In this usage it's more like saying that information was "inefficiently" or not fully priced or not fully accurately priced. I'm not arguing that the market mechanism is inefficient, but that the market convenes on prices which in the short term fail to account for some underlying reality.
In an ideal world, markets should be perfectly efficient (near immediate) at exposing things which are misvalued because people can make money if they understand some fact that the market doesn't and then that fact will be accounted for.
In reality they just converge on the average of beliefs weighted by how confident a given actor is for a given belief and how much money they have to put behind the belief, and people are extremely imperfect, especially when it comes to predicting the outcomes of complex systems. Given this, there exist all sorts off "inefficiencies", or times when the current state of the market fails to accurately account for some underlying reality which leaves an exploitable opportunity to buy or sell a mispriced asset.
In an ideal world, markets should be perfectly efficient (near immediate) at exposing things which are misvalued because people can make money if they understand some fact that the market doesn't and then that fact will be accounted for.
In reality they just converge on the average of beliefs weighted by how confident a given actor is for a given belief and how much money they have to put behind the belief, and people are extremely imperfect, especially when it comes to predicting the outcomes of complex systems. Given this, there exist all sorts off "inefficiencies", or times when the current state of the market fails to accurately account for some underlying reality which leaves an exploitable opportunity to buy or sell a mispriced asset.