I have to imagine they're doing this for the continued exposure. There's no such thing as bad press and all that.
Alternatively phrased as after 3 days, only a mere 40% has been lost. Hits different though.
At worst, Eli Lilly would have had slightly higher interest rates on their next round of debt funding.
However, Friday also saw a broad drop in pharma stocks. If I'm quite generous I'd say 50% of that 2% can be attributed to the Twitter tomfoolery.
They also lose a lawsuit on the day of that tweet (and the drop was pretty typical for that day on the market) so I'm not really convinced their stock was altered much by a fake tweet.
>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 of value to lose over a fake tweet? is 1% ok? 2%?
> 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.
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.