Netflix - and chill (with a film)
Facebook - data capture service
Coca Cola - type 2 diabetes in a can
Exxon mobile - creators of oily seals
Ford Motor - No longer just in black
Manchester United - inferior football
Wal Mart - guns and groceries
Starbucks - Pumpkin Spice Latte
Pepsi Co - Not Coke
Tesla - Cars youâll never own
World Wrestling - Totally real entertainment
Nike - Young offender formal wear
McDonalds - Childhood obesity. With a toy.
Goldman Sachs - Vampire squid
Pfizer - Little blue pills
Riot Blockchain - Even they donât know
General Electric - Non-specific electricity
General Motors - Non-specific vehicles
Walt Disney -Gender stereotyping since 1923
Alibaba Group ADR - Chinese Amazon (and more)
Apple Inc - iPhone
Berkshire Hathaway - Stock that is effectively an ETF
Cisco Systems Inc - Office phones
Disney - Childâs dream
NVDA - Loved by gamers and miners
I enjoy funny descriptions, but Apple as âexpensive fruitâ is actively confusing and ambiguous. Maybe this is a company that actually sells apples?
So when we write the content for our stock descriptions, we have two priorities:
Give our users clear, accurate information
Assuming weâve achieved number one, have some fun
The issue isnât that someone might buy the stock thinking it was the something else, but that when you view the list, you might double-take and be forced to check what the stock is for.
People shouldnât have to double-check these things to be sure they understood the joke right.
They should know what it is, and then enjoy the joke.
Actively lying in the short description is not âclear, accurate informationâ.