Why not? They chose to be named as the most popular independent variable of all time.
It would be super ironic if we change how we refer to things because of their preferences for calling themselves.
Simply search "crowdstrike" or "crwd" in the subreddit for evidence of regular posts about this stock, both positive and negative. Just a coincidence, and not really that special of one. HN should be smarter than this
There are WSB posts all the time both positive and negative about all large companies. Simply search "crowdstrike" or "crwd" in the subreddit for evidence of regular posts. Just a coincidence, and not really that special of one.
They're up more than double YoY as of right now. Down ~30% from peak mostly due to the events today. It's not clear to me if the OP on this is "in the money". I don't fully grok options trading.
She says:
> My Position:
CRWD $185 Put, 11/21/25 expiration date,.
5 contracts @ $7.30, up 16.85% since 06/11/24
$185 puts that cost $7.30 mean they are considered ITM if CRWD drops below $184.27, assuming there's no cost to trade and the $7.30 refers to a single options contract (worth 100 shares). There is likely some (or a lot) extrensic value still remaining in the puts given the far away expiry date. The extrensic value is what makes them valuable.
This basically means the person has a guaranteed buyer who has to buy a set number of shares of CrowdStrike at $185 per share. If the price drops below that, say to $100, this person can buy a share at market value and immediately execute the contract making the person buy it at $185.
In the meantime, as the share price drops the contract's value itself usually goes up. They can sell the contract itself without having to touch shares and still make a profit.
The position doesn't have to be "in the money" to be profitable. At present, the underlying (that is $CRWD, not the puts themselves) is trading around $305 per share, so these puts with the strike price all the way down to $185 are still far, far off from being ITM. But, options are largely a bet on volatility. While the extreme price drop between when this user opened the trade and this morning has already made this trade quite profitable, it could still lose money if the trader holds on to it; IANAFA, but selling and taking profits on this rare event would most likely be in their interests, even if they continue to believe the underlying security will go all the way down to $185 by November.
Crowdstrike is worth whatever they can get people to pay for it. It might not provide that level of value to its clients, but it certainly sells at that price in the market.
Ayn Rand, is that you? I guess technically speaking you are correct - but that value proposition has evaporated now. They've likely lost all trust with their customers at this point.
I do hold IT departments accountable, though. A third party vendor software update should not be able to cripple your entire organization like this.
Especially since I'm assuming those organisations pay good money for those services (my org hasn't been affected and we don't use them but we're also very small so I wouldn't know).
> CrowdStrike could potentially behave as a propaganda arm of the US government by creating “fake hacking stories” which are un-disprovable.They are able to do this due to information asymmetries in society.
If this is true, then isn't crowdstrike valuation quite low?
> It’s prohibitively hard to hack into a “cloud system” due to few possible entry points
43 comments
[ 3.8 ms ] story [ 109 ms ] threadThis reddit post was written hours before the outage
1. Quietly compromise enterprise IT vendor X.
2. Sockpuppet post on /r/wallstreetbets, suggesting shorting X, for any reason (doesn't matter why).
3. Place big bet against X's stock.
4. Use your compromise of X to accelerate a big public failure by X.
5. Profit, and the WSB post by your sockpuppet is your plausible reason for shorting X, and you're only one of a crowd who did so.
6. Bonus: sockpuppet account becomes WSB folk hero, as others also profit from tip, which is political capital you can spend later.
Makes it sound like you're talking about the site formerly known as Tiwtter.
Post your calls position if you’re serious.
She says: > My Position:
Regardless, all of this is just intellectual play considering the Reddit poster has no desire to exercise their options.
If they sold right now, ~$7000 on ~$3500 invested; not bad.
Theyd make way more than that DOOM LEAP they bought, but its worth $13 at time of writing, so 100%
people trading the 0DTE made 18,700% though
just save this comment for when you understand it
In the meantime, as the share price drops the contract's value itself usually goes up. They can sell the contract itself without having to touch shares and still make a profit.
I do hold IT departments accountable, though. A third party vendor software update should not be able to cripple your entire organization like this.
> CrowdStrike could potentially behave as a propaganda arm of the US government by creating “fake hacking stories” which are un-disprovable.They are able to do this due to information asymmetries in society.
If this is true, then isn't crowdstrike valuation quite low?
> It’s prohibitively hard to hack into a “cloud system” due to few possible entry points
?????
More discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41002195