back to article Ha ha, fooled you! Shares tumble over G4S fake website profit warning

False rumours of a profit alert and executive dismissals put the skids under G4S shares on Wednesday. A bogus statement was emailed to journalists falsely stating that the security service firm had discovered accounting errors. The false warning (suggesting G4S profits would be restated) was sent out in an email containing a …

  1. Phil Endecott

    Guantanamo

    Story in the Grauniad today reporting that G4S has been doing stuff at Guantanamo Bay - the usual chores that are too lowly for Real Soldiers like emptying the bins, but also "Custodial Services". But we're not to worry, as they have now sold off that part of the business.

    Possible motive for a hacker?

  2. Malcolm 1

    https

    Of course, if all websites employed secure HTTP and Extended Validation Certificates this would be rather more difficult.

    1. returnmyjedi

      Re: https

      Since when did G4S have the slightest interest in anything that would make something more secure?

      1. Malcolm 1

        Re: https

        Indeed. Although a few more incidents with adverse stock price impact might pique their interest slightly.

      2. P. Lee

        Re: https

        Since when did Certificate Authorities have the slightest interest in anything that would make something more secure?

        FTFY

      3. Kane
        Thumb Up

        Re: https @ returnmyjedi

        slowclap.gif

    2. BillG
      Holmes

      Re: https

      Well, there is a separate issue here. You have analysts that read the fraudulent release, know that it's a fraudulent release, but understand that there are going to be people that take the fraudulent release seriously and so they sell the stock anyway. Perception becomes reality.

      1. MyffyW Silver badge
        Paris Hilton

        The six prettiest faces

        I believe this sort of stock market behaviour is known as the Keynesian Beauty Contest, with people doing not what they consider rational, but what they consider the other players will believe is most rational. Now if one considers that most people are idiots (Scott Adams, 1996) we have explained most of the market behaviour since Tulips and South Sea Bubbles.

        MyffyW, 390 milliHelens on a good day.

    3. Keith Langmead

      Re: https

      "Of course, if all websites employed secure HTTP and Extended Validation Certificates this would be rather more difficult."

      That only helps if EVERY website adopts that, and realistically that's not going to happen. Even having HTTPS won't help, I could go and register thereal-theregister.co.uk today under my name and get a valid SSL certificate for that and then setup a dummy thereg site on it. You'd get a legit looking site running under SSL, you'd only know there was an issue if you dug deeper. On the face of it in terms of the browser saying it's legit, SSL only helps confirm you're on the website you're attempting to visit, it doesn't confirm you've gone to the wrong address.

  3. aidanstevens
    Thumb Up

    It's no borders activists

    http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2014/11/518675.html

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: It's no borders activists

      You seem to be correct in your assumption. Followed the link and they even have a tutorial link on how to do it.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: It's no borders activists

      A pretty bunch.

      "No nation, no border, fight law and order!"

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    That's interesting going to the CEO of NCC for a soundbite about TLD and getting it right just as NCC release a service offering to host people on their own "trsuted" TLD....something fishy going on here...

  5. P. Lee

    Its easy to fix this "problem"

    Invest for the long term dividends rather than gambling on stock-price movements.

    This sort of thing then has no impact on you.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Its easy to fix this "problem"

      Unless they go under, right?

  6. Graham Marsden

    Follow the money...

    ... just look for who sold the stock short before the announcement and turned a tidy profit...

  7. Will Godfrey Silver badge
    Happy

    Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of fraudsters.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "The Telegraph reports that the hoax press release was full of grammatical and factual errors as well as spelling mistakes."

    At least the hoaxers made at least some effort to appear genuine....

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I should be angry about this

    What these activists did is surely wrong, and should Shirley make me angry? But I'm not angry at all. Quite the opposite.

  10. veti Silver badge

    Giving the game away

    This seems like a lot of trouble to go to for a 5% edge in share price. And if you were going to go to that much trouble, surely you'd include a "proofreading" stage in your plan. Not doing so, makes it look as if the plan wasn't to manipulate the stock price, or even to embarrass the company - it was mostly a publicity stunt.

    No, the cui bono? finger here is pointing from the second page of this story. Who benefits, if every company in the world has to pre-emptively register every conceivably connected domain name?

    Domain registrars, that's who.

  11. Keith Langmead

    Impetus to check

    You also have to wonder if any of those reporters or analysts trade in those stocks themselves (or know those who do). There are laws about giving bogus information in order to make a profit, but if you've been "fooled" by information given by someone else due to not bothering to check the facts then how would anyone prove it. Even if you suspected it might not be legit, I imagine there must be a temptation to publish anyway, make some cash (either directly or indirectly via friends), and then say "woops, can't believe I fell for that!" afterwards.

    1. wikkity

      Re: Impetus to check

      Would it be illegal to sell shares and buy them back when the price goes down if you realised the statement was a fake but you knew others would think it true?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Impetus to check

        On legality there would be two main issues (disclaimer IANAL).

        Firstly did you release the false information? If the answer is yes then that is market manipulation if you (or others connected to you) intend to trade on it and very very illegal.

        The second is are you acting on material non public information? IE do you know anything that an average guy on the street couldn't easily find out? If the answer is yes then don't trade.

        So lets say you didn't release the data, you have seen the release, realised its fake and seen the beginning trend in sell orders through purely public information. Lets also assume you have a spread bet account for a highly leveraged trade. You could probably make such a trade and were you to be investigated for possible insider trading or market manipulation then prove yourself innocent.

        Would you want to take that risk (along with the risk of actually being right that the market will move down, what time to buy, what time to sell, whether to hedge against the underlying markets and whether you wanted to reverse the position to catch the bounce)?

  12. This post has been deleted by its author

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon