Advertisement
Trump Media Stock Sinks to Post-merger Low
Shares of Truth Social owner Trump Media & Technology Group tumbled 12% on Friday, sinking to their lowest level since the company went public last week.
Menu
Front Page Breaking News Comments Flagged Comments Recently Flagged User Blogs Write a Blog Entry Create a Poll Edit Account Weekly Digest Stats Page RSS Feed Back Page
Subscriptions
Read the Retort using RSS.
RSS Feed
Author Info
REDIAL
Joined 2009/01/04Visited 2024/04/30
Status: user
MORE STORIES
Democrats Would Save Speaker Johnson from Being Ousted (11 comments) ...
An El Nino-less summer is coming. (1 comments) ...
Pentagon to 'Rush' Patriot Missiles to Ukraine (10 comments) ...
Houthis damage oil tanker, shoot down US drone (1 comments) ...
Baltimore Sues Owner and Manager of 'unseaworthy' Dali (3 comments) ...
Alternate links: Google News | Twitter
Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.
"I mean, it's ridiculous,"
Pithy description of everything Trump. Once again, ordinary shmoos will be financially ruined by something Trump does for his selfish benefit. But we still have interesting people who won't admit that a new Trump presidency will be a hellscape.
#1 | Posted by Zed at 2024-04-06 08:14 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1
But we still have interesting people who won't admit that a new Trump presidency will be a hellscape. #1 | Posted by Zed
"Both sides are the same!" - Nader 2000 & Jill Stein 2016 Voters
"Are you sure about that?" - 1 million dead Iraqis & 300 million Americans who will live under a Talibaptist SCOTUS for the next 30 years
#2 | Posted by censored at 2024-04-06 08:23 AM | Reply
Both sides are the same!" - Nader 2000 & Jill Stein 2016 Voters "Are you sure about that?" - 1 million dead Iraqis & 300 million Americans who will live under a Talibaptist SCOTUS for the next 30 years
POSTED BY CENSORED AT 2024-04-06 08:23 AM | REPLY
Here's a thought. Nominate better candidates and you won't have as many third party voters. I know that makes way too much sense of course.
#3 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2024-04-06 10:42 AM | Reply
Here's a thought. Nominate better candidates and you won't have as many third party voters. I know that makes way too much sense of course. #3 | Posted by LauraMohr
You think Sanders (the Jewish, socialist, atheist) had a chance of winning the 2016 general election? Cause he lost the Dem primaries, again, in 2020. Almost as if even the left didn't care very much for him. And you think Bill Bradley or Jesse Jackson had a better chance than Gore in 2000? After Gore swept the primaries?
What color is the sky in your world?
Life is about compromises and it's a binary selection choice. Either the Republican or the Dem is going to win every single time, and the Nader/Stein voters helped make sure the worst candidate (from their perspective) won.
Hope you enjoy that Talibaptist SCOTUS for the next 30 years. I'm sure you have nothing to fear from their rulings. Personally, I get satisfaction from the suffering each one of SCOTUS's corporatist, anti-gay, anti-etc rulings cause the Green-voters. Cause no one deserves that more.
#4 | Posted by censored at 2024-04-06 12:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2
@#4 ... What color is the sky in your world? ...
Based upon your recent comments, I might ask the same of you.
But more to the point of this thread...
... Shares of Truth Social owner Trump Media & Technology Group tumbled 12% on Friday, sinking to their lowest level since the company went public last week. ...
What do you think about the stock price (and the value it places upon the DJT company compared to the financial results of the DJT company?
#5 | Posted by LampLighter at 2024-04-06 10:16 PM | Reply
@#5
My first views...
finance.yahoo.com
... Market Cap 5.54B Price/Sales 879.02 ...
For comparison, Amazon ...
... Market Cap 1.92T Price/Sales 3.38 ...
#6 | Posted by LampLighter at 2024-04-06 10:21 PM | Reply
So it looks like DJT is priced somewhere around 300 times the value of Amazon.
Can anyone explain why that valuation might be worth it for DJT investors?
thx.
#7 | Posted by LampLighter at 2024-04-06 10:23 PM | Reply
"Trump ___ sinks to ____ low." Sounds like a good start for the ironically named Mad Libs.
Trump morality sinks to Death Valley low.
#8 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2024-04-06 10:28 PM | Reply
They have "Faith".
#9 | Posted by REDIAL at 2024-04-06 10:29 PM | Reply
@#9 ... They have "Faith". ...
Yeah, possibly.
But as many have learned, "faith" may not result in a happy outcome when dealing with Wall Street.
#10 | Posted by LampLighter at 2024-04-06 10:37 PM | Reply
And, fwiw, "Wall Street" does not refer to the wall of high-rise buildings in the area. It has a more historical origin...
en.wikipedia.org
... Early years In the original records of New Amsterdam, the Dutch always called the street Het Cingel ("the Belt"), which was also the name of the original outer barrier street, wall, and canal of Amsterdam. After the English conquest of New Netherland in 1664, they renamed the settlement "New York" and in tax records from April 1665 (still in Dutch) they refer to the street as Het Cingel ofte Stadt Wall ("the Belt or the City Wall").[3] This use of both names for the street also appears as late as 1691 on the Miller Plan of New York.[4] New York Governor Thomas Dongan may have issued the first official designation of Wall Street in 1686, the same year he issued a new charter for New York. Confusion over the origins of the name Wall Street appeared in modern times because in the 19th and early 20th century some historians mistakenly thought the Dutch had called it "de Waal Straat", which to Dutch ears sounds like Walloon Street. However, in 17th century New Amsterdam, de Waal Straat (Wharf or Dock Street) was a section of what is today's Pearl Street.[3] New Amsterdam's wall depicted on tiles in the Wall Street subway station The original wall was constructed under orders from Director General of the Dutch West India Company, Peter Stuyvesant, at the start of the first Anglo-Dutch war soon after New Amsterdam was incorporated in 1653.[5] Fearing an over land invasion of English troops from the colonies in New England (at the time Manhattan was easily accessible by land because the Harlem Ship Canal had not been dug), he ordered a ditch and wooden palisade to be constructed on the northern boundary of the New Amsterdam settlement.[6] The wall was built of dirt and 15-foot (4.6 m) wooden planks, measuring 2,340 feet (710 m) long and 9 feet (2.7 m) tall[7] and was built using the labor of both Black slaves and white colonists.[8][9] In fact Stuyvesant had ordered that "the citizens, without exception, shall work on the constructions ... by immediately digging a ditch from the East River to the North River, 4 to 5 feet deep and 11 to 12 feet wide..." And that "the soldiers and other servants of the Company, together with the free Negroes, no one excepted, shall complete the work on the fort by constructing a breastwork, and the farmers are to be summoned to haul the sod."[10] ...
In the original records of New Amsterdam, the Dutch always called the street Het Cingel ("the Belt"), which was also the name of the original outer barrier street, wall, and canal of Amsterdam. After the English conquest of New Netherland in 1664, they renamed the settlement "New York" and in tax records from April 1665 (still in Dutch) they refer to the street as Het Cingel ofte Stadt Wall ("the Belt or the City Wall").[3] This use of both names for the street also appears as late as 1691 on the Miller Plan of New York.[4] New York Governor Thomas Dongan may have issued the first official designation of Wall Street in 1686, the same year he issued a new charter for New York. Confusion over the origins of the name Wall Street appeared in modern times because in the 19th and early 20th century some historians mistakenly thought the Dutch had called it "de Waal Straat", which to Dutch ears sounds like Walloon Street. However, in 17th century New Amsterdam, de Waal Straat (Wharf or Dock Street) was a section of what is today's Pearl Street.[3] New Amsterdam's wall depicted on tiles in the Wall Street subway station
The original wall was constructed under orders from Director General of the Dutch West India Company, Peter Stuyvesant, at the start of the first Anglo-Dutch war soon after New Amsterdam was incorporated in 1653.[5] Fearing an over land invasion of English troops from the colonies in New England (at the time Manhattan was easily accessible by land because the Harlem Ship Canal had not been dug), he ordered a ditch and wooden palisade to be constructed on the northern boundary of the New Amsterdam settlement.[6] The wall was built of dirt and 15-foot (4.6 m) wooden planks, measuring 2,340 feet (710 m) long and 9 feet (2.7 m) tall[7] and was built using the labor of both Black slaves and white colonists.[8][9] In fact Stuyvesant had ordered that "the citizens, without exception, shall work on the constructions ... by immediately digging a ditch from the East River to the North River, 4 to 5 feet deep and 11 to 12 feet wide..." And that "the soldiers and other servants of the Company, together with the free Negroes, no one excepted, shall complete the work on the fort by constructing a breastwork, and the farmers are to be summoned to haul the sod."[10] ...
#11 | Posted by LampLighter at 2024-04-06 10:43 PM | Reply
Seeing the chart on DJT and that 12% drop just brought tears to my eyes...I'm seeing pink, as in sheets on NASDAQ.
#12 | Posted by Yodagirl at 2024-04-07 11:09 AM | Reply
#9: They have "Faith".
And every time the object that "faith" is based upon fails miserably, their anger and resentment and frustration cranks up yet another notch.
#13 | Posted by MadMikeMcGonzo at 2024-04-07 04:51 PM | Reply
It's a worthless company. When the rats start fleeing the ------ ship, expect a stampede out of DJT.
#14 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2024-04-07 05:06 PM | Reply
"Nominate better candidates and you won't have as many third party voters."
"No Labels" doesn't really compare candidates, it's just a rejection of the concept of political parties whivh are inevitable in a pokitical system such as ours.For the most part the party affiliation of a candidate does give us a mostly accurate method to predict how they will govern. Third party candidates owe a duty to voters to consider the "spoiler" effect their cacdidacy often has on election outcomes. Yes, they do have a right to run for office but they also have a responsibility to consider what affect their candidacy will have on election outcomes. If their candidacy is really just an ego massage then their selfish need to run eithout any chance of winning just enables the candidate they most disagree with to win an election ala Ralph Nader. What else did his candidacy accomplish? Some would rightly conclude that he does carry some responsibility for the outcome in 2000 though, in truth, the Robertsm Court carries far more responsibility for the utter disaster of the G.W. Bush Presidency. I believe that 2000 was when our totally corrupt Supreme Court went totally off the rails from being the arbiter of Constitutionality to purely just a Republican political weapon to undo the will of the people.
#15 | Posted by danni at 2024-04-08 04:27 AM | Reply
Post a commentComments are closed for this entry.Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2024 World Readable
Comments are closed for this entry.
Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2024 World Readable