I quite agree that investors who make investment decisions based upon the reports in the media or analyst’s reports put their investments at risk. The motivation of analysts is always suspect. Having said that, I find that a huge number of shares were dumped on what at best was partial information and a leap in logic, and, at worst, was a direct attempt to mislead the investment community. Investors, in this jumpy market, do panic easily.
Because the official position of the company contradicts the position of Leerink Swann, I believe that the management had an obligation to confirm in a timely manner to the investing public that we are on target to meet projections etc. I believe that the unsuccessful searching for news releases by ROBTV and Newsworld during the day had a negative impact on investor confidence. Indeed, I doubt that Fred Langdon would have made his obvious blunder, if he had access to a news release from the company.
The Dow Jones Newswire release that you posted was dated October 4th. Thus, I assume it came out after the closing of the market. I think Elayne Wandler’s comments in the release addressed the issue well.
I accept that QLT is an emerging biotech with lots on its plate. However, silence is not golden when the credibility of a company’s projections is called into question.
As an advisor on corporate communications (not for QLT), I would recommend that a succinct, factual response be provided as soon as the basis for the downgrade was known.
I certainly did not attack QLT personnel. I did strongly recommend that that they get out a news release ASAP. Later, I suggested that a timely release could possibly have avoided the Fred miscue.
I find that QLT management is excellent. I like the conservative approach of the scientist, Julia Levy. In fact, every time I attend an AGM, I am reminded of how competent the leadership of the company is. However, I do hope that they will review their response to this past situation and implement a strategy to deal with future issues.
Best regards,
Ed |
