords are the signa…

The damaging stuff isn't idle chitchat. Much of it is orchestrated by people who want to manipulate the gullible to their political advantage.

If all the pesants are saying it, nobody gives a shit.

If all the blue checkmarks are saying it, people give a shit.

You cant tell the difference anymore.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#132

Post by AlexandrB »

SoftTalker wrote: post #73
mirzap wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patients don't have real choice. Options are either you die or spend hundreds* of dollars on a drug that everywhere else on the planet costs few bucks.

The patients also aren't actually paying for it, so mostly don't care. Insurance, Medicaid, or Medicare is paying.

And insurance companies get that money from thin air? Isn't this "Exhibit A" for why health insurance in the US is unaffordable to many?

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#133

Post by kelseyfrog »

BrainVirus wrote: post #120

Quoted post unavailable.

I'm not sure anyone would believe this when the other narrative is simply more fun. If we're going to frame events using narration we have to be cognizant that spectacle wins. A fun story is going to trump a boring one every time. It's Memetics 101.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#135

Post by sangnoir »

scotty79 wrote: post #7

It's super funny that identity verification of authors of things published was basically more than half of the value twitter provided to its users, both readers and writers and the first thing Elon did was to destroy it. Just to replace it with what he calls "payment verified", which basically means you have 8$ and means to send it to twitter. Which apparently is worth less than nothing. It kind of reminds me how a w…

> It's really a bit surprising that noone told him that his tweets are worth anything only because people reading them can know they come from Elon not some guy who paid 8$ to call himself Elon on Twitter.

I'm aware of no less than 3 formerly verified individuals who did tell him[1] before the feature launched, and he responded by banning them for impersonating him and instituting a "no lying about who you are" rule that empirically works on an honor system, or upon pain of forfeiting $8.

1. "Showed him" would be more accurate, but he shockingly failed to grasp the point they were making.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#136

Post by shagmin »

falcolas wrote: post #38
benj111 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

80% from what base line? >by Friday morning, Lilly stock had dropped by more than 5% from the day before. The Twitter stunt pulled down the stock price of other diabetes drugmakers, including Novo Nordisk and Sanofi. Lilly’s stock has yet to recover and, on Monday morning, remained down more than 4% over the past five days. So the article suggests its only recovered 20% of the fall. And anyway what is a fair amount o…

I'm looking at the actual stock market as of right now. They've been trading for hours, and their price is up overall. > And anyway what is a fair amount of value to lose over a fake tweet? is 1% ok? 2%? Given that when the stock prices return and continue to rise - there's no actual monetary losses... sure. Those are all fine. At worst, their interest rates on new loans would be a bit higher is all.

>there's no actual monetary losses

Average daily volume of Ely Lilly is 3 million shares - at $356 price/share that's $1,068,000,000 traded each day affected, not to mention stock option premiums jumping due to heightened volatility, etc.,. I'm pretty sure there were some actual monetary losses in there.

This company is doing the same thing plenty of other companies and people are doing, this company just went through a bit worse before it made that decision.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#138

Post by pixl97 »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #55
mirzap wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Patients don't have real choice. Options are either you die or spend hundreds* of dollars on a drug that everywhere else on the planet costs few bucks.

Not true. You can buy generic insulin in the US for a reasonable price, it's the new stuff that lasts longer that is expensive.

I believe Walmart is the only place that does this, and there is some state this is not true in (thinking Indiana, but I'd have to look it up).

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#140

Post by shagmin »

throwuwu wrote: post #95
malfist wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stock prices don't move unless people are selling. So shareholders absolutely lost money.

The people selling based off of tweetstorms or breaking news are not mom and pop investors saving for retirement. They’re day traders trying to squeeze profit out of fluctuations.

It's also possible in the last few days people sold shares at the discounted price, who were saving for retirement and other things.
Post reply on HN