OK, let's do this. Anyone with half a brain can see that from today's FT article and FT's earlier reporting that they confused gross and net annualized revenue lines (ex-Microsoft rev share).
The problem is that the sensationalized, conflated headline leaves a large share of readers believing there was malfeasance when there was none.
Consider the opening sentence: "OpenAI’s annualised revenue is about $20bn less than the company had signalled"
Really? When exactly did the company signal that? The FT's September 29 story citing the $70B figure certainly doesn't say so (see screenshot below).
If there was wrongdoing, why was that September 29 piece not corrected?
The goal of journalism is to tell the truth, inform with nuance, and be accurate, not to blur facts and conflate for clicks.
Leaving most of your audience with a misleading impression from a sensational clickbait headline, on top of the FT homepage no less, does them a disservice.
Look at what people are posting online on X and Reddit with the false takeaway the FT has left them with. Nearly 95%+ are saying there was blatant wrongdoing and worse. That's not fair or accurate.
Shameful journalism.
@Asplundfund You need to look at multiple strikes to understand fair pricing. He called out an observation here about the price of 2400. Since you understand none of this no wonder you would purchase something 700 points out the money.
@Asplundfund@slowpoke90@smartertrader Dude where do you see him saying buy this?? This was an observation looking at pricing. He never suggested buying here or in group. You are clearly a sore looser and whiner. Who the fuck would buy 2400 SNDK in their right mind when its 1700
@Asplundfund@smartertrader You are crazy to rely on that single tweet. He did not claim to have any info whatsoever. Also never said in private room to buy MU for ER