Chart, page-13438

CS cut from 275 to 250 but Nick still likes it (what's not to like about nearly doubling?), but a near term catalyst is unlikely. In my opinion, long term holders have no reason to change their view, similarly, there wasn't much in there to change the view of shorters. Interestingly, the lack of pricing guidance, or anything at all even about recent historical prices, leaves a vacuum for the analysts to fill themselves. In the case of CS, they infer that if prices were set near the beginning of 19H2, and SC6 is near a historical low, then fill in the blanks for pricing for the rest of the year. You could argue that is a wrong thing to do, but if you don't disclose yourself, then other people will make guesses.

Other brokers have slightly reduced price targets as well, it looks like near term weakness in the commodity price is the driver of the marginal downgrades, so again, if you're a long term story holder, that near term weakness shouldn't make much difference to your NPV.

Finally, there's probably a bit too much attention placed on price targets when the content of the analyst reports are much more interesting. In particular, the upside and downside risks. One broker has a bull case valuation north of $3 and a bear case valuation of $0.35. The central case is in between of course. It gives a sense of the uncertainty over the valuation of something where (a) the resource is only just up to square one, and (b) where there is no forward curve to reference for the commodity price, and (c) the supply/demand conditions in the out years - 2025 and beyond, are basically random... the net balance in particular... oh yes and (d) where technology for extraction may completely change the marginal cost curve. At least that broker has the sense to give a really wide range for the possible outcomes, reflecting their uncertainty.