Disclaimer: None of this is investment advice. The logic here may be bad and should not be relied upon. My assumptions may be bad and should not be relied upon. This post reflects my opinion. I may hold positions in securities I write about, and I believe in what I write.
I saw an update today on Fidelity’s ATP that purports to be from a Morgan Stanley analyst: “Morgan Stanley Maintains Underweight on Evofem Biosciences, Lowers Price Target to $0.75.”
This makes absolutely no sense to me. Really, zero sense.
As I’ve posted over and over, I believe this stock is worth $1+ or $0. Nothing in between. I would expect a Morgan Stanley analyst to do at least some cursory research before forming an opinion. I don’t know how anyone who is aware that delisting in the case of Evofem may bankrupt the company and who most certainly would know that maintaining a price below $1 would ultimately get the company delisted would provide a price target of less than a dollar.
My opinion is that either Jeff Hung, Morgan Stanley research analyst and graduate of MIT, Yale, and Johns Hopkins, doesn’t know how to read filings and then have thoughts or that it’s not a real Jeff Hung of Morgan Stanley release.
If this isn’t real, it reeks of illegal short-and-distort as part of greater stock price manipulation. If it is real, stock analyst sounds like the easiest job in the world. And one Jeff Hung certainly didn’t need a degree in nuclear engineering to do.
Evofem was two days away from reestablishing compliance with the Nasdaq’s price requirement, as yesterday was Day 8 of the 10 consecutive needed. Now the day count resets. Disappointing, sure, but it starts over on Monday and with more people aware of this company. I like the odds that Evofem survives.
Pingback: Day 17 of the EVFM Short Squeeze (post-close post) Who is Todd Stewart Cox? | raabidfun does crosswords