Research, answered

No. This is research, not a recommendation, and nothing produced here accounts for your circumstances, obligations or tolerance for loss. We are practitioners rather than licensed advisers.

Free coverage is someone else reading the primary document for you, with their own position and incentives, arriving pre-digested and usually late.

Primary documents wherever they exist: filings, accounts, prospectuses, contracts, regulatory records and company disclosures. Commentary is read afterwards, to see what the market believes rather than to establish what is true.

A focused brief on a single name is usually days rather than weeks, depending on how much primary material exists and how contested the situation is.

Yes. Ongoing monitoring covers filings, material announcements, changes in the competitive or regulatory picture, and anything that would alter the original reasoning.

Sell-side research is produced by firms with relationships to the companies covered and revenue models attached to activity. That does not make it wrong, and it does make the incentives worth knowing.

Yes, though the material available is different. Where filings are thin, the work leans on contracts, the deck, customer and supplier reality, and the incentives of everyone at the table.

One page of view: what the reasoning supports, what would have to be true, what would make it wrong, and what you would do if the price moved sharply either way. Supporting detail sits behind that.

Yes, and that is often the more valuable exercise. Existing positions rarely get re-examined with the same rigour as new ones, and the original reasoning is often no longer current.

By not holding positions in what is covered for a client, and by disclosing anything that could reasonably look like an interest. If something cannot be covered cleanly, that gets said rather than worked around.