RE:Chen's trust factor.....WS starts to really care when it smells near term to immediate business. More along the lines of M&A or a Financing. It's the nature of the industry. Analayst don't fully decide which stocks to cover. Their firms play a role. So it's not based on if an analyst feels a stock is inexpensive and if they believe or not in a company, and writiing upbeat reasearch reports for secondary order flow. If some institution places an order to buy say 1 million shares of say BB, the brokerage firm might charge 3-5 cents per share. That is $30K to $50K. If it were a new financing for BB and the instution placed the exact same order (for 1 million shares) the IB firm makes in the range of 4% or 5%. Assume BB is at $9.50 Canadian. That fee now becomes $384K to $480K. Very likely some analysts realize BB is very cheap but they just won't or can't get possitive until later down the line. Their firms just don't want any risk until its undeniable (meaning they will wait for it to show in the numbers) and even then, if they don't see potential IB business, probably won't care. It's just the MO. Of course if big fees - M&A and IB buiness - where on the doorstep they would be much more leaniant in terms of the risk and would jump on board practically immediately (and find a way to rationalize it). Anyone who has carefully tracked BB knows it has turned to corner. And clear the numbers are coming. Waiting until those numbers hit the books means it will cost much more to buy BB. Some might suggest WS is tainted yet it is partially an attitude of 'why should they care unless there is really something in it for them?'. The intstitutional holders is what stands out, and the caliber of those invested. That is more telling. So is the quality of the entities BB is working with, including clients and partners. So is the caliber of people working at BB. This tends to flow to the bottom line. The institutions that bought BB are indifferent to the fact that every last analyst has a sell or hold recommendation (and has had since the $3 USD level 24 months ago). Risk / Reward here looks undeniable. SentinelOne at 55x saless with $11 billion market cap versus BB at $4 billion (less if we subtract cash) and at 4-5X sales ? Does SentinelOne really have more upside than BB? Based on the SP suggest the market feels its future is 10x better than BB's? Really? Again, WS would likley change it's tune pretty fast if BB were doing a bunch of IB business. Nothing against WS it's just the nature of the business. Anyone with any doubts (Rug 2000) should ask themesleves why these firms that are supposedly giving BB a pass (i.e. the majority of major US and even Canadian IBs) invite BB to all their conferences and link their IB firms name to BB's, and expose their clients to BB. That is an endorsement right there. BTW this has completely ramped up since the AWS announcement. Prior to that there were no WS firms including BB in their conferences (and maybe one or two Canadian firms). That is probably because these firms see that real change for BB is on the horizon and want to build the relationshp, be linked, and have their institutional clients see that link. And be ready to get fully on board. It's a precursor. Do your own DD.