That is not what happened in terms of the timeline. Here is a...

That is not what happened in terms of the timeline. Here is a chronological sequence of Macca's recommendations:



Macca had STX as outperform up to late Feb when SE2 results came out. They also started shorting it from late-Jan. So all the short selling between 24/01 and 14/02 were done while they had an outperform on the stock.



While I agree that all the shortselling from late Feb onwards are more "acceptable", I'd also argue that having a "neutral" recommendation on a stock that they were busy shorting is still questionable practice.

Anyway, from our company stakeholders' perspectives, do we really want to handsomely pay a company for a host of services (loans, corporate advice, etc) while they are engaged in behaviours that would appear morally wrong even if not outright illegal?

I will forward these details to the company. Whether they choose to dig deeper into it or otherwise is obviously up to them.

618