United stock plunges as old story resurfaces on Web

Boy, they really hosed this one. Anyone that got in at the low is
probably very happy!

http://blogs.trb.com/chicago-breakin...as-old-st.html

snip:
========
United Airlines' stock fell more than 75 percent Monday morning after
a nearly six-year-old Chicago Tribune news report was posted on
Bloomberg News Service.
The stock, which had closed Friday at $12.30 a share, hit a low of $3
a share before the confusion was cleared up. The stock was trading
recently at $8.97, down $3.03 for the day.

After being alerted to the issue Monday morning, the Chicago Tribune
removed the story from its online archives which are also accessed by
other Tribune Co. newspapers. The South Florida Sun-Sentinel's version
of the story was the one that was cited by Bloomberg. The story did
not appear on the Web site of the Chicago Tribune.

On Sep 8, 3:07*pm, Duh_OZ wrote:
Boy, they really hosed this one. *Anyone that got in at the low is
probably very happy!

http://blogs.trb.com/chicago-breakin...ed-stock-plung...

snip:
========
*United Airlines' stock fell more than 75 percent Monday morning after
a nearly six-year-old Chicago Tribune news report was posted on
Bloomberg News Service.
The stock, which had closed Friday at $12.30 a share, hit a low of $3
a share before the confusion was cleared up. The stock was trading
recently at $8.97, down $3.03 for the day.

After being alerted to the issue Monday morning, the Chicago Tribune
removed the story from its online archives which are also accessed by
other Tribune Co. newspapers. The South Florida Sun-Sentinel's version
of the story was the one that was cited by Bloomberg. The story did
not appear on the Web site of the Chicago Tribune.

"Outrageous" is a kind word for such shafting

Robert Cohen wrote:

On Sep 8, 3:07 pm, Duh_OZ wrote:

Boy, they really hosed this one. Anyone that got in at the low is
probably very happy!

http://blogs.trb.com/chicago-breakin...ed-stock-plung...

snip:
========
United Airlines' stock fell more than 75 percent Monday morning after
a nearly six-year-old Chicago Tribune news report was posted on
Bloomberg News Service.
The stock, which had closed Friday at $12.30 a share, hit a low of $3
a share before the confusion was cleared up. The stock was trading
recently at $8.97, down $3.03 for the day.

After being alerted to the issue Monday morning, the Chicago Tribune
removed the story from its online archives which are also accessed by
other Tribune Co. newspapers. The South Florida Sun-Sentinel's version
of the story was the one that was cited by Bloomberg. The story did
not appear on the Web site of the Chicago Tribune.


"Outrageous" is a kind word for such shafting

No kidding. That would seem worthy of a lawsuit.

mrtravel wrote:


No kidding. That would seem worthy of a lawsuit.


A statement was made by Tribune that day. The Florida Tribune did NOT
re-publish that article. It was some financial analyst doing some
research, who did a search on the newpaper's web site and pulled the
2002 story, and he then proceeded to feed that story as a new one to the
newswires quoting the florida newspaper.

It appears to me that the SEC could be investigating this since
financial analysts stand to make massive gains if they shorted the stock
and then issued that release that resulted in UAL stock losing so much
value.

John Doe wrote:

mrtravel wrote:


No kidding. That would seem worthy of a lawsuit.



A statement was made by Tribune that day. The Florida Tribune did NOT
re-publish that article. It was some financial analyst doing some
research, who did a search on the newpaper's web site and pulled the
2002 story, and he then proceeded to feed that story as a new one to the
newswires quoting the florida newspaper.

It appears to me that the SEC could be investigating this since
financial analysts stand to make massive gains if they shorted the stock
and then issued that release that resulted in UAL stock losing so much
value.

I am bit unhappy that he didn't tell me first
I will have to make do with the SIRI shorts That was when the stock
was at $2.30.

On Sep 11, 1:41*am, mrtravel wrote:
John Doe wrote:
mrtravel wrote:

No kidding. That would seem worthy of a lawsuit.

A statement was made by Tribune that day. The Florida Tribune did NOT
re-publish that article. It was some financial analyst doing some
research, who did a search on the newpaper's web site and pulled the
2002 story, and he then proceeded to feed that story as a new one to the
newswires quoting the florida newspaper.

It appears to me that the SEC could be investigating this since
financial analysts stand to make massive gains if they shorted the stock
and then issued that release that resulted in UAL stock losing so much
value.

I am bit unhappy that he didn't tell me first
I will have to make do with the SIRI shorts That was when the stock
was at $2.30.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

http://www.slate.com/id/2199761?nav=wp