Count: Since your post was in response to my post I have to assume that when you use the word "you" or it's derivatives you are referring to me personally. If so, I take great umbrage to your comments. I challenge you to come up with any of my posts where I was critical of the way that Jim runs the board.
"It is unbelievable to me how so many folks feel no shame in benefiting from the incredible knowledge base here then pissing all over Jim because he doesn’t run the board to their liking. Please feel free to go elsewhere for your information – you won’t be missed here. At the very least, shut the f up about how Jim runs the board. If someone treats you to a ball game, don’t bitch because the beer isn’t cold enough. ( snip) So if you’re not happy here, please go to Atomic Bob's, where the most discussed topic is how bad IHub is. You’ll fit right in."
...........
As far as the supposed "logic" you used to justify Carpenter's action, that is just another example of my often expressed thoughts about playing with numbers.
Your calculation appears to be based on assumption that there should be a steady straight line appreciation from the price when the buy rating was issued to the specified target price 12 months later. I would like to point out that the stated criteria for a Hilliard Lyons "Buy" ratings is not a target price at the end of 12 month period, but "Buy - We believe the stock has significant total return potential in the coming 12 months.".
As we all know, or should know, the market, and individual stocks, have been extremely volatile. Significant up and down movements have occurred, and will probably still happen based on individual company news, and/or the overall economic situation. In this type of market action, and has been pointed out by other posters, using your logic would require Carpenter to reissue a "Buy" rating whenever the market price goes significantly (?) below a computed fair market value at that point of time; and, conversely, again go "Neutral" when the price goes up again.
