Talk:Pump and dump/Archives/2012

Short and Distort

I believe that "Short and Distort" should be included here as a variation of "Pump and Dump". Both techniques involve taking positions ahead of spreading false news that drives the stock into a profitable position for the crook. "Short and Distort" is accepted nomenclature on Wall Street. Google the expression for verification. Instead of creating an entirely new page, why not include here? Polihale 20:21, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying it doesn't deserve to be mentioned, just not in this article. You can certainly mention it in the short selling article but I would suggest that you cite a WP:V example of it actually happening, from the SEC website. Also you've exaggerated its importance by putting it in the first paragraph. --Mantanmoreland 20:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

% of Pump & Dump that is spam

Added citation needed to comment that 15% of spam is pump and dump scams. I find this hard to believe, and the link provided does not state this. - xdxfp

DDOS attack on anti-spam sites, 12 January 2007

For information: about 1700hrs GMT on 12 January 2007 a coordinated Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) attack was launched against some prominent anti-spam sites, including spamnation.info, worldwidespam.info, and possibly two others. This attack was presumably launched by spammers trying to shut down sites that expose their practices. These anti-spam sites are still unavailable after about 24hrs, but are working to restore service; other sites may be affected as well. As this issue resolves itself it may be worthwhile to include a brief note about it on the main page. -- James R 17:48, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed stuff about a trojan attack

I removed this text Often when a targeted person does not buy the spammed stock, a Trojan virus called "Greeting_Card.exe" is sent out as a "punishment". This makes no sense to me. Pump and dump is anonymous, and small stock purchases can't be easily verified. So the people who run such schemes would have no way of knowing who to "punish". This seems to be simple nonsense, perhaps an urban myth. Of course, if it can be sourced, that is another story. Notinasnaid 15:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Is this a type of pump and dump?

This was a standard Yahoo ad - http://www.gftforex.com/land/?aid=795 - but the idea is that a program can "predict" tomorrow's market movement. Is that conceptually different from pump and dump, and if so, why?

Like to hack the source code for THAT program! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.186.148.86 (talk) 16:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC).

Thom Calandra

Please do not add Thom Calandra as an example of pump and dump. What he did was reprehensible and illegal, but was not pump and dump, which involves dissemination of false and misleading information. What he engaged in was a similar practice called "scalping," which involves front running of newsletter or analyst reports, which are favorable but not false or misleading. See the SEC complaint in Calandra.[1] Calandra is a living person and care must be taken under WP:BLP. This demonstrates either a lack of understanding of pump and dump or a cavalier attitude toward BLP, or both.--Samiharris 13:03, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Merge?

This article and chop stocks cover roughly the same, though not identical ground, so I think they should merge into microcap stock fraud. The latter is definitely duplicative with both, yet at the same time it could include other things like the Thom Calandra situation above, which is microcap fraud without exactly being pump and dump and not chop stocks either. --Mantanmoreland 12:30, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Effect on companies whose stocks are used?

The article needs a section describing the effects of such a scheme on the real business of the companies whose stocks are targeted by the scheme. -- 77.7.131.141 (talk) 15:07, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Facebook

Facebook IPO is already under investigation and a class-action lawsuit is being organized [2], while being compared to previous cases of stock fraud [3]. While it's early in the process, clearly Facebook has many earmarks of a pump-and-dump scheme. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.204.8.21 (talk) 19:07, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

No. Facebook is nothing like a traditional pump-and-dump. A pump and dump is where you take some easily manipulateable stock already on the market, buy it, pump the price up, then dump it. Facebook's stock after the IPO went down, yes, but that isn't a pump & dump. Nobody is arguing they got "fooled" by a quick media blitz about secret information that Facebook was worth far more money. And an IPO isn't really what a pump & dump talks about; every single IPO features hype that the stock is awesome. Lastly, pump & dumps are usually connected to *outside* investors. e.g. I know nothing about XYZ Corp, but I buy it, send spam emails saying the price is about to shoot up, then sell. XYZ Corp is actively annoyed by a pump & dump. If the allegations in the linked articles are true, at worst there was inside trading going on, where the big banks told favored clients the bad news first. That's bad, but it's a different kind of financial malfeasance; it's not pump-and-dump.

In short: Pump-and-dump is from the outside on low-information stocks that are not closely monitored where totally fake information is made up. The claims against Facebook are inside trading on a high-information stock closely monitored where true information was sent to favored clients before the general public. SnowFire (talk) 22:48, 22 May 2012 (UTC)