Stock prices have nothing really to do with the company itself. Stock is issued by companies, but the value of a stock is proportional to the expected future hype value of the stock. Given sufficient hype, more people will buy in to it after you buy it, and the unit price of the limited stock issue goes up. Stock picking is simply gambling for retail investors which have zero say in how a company is run.
According to the conspiracy theory, investors would see HUGE profit margins and they wouldn't rebalance their portfolio to get in on that? Why does the conspiracy theory rely on all investors being completely immune to earnings and allergic to profits? Why are earnings reports such a massive deal normally but in the grocery business nobody cares? Or why would investors assume that the huge earnings are very temporary and do not improve the longer-term outlook?
The amount of cope in this thread is truly unfathomable. Just straight up economic illiteracy.
Stocks crash on bad earnings reports because the future attractiveness of the stock has diminished. This reduces the likelihood that a future investor will buy your hot potato above the unit price they bought in.
Stocks are fundamentally divorced from economic reality EXCEPT when a company ceases trading and several other rare administrative actions.
Predicting future hype is all that matters. Or time spent fractionally invested in all broader casino hype trains, e.g. VTI
Why in the motherfuck would it be a bad earnings report when, according to this conspiracy theory, gross margins on food would have gone from 1% to 43%? Conservatively that would lead to a ten thousand percent increase in the stock price. Yet instead the stocks of Metro AG and SPAR Group, Inc. are down 25 or more percent YTD.
