There has been a few ratings changes and price targets issued in recent days, but I have yet to see any make a big deal about the points that Richard Leeds has raised.
I'm not being scarcastic, genuine question, if Richard is on the mark with his accusations, how come none of these analysts (including Hinds Howard who I respect) has made any big deal out of it?
yes, GS in initiating coverage with $19 as price target mentioned the coming higher payout on the preffereds, the coming increase in G&A costs, requirement of acquisitions or growth, and no expected distribution growth for next 2-3 yrs as negatives but did NOT refer to issuance of class B units as a headwind. In fact GS in initiating their coverage mentioned "supportive sponsor" as a positive. JPM in their note 3/8 reiterating outweight rating (while lowering price target to $20) also cited QRE's strong sponsorship (deal flow, management expertise) as a positive that should allow QRE to participate in acquisitions bigger than peers of similar size. Wunderlich on 3/6 also maintained QRE at a buy while lowering its target to $20. Finally, I note VP Crump bought shares at 16.76 last november
QRE may end up like LINE in being rangebound (at least medium term) with dips into 16's a buy and rips into 19-20 a sell
for the most part, the anals are kids with no experience and no specialized knowledge - they are the bottom of the wall street totem-pole and deservedly so
there are good analysts; and even brilliant ones; you try to follow them once you got to know them; but the fact that most analysts missed something isn't much of an argument; (that Hinds Howard missed something probably would be meaningful). what are richard's accusations?