+- ShareholdersUnite Forums (http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb)
+-- Forum: Companies (http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: InterOil Forum (http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Thread: A sober look at Keubiko.. (/showthread.php?tid=5696)
RE: A sober look at Keubiko.. - admin - 12-29-2013
'Petrovale' pid='35276' datel Wrote:STP, this "guy" is going to take you and your pig headed academic info sharing to the shed and screw your $110 and $87 targets 10 times over, all along the short targets. And so will JFT's dicking of dividends, stock splits and other pumperisms. Hence my suggestion to take the IOC public forum offline, so we can start doing some serious homework. Now, if you don't understand the above, you're either extremely naive or addicted to the penny-per-hit counts on your website. Who else would care about your damn hits? Most people care more about IOC's performance, short - medium - long term. I trust this clarifies what I was trying to say earlier on.
In that case I am naïve as I'm not following you here.
I made a very basic calculation in an SA article, that is, in the full public eye so I don't see what should be taken private and why.
Keubiko run ranshot over the article, exploiting a typo in the text that was completely immaterial, arguing I was off by a factor more than two times
Then he produces a calculation of his own in his own article and, based on the same P50 GLJ number, ends up only slightly below my figure.
Apparently I wasn't off by a factor more than 2x.. It was hardly off by anything, if you compare it to his own calculation..
That's all.
I don't know what your rant against me is supposed to achieve, or even where it comes from, but I would like to see how you react when they rape your article, and very much intentionally so, and then refuse to budge and keep on obfuscating the fact.
With his own calculation that's now plain for all to see, that guy is not to be trusted. He doesn't mind running circles around SA collegues. Yes, we already knew that, but sometimes it's actually useful to be able to demonstrate that beyond any reasonable doubt.
RE: A sober look at Keubiko.. - Palm - 12-30-2013
The article by "Keubiko" is really nothing more than a short "pump piece". Nothing new in it and it relies on maximum worst case conjecture. An opposite article written by a long would be called a "pump piece" by shorts. To say things like there is talk, etc of an IPI investor putting up a fuss is meaningless without supporting info; I can just as easily say (and I will) that that IPI investor has now been satisfied through some very creative means within the last couple of days per a source. What is either of our statements worth without valid publicly available support? Nada. Neither can be relied on until the matter is made public.
Other statements like "EA" is what Total is buying into are incorrect. It's all of PRL15, which in other places he mentions, but it's an important distinction as the Final Certification Payment (which isn't mentioned) is also part of the equation.
IMO this piece is as much about poking at longs as an irritation as anything. Really nothing new or very substantive in it.
It is interesting that there is now this call to "take SHU private", as that was my original proposal when I suggested a new forum. However some of those now supporting the idea were some of the ones most staunchly against it back then. Maybe a lesson learned but likely too late. What matters now is execution of the plan by IOC. Maybe we should just let it happen.
RE: A sober look at Keubiko.. - admin - 12-30-2013
Well, it's a surprising take on what I did in this thread. I only thing I did is that I showed Bonk doing a (really big and quite disgusting) number on my previous SHU article. In black and white.
If I understand Petro, I should have done that in private, but I really don't see why, and apart from throwing a few choice words in my direction, he hasn't really explained that very well either.
He's right in one sense though, he called me naive. And indeed I have been naive, for ever having considered Bonk for an inclusion here. That's now also in black and white. Mea Culpa.
Sometimes it's actually useful to have stuff in black and white, for all to see. So obviously, no, I don't think this should have been done in private, quite the opposite.
RE: A sober look at Keubiko.. - ebster123 - 12-30-2013
Palm, your post seems accurate. However, I do not believe it is too late to go private. There is a lot of solid factual information presented here. Information the average short would not know without connections. I agree that the wearing of our concerns on our posts is easy feeding for those who wish to bash. If it were private we could all be prepared in the event of a bashing without supplying the bashers with a resource for their frenzy.
RE: A sober look at Keubiko.. - Palm - 12-30-2013
'admin' pid='35292' dateline='<a href="tel:1388328 Wrote:Well, it's a surprising take on what I did in this thread. I only thing I did is that I showed Bonk doing a (really big and quite disgusting) number on my previous SHU article. In black and white. If I understand Petro, I should have done that in private, but I really don't see why, and apart from throwing a few choice words in my direction, he hasn't really explained that very well either. He's right in one sense though, he called me naive. And indeed I have been naive, for ever having considered Bonk for an inclusion here. That's now also in black and white. Mea Culpa. Sometimes it's actually useful to have stuff in black and white, for all to see. So obviously, no, I don't think this should have been done in private, quite the opposite.
He can speak for himself but it appears one of his main points is, the article appeared on SA, so respond there, not here. As for the "private" call it appears there's a sudden realization that it may not be the best to publicly air thoughts/ideas on personal investments. Novel idea.
RE: A sober look at Keubiko.. - admin - 12-30-2013
Petro is entitled to his opinions, but I don't need him to tell me where I can and cannot respond. In fact, I did respond there, but the response got rather lengthy and ran into the limitations of the SA editor software.
RE: A sober look at Keubiko.. - Bevo - 12-30-2013
Agree with taking SHU private, be glad to pay a few $'s to read information you guys can provide. My broker dealer doesn't follow IOC so this and occasional conversations with WA have been my best sources for info... Thanks
RE: A sober look at Keubiko.. - Palm - 12-30-2013
The only way "private" works is with a small group of people who have similar time horizons and expectations for their investments as well as investment mix. And they agree that "private" posts don't end up on public forums. Akin to an investment club but it allows people geographically separated to work together. To think SHU in part or whole could suddenly go private is a bit naive. It's been tried on a limited basis but no workie. Who gets admitted itself can't even be agreed on. It becomes its own monster very quickly. The result has been people form their own "private" groups outside of the forum and make the best of it. It is what it is, and isn't. You like it, you stay. You don't, whatever. You garner what you garner and if wise take little as gospel because the intentions of the poster are not completely known.
In the end the only thing that really matters is the execution by the company as we do not and cannot know enough of what REALLY is going on. So we guess and gossip and ???? and like to think we know it all. But we don't whether long or short or in between. At times both sides are right, but many times both are very wrong. That's investing. You just hope that overall you make good decisions as to how much you have dedicated to speculative stocks like this. These stocks are a gamble to a point; gamble wisely.
RE: A sober look at Keubiko.. - Thylacine-2 - 12-30-2013
(12-30-2013, 01:17 AM)Palm Wrote:
admin dateline='<a href="tel:1388328638">1388328638</a>' Wrote: Well, it's a surprising take on what I did in this thread. I only thing I did is that I showed Bonk doing a (really big and quite disgusting) number on my previous SHU article. In black and white. If I understand Petro, I should have done that in private, but I really don't see why, and apart from throwing a few choice words in my direction, he hasn't really explained that very well either. He's right in one sense though, he called me naive. And indeed I have been naive, for ever having considered Bonk for an inclusion here. That's now also in black and white. Mea Culpa. Sometimes it's actually useful to have stuff in black and white, for all to see. So obviously, no, I don't think this should have been done in private, quite the opposite.He can speak for himself but it appears one of his main points is, the article appeared on SA, so respond there, not here. As for the "private" call it appears there's a sudden realization that it may not be the best to publicly air thoughts/ideas on personal investments. Novel idea.
Publicly discussing IOC may have it's advantages in that we can publicly hold our BOD, management, and insiders to account when that needs doing.
For example, if there is an attempt to take the company private, it might be of some advantage to opponents of that move to have a good place to discuss it publicly.
In the medium to long run, and possibly even short term, I very much doubt if negativism expressed here, or on SA, will influence the sp one way or the other. And it seems likely there would be closet shorts on SHU after it was private, just as there is now. Taking the board private would not restrict access to the conversation by the shorts. It would only restrict access by the general public.
Informed public discussion, discussion at the level of that of Itinvest for example, can only make the market for IOC more efficient.
RE: A sober look at Keubiko.. - Bevo - 12-30-2013
Thanks for your insight, that's why I'm here!