For anyone out there that has a sneaky doubt about the intentions of some of the analysts we pay to receive advice from, just have a look at this extract from today's report on GXY issued by Macquarie.
There were so many things running through my mind when I tried to digest this page at the back of their research report...... like:
* why did they chose to amend their pricing methodology from previous reports for this report? As you can see by the list of Target Price valuations (below) over the last 3 years, their valuations have swung wildly (to say the least). From a low of A$0.34c on 27/04/2020 to A$4.50 on 15/04/2021.
*Macquarie are now net long of 0.5% + of GXY i.e. they are short no more! Does this change in position influence their recommendation?
* Macquarie representative(s) have been to site recently and GXY arranged local transport for their visit. Does this have any affect on the change of recommendation from "Underperform" to "Outperform"?
* why have Macquarie changed their forecast/ recommendation twice in 3 days when prior to this quickfire upgrade they provided no change for 6 months?
*and, related to the previous point, how could their valuations go from A$0.40 to A$1.60 to A$4.20/ A$4.50 over the period 29/06/2020 to today? That's only a difference of 11.25 times when the company has essentially been doing the same thing over that time frame.
Yes, the world of investment analysis is a strange world in deed!!!
View attachment 3101546
