Thanks for that clarification. I assumed it was not immediate and not five years out.
In these stocks, anything can happen, as we have seen a few times this past year. .22 in June seemed sillier than .23 today (post Gupta and post DOJ) - my point is that it's aggressive still and based on a bad share-count assumption. The fact that the share-count is so wrong erodes the overall credibility of the research firm.
There were a lot of pluses and minuses this week. Maybe Sterling and Kurt played it really well - coinciding both the good and the bad so as to curtail excessive volatility. I bet the bad is over and the next one is good!