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

CrowdStrike is not worth 83B Dollars

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 44 posts

Re: CrowdStrike is not worth 83B Dollars

#31

Post by josefritzishere »

a0123 wrote: post #30
neilv wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amusing conspiracy theory: 1. Quietly compromise enterprise IT vendor X. 2. Sockpuppet post on /r/wallstreetbets, suggesting shorting X, for any reason (doesn't matter why). 3. Place big bet against X's stock. 4. Use your compromise of X to accelerate a big public failure by X. 5. Profit, and the WSB post by your sockpuppet is your plausible reason for shorting X, and you're only one of a crowd who did so. 6. Bonus:…

Can't use X like that anymore. Makes it sound like you're talking about the site formerly known as Tiwtter.

Elon ruined the letter X.

Re: CrowdStrike is not worth 83B Dollars

#32

Post by a0123 »

whalesalad wrote: post #14
observationist wrote: post #11

Crowdstrike is worth whatever they can get people to pay for it. It might not provide that level of value to its clients, but it certainly sells at that price in the market.

Ayn Rand, is that you? I guess technically speaking you are correct - but that value proposition has evaporated now. They've likely lost all trust with their customers at this point. I do hold IT departments accountable, though. A third party vendor software update should not be able to cripple your entire organization like this.

Especially since I'm assuming those organisations pay good money for those services (my org hasn't been affected and we don't use them but we're also very small so I wouldn't know).

Re: CrowdStrike is not worth 83B Dollars

#33

Post by neilv »

a0123 wrote: post #30
neilv wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amusing conspiracy theory: 1. Quietly compromise enterprise IT vendor X. 2. Sockpuppet post on /r/wallstreetbets, suggesting shorting X, for any reason (doesn't matter why). 3. Place big bet against X's stock. 4. Use your compromise of X to accelerate a big public failure by X. 5. Profit, and the WSB post by your sockpuppet is your plausible reason for shorting X, and you're only one of a crowd who did so. 6. Bonus:…

Can't use X like that anymore. Makes it sound like you're talking about the site formerly known as Tiwtter.

We shouldn't let billionaires destroy language, and we don't have to.

Re: CrowdStrike is not worth 83B Dollars

#35

Post by deliveryboyman »

Kirby64 wrote: post #28
deliveryboyman wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they are not ITM until CRWD hits $180/sh.

$185 puts that cost $7.30 mean they are considered ITM if CRWD drops below $184.27, assuming there's no cost to trade and the $7.30 refers to a single options contract (worth 100 shares). There is likely some (or a lot) extrensic value still remaining in the puts given the far away expiry date. The extrensic value is what makes them valuable.

Yes that was a typo. I meant 185.

Regardless, all of this is just intellectual play considering the Reddit poster has no desire to exercise their options.

Re: CrowdStrike is not worth 83B Dollars

#36

Post by tonynator »

bnchrch wrote: post #3

For those that come straight to the comments: This reddit post was written hours before the outage

Simply search "crowdstrike" or "crwd" in the subreddit for evidence of regular posts about this stock, both positive and negative. Just a coincidence, and not really that special of one. HN should be smarter than this

Re: CrowdStrike is not worth 83B Dollars

#37

Post by quantified »

a0123 wrote: post #30
neilv wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amusing conspiracy theory: 1. Quietly compromise enterprise IT vendor X. 2. Sockpuppet post on /r/wallstreetbets, suggesting shorting X, for any reason (doesn't matter why). 3. Place big bet against X's stock. 4. Use your compromise of X to accelerate a big public failure by X. 5. Profit, and the WSB post by your sockpuppet is your plausible reason for shorting X, and you're only one of a crowd who did so. 6. Bonus:…

Can't use X like that anymore. Makes it sound like you're talking about the site formerly known as Tiwtter.

Why not? They chose to be named as the most popular independent variable of all time. It would be super ironic if we change how we refer to things because of their preferences for calling themselves.

Re: CrowdStrike is not worth 83B Dollars

#39

Post by [deleted] »

tonynator wrote: post #36
bnchrch wrote: post #3

For those that come straight to the comments: This reddit post was written hours before the outage

Simply search "crowdstrike" or "crwd" in the subreddit for evidence of regular posts about this stock, both positive and negative. Just a coincidence, and not really that special of one. HN should be smarter than this

[deleted]
Post reply on HN