Most people seem to overestimate the impact a post has, one person posting a lie has little impact, that lie repeated 1000 times can be a problem. Musk’s “funding secured” is a perfect example and from a reputable source. His tweet was retweeted thousands of times, the stock shot up, but the market had its doubts, and the stock was hammered.
This stock has so little volume, one buyer or seller can easily move it. The greater impact comes from coordinated social media campaigns, emails, and several posters received boiler room phone calls in the spring of 2017.
“However, if I say "SIGO has not filed …. And therefore, SIGO share price is going to crash soon.", that would be manipulative imo.
I’m not sure I’d completely agree, I feel like we all should know the difference between opinion and fact. The first statement is clearly a fact and is easily verified, the second part refers to the future, and is a reasonable inference. None of us know the future, but we all buy or short stocks hoping they’ll go up or down in the future. That statement could be changed to a more positive tone also, “when SIGO files, the price will go up.” If that statement came from Valerie, then it would be manupulation, but she’s a reputable source (supposedly) and more importantly an insider. In the fall of 2017 those near daily 8k’s brought in new buyers, but it didn’t take long for the market to ignore them, and the prices slipped from over $3 in January, to where we are now.
