To Mark Palmberg:
All I was objecting to was your criticism (and that of Evan Balter) of analysts for not giving Adobe proper credit for beating estimates. The analysts have been consistently friendly, and they have given Adobe all the credit it deserves. Remember, Adobe plunged a month ago because it fell short of OVER-OPTIMISTIC projections by analysts. Believe it or not, analysts do try to get earnings right -- their mistake was that they were TOO friendly, and TOO enthusiastic. The fruit of their friendly attitude was a 33 percent haircut and the opportunity to look stupid in front of their peers.
If you want to whine about something, whine about Adobe's failure to meet the high expectations of its friends a month ago. Don't whine about analysts' failure to meet give Adobe proper credit -- they did. And Adobe fell short.
In fact, I personally don't think Adobe, or any other business, owes anything to any analyst -- they just owe their shareholders a dedicated effort to make the business prosper. But they have chosen to manage earnings expectations in the marketplace, and you and other investors have chosen to play the earnings expectations game. If you are going to do this, at least be consistent -- and don't complain when others have a memory that goes back all of one month.
I like the company, and I like their software. I just happen to think that the fall in the stock is entirely rational, and is not the result of any conspiracy by unfriendly analysts, hostile foreign factions, or El Nino. I tend to agree with such previous posters as Pete Mason and earthling that the stock is no more than fairly priced and is possibly underpriced at these levels.
Cheers
Chuck Edwards |
