OPY bought Stanford brokers isnt that a regulators nightmare?
I know this is a factor but the recent performance of the stock can’t only be a function of the inclusion to the Russell indexes. Besides, if I am not mistaken, this has been a very recent development. The stock has been in an upward direction for a while. Also, various stocks have been included to even broader tracked indexes like the Dow Jones and the stocks have performed poorly. Just look at the reaction of the Travelers and Cisco stocks since their addition to the Dow Jones, less than a month ago.
I believe, if we start thinking beyond this, we can see that this is a function of other factors.
Let’s step back to the end of the first quarter of ’09. After looking at the company’s quarterly results, AUM and other such factors….by my calculations….the numbers on avg, were down 30% yoy. However, the stock was down more than 70%! You can disagree with my analysis but for me, the stock on March 31, 2009 (or when the earnings came out) should have been down 30% or trading around $28 but it was hovering at $10.
Based on the above, I must say I disagree with your interpretation of why the stock doubled in just a few months. But if you are right and the stock moved higher just based on the fact that money managers, mutual funds and ETF’s bought into the stock because of its Russell inclusion then your strong buy recommendation is misguided. This factor can only be temporary, and in my opinion, unsustainable.
My interest here is based solely on the stock's continuous undervaluation. I have tried to analyze this factor for several years now and have pointed out my opinion that it is due to the company's lack of adequate communication.