OT - Just to follow on Zack's predictions and recommendations. Part of the reason I can't understand why any institution would pay for Zack's analysis is that part of their stock analysis is what I would call 'self-referential', and just introduces a large measure of worthlessness to their analysis. That is, part of the reason they gave a 0% chance of INFN beating estimates was that Zacks has five ratings for stocks - ratings 4 being sell, and 5 being strong sell. Since INFN is in one of those catagories, it must be a sh*t stock, and therefore it's prospects are miserable, and it couldn't possibly do well. I wonder if stock get their rating raised when they defy Zack's prediction (INFN up 28% currently), creating an always backwards-looking, self-referential 'loop', whose predictive powers are essentially nil. Anybody on this board could do better. Or, perhaps monkeys throwing darts at stock names on board.

As to what valuation INFN deserves, that's puzzling. When they got slammed in an outsized way for poor quarters, I'm not sure if it's partly compensating for that with an outsized upward move in relation to news that was good, but not rocket-fuel good.  Having sold my most expensive shares some time ago for a large loss, I am up by $124 at current levels on the remainder. Am tempted to get out with my skin intact, but likely will let it ride.  28% is pretty good follow-thru on a day when the market is getting crushed again.

Does everyone here still hate Amazon? They seem to be the only FANG that is showing some pretty good numbers.