Yesterday I said there was NO proof or evidence of the MW GME story before the drop. Today I have PROOF
Not the proof you all wanted, but proof that this is 100% a non story.
TLDR at the top since I got your attention, but now no one cares: E-Trade's system (either their own or one they buy through) is off by 1 hour (at least when it pulls from MW) and MW has issues with their "last updated" timestamp. The story was 100% published after the drop.
So the MonkeyWatch story about GME story about the drop before it happened yesterday has been a hot topic around these subs the last 24+ hours. Everyone who is in this topic knows what it is about.
Yesterday evening I made a post that people didn't like cause I said that there is NO proof and very weak evidence to support the MW GME story.
This is the tweet that started it. https://twitter.com/MrDavidNIO/status/1369733681259053061 Has an 11:55am time stamp from the article, no timestamp of when the pic was taken. 11:55am is 100% before the GME drop. Here are pics of the article as seen through E-trade. Look at the first pic. 11:55am. Look at the last pic 12:55 ET (17:55 GMT). 1 hour off. E-Trade showing the wrong time.
Let's test this. Brand new MW article today by the same person about Novavax stock. Published 4:21 pm. Here is an archive link as well. Now here is the same exact story in E-Trade Look at the time stamps. 3:21 pm at the top. 16:21 ET (21:21 GMT) at the bottom. The top is 1 hour off again. This is a problem with whatever service E-Trade is using to pull articles from other sites!
This morning there was this post. I linked to the top comment cause it is the first time we have evidence to support the story before the price drop due to time stamps of the published article and mention of something 7 mins in the future.
But look back at the main topic pic of the post. There are time stamps about the article for 11:43 AM, 11:53 AM, 11:55 AM. Remember, these are all 1 hour early so the real times are Published at 12:43 PM, which agrees with the original MW article (earliest archive at 12:46pm - 13 mins after publish). Then the other times would be 12:53 PM and 12:55 PM. But what are these? The MW article just has a publish time of 12:43PM.
They are article updates! I know what you're going to say, "but the MW article doesn't have an updated timestamp!". I thought that was weird too, but I also didn't think it was proof the article wasn't updated. So I asked the publisher of it about this issue. (sorry if you get more attention again now, but I wanted people to know the truth to this entire thing). I tried not to lead them on with my initial question and they answered with a comment that covers every timestamp that has been mentioned above without me bringing them up.
The story we published at 12:43 noted "three halts between 12:20 and 12:40." When we updated at 12:53 and 12:55, we updated to "five halts between 12:20 and 12:50." An hour later we updated to "seven halts between 12:20 and 1:15," which I believe was the final count.
12:43
12:53
12:55
The exact times E-Trade shows when you account for E-Trades 1 hour timestamp mistake. All these times are also before the 12:56PM archive.
I then did a search for GME halts yesterday and that also lines up with the times mentioned above
12:43 publish = 3 halts between 12:20 and 12:40
12:53 update = 5 halts between 12:20 and 12:50
Yup. Exactly as it happened in the market
So I questioned him again directly about the missing "last updated" timestamp.
We just added the "original" and "updated" timestamps function this quarter, meaning that our main article template on PC should show when the article was first published and last updated, but it can still be hinky and slow to update as we work on it. That update has not rolled out to amp and some other mobile versions of our articles, which has created some issues. In general, the copy updates before the timestamp, headline and some other data on the page, so I'm not surprised to see a version with the updated copy but no updated timestamp, especially 1-3 mins after the update. There also could be issues with which version is being archived, as well as the archive itself.
So it sounds like the "last updated" timestamp is bugged on MonkeyWatch, but other sites like E-Trade were able to grab the updates as they happened although they got the time wrong cause of their own timestamp issues. Everything points the story being published after the drop started and there is even documented proof of the edits that were made on the MW story even though MW didn't have a last updated timestamp themselves.
Before anyone asks about WeBull confirming it, that's a support email that some random worker got asked and they simply looked at the same wrong timestamp that E-Trade shows.
Posted Mar 11, 2021, 11:03 PM UTC · edited