Birdman, you beat me to the press. I wrote the following as a WP document this morning, but I got side-tracked. Anyhow, it is already written, so I'll post it.
In the most recent online publication of The Bull (https://thebull.com.au/18-share-tip...mp;utm_term=0_27a4a54d92-20c1aa0f62-266337281 ), Tom Bleakley, BW Equities opines that shareholders sell NEA. The words are: NEA delivers high definition aerial imaging services. The company delivered fiscal year 2021 revenue growth above 20 per cent, with 75 per cent gross margins. The company made a loss after tax as it continues to invest in longer term growth. NEA faces increasing competition from advances in satellite technology. In our view, rising bond yields provide an opportunity to consider cashing in some gains. opines that shareholders should sell NEA, and advances this reason, “NEA delivers high definition aerial imaging services. The company delivered fiscal year 2021 revenue growth above 20 per cent, with 75 per cent gross margins. The company made a loss after tax as it continues to invest in longer term growth. NEA faces increasing competition from advances in satellite technology. In our view, rising bond yields provide an opportunity to consider cashing in some gains.”
I would not even think what bonds are going to do if I held, or intended buying, a non-dividend-paying growth stock like NEA. I'll not insult those who know NEA's offering by commenting on the veracity of his warning of advances in satellite technology. The advice to sell may be aimed at traders with a very short timeline, but I certainly would not apply it to long-term investors.
I have often opined that the court case in Utah is either going to have a trivial negative effect on NEA, or the court will find in NEA's favour, and I am inclined to think the latter is the most likely. I'll use that viewpoint to suggest a contrary opinion. Other things being equal, if the SP dropped 20% when the litigation raised its ugly head, mathematics suggest that it increase by 20/80. or 25% when the matter is resolved. Other things are not equal, so stuffing around with mathematics is being too cute, but what I believe is that the resolution of the matter will give the SP a fillip. However, unless one of the litigating parties throws in the towel, these things can drag out for a long time.
