imported_Tango
Golden Member
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: Genx87
Sometimes wonder if analysts dont poison the food supply.
They project 1.76 earnings and they come in at 1.54 and it tumbles. Analysts pickup large chunks of Google and hype it through the year as it continues posting nearly double the profits from last year.
Analysts only have their knowledge and what corporate insiders are giving them as per Reg FD.
Financial analysis of equity is not a science, its an art, one which contains thousands of variables and at times has high variance. All they can do is piece together what the insiders say with their guideline announcements, earnings projections, and incorporate them into their own models.
If it were easy there wouldn't be a 3-year, 18-total hour exam, nor the 10,000 or so pages and 1,500+ hour or so study requirements for the CFA.
Given that, I'd say that many analysts out there are suckling rather than doing their job the right way. Personally, I'd take Google's rosey colored projections, slash them to pieces, build my own models, and go from there.
A 600 price target for a company that operates off of ad fees, has only IP, and doesn't really own or produce anything unique is pretty damn stupid.
Not even Berkshire Hathaway has that kind of record. I'd pick Buffet over some geeks any day.
Me too. But Buffet is value orientered, and has been so his whole life. Good strategy, but not the only one.