I trust the one who wrote a length and detailed report and gave reasons for her conclusions... the one with calculations... the one who explained what she thought was realistic in terms of the company's predictions, and what she thought might be optimistic... the one whose report is not a series of "one would have to wonder" comments.  The one whose reports reflect the changing landscape in the mode of "these things have changed; let's see how they affect my conclusions" versus, "gosh, they've plugged that hole, what should I try next".

Analysts have only one thing to sell, and that is their credibility.  Any opinion that originates in an agenda should be scrutinized, and when it seems to serve that agenda relentlessly and without reference to the facts, it doesn't pass muster.  When the analyst hides behind innuendo and "what-if's", it's also cowardly.