FT clearly didn't do their due diligence, since the auxiliary information provided with the $70B leak (about e.g. growth rates and enterprise sales) made it clear that the number could not possibly be correct.

It just wasn't clear exactly what the error was (e.g. was a projection of a $70B ARR by end of year being misinterpreted as $70B ARR now -- that would have been stupid, but less stupid than the "investors added a fudge factor to the numbers" story that they're now going with).

fair enough