Pretty clear RayJ will increase $100 tgt as soon as deal is inked....

[Dmarque]

Pavel was right. Those of us longs who invested funds after Antelope 2 was tested would generally have been better off putting our money in index funds. But then, the right time to invest in this stock since Antelope 2 has always seemed to be now. Can we agree if anyone takes Pavel's recommendation today planning on a 25% return in the next 12 months would be investing his money wisely?

Nobody would dispute that.....AND that is why the advice is worthless.  It is so friggen obvious~!  An Analyst is supposed to be able to make those assumptions on his own.

HISTORY:  
When Wayne Andrews first recommended Ultra Petroleum the stock was under $5/share.  Upon completing his analysis his target was $100.  A year later theUltra was trading for $100.  Shortly thereafter he made the same discovery of InterOil.  Instead of writing a report on IOC he tendered his resignation and bought all the IOC he could get his hands on (At less than $2/share).  That is conviction~!

Pavel has no b@lls~!  His targets are merely calculations of what will not undermine his position with his company in the event that his is wrong.  If he was good he'd make those assumptions.....I don't see the value in declaring a target of $100 for IOC when we all know that the company is significantly worth more than that even without the HARD WRITTEN deal consumation.  THAT is just what he should sharpen his pencil enough to determine if he is going to take the role of an analyst.  He's a beaurocrat~!  More intent on keeping his job than serving those who read his reports.  We certainly have enough cowards in Washington and clearly we have them on WS as well.

Just to be clear! I was talking with WA a couple of days before he left RJ and IOC WAS at 12$/sh. This was right after the 2008/9 crash.

So the gist of what i was saying is wrong because his entry price was $9-12 and not $2?   Come on......

Bottome line is that Wayne knew a highly under-valued property when he saw it and was willing to risk security of a well paid position to take advantage of his assumptions.    He left a cozy career as a well paid analyst at RJ to bank on his calculations of the assets of IOC and invest in it.  He was precluded from doing so while employed as an O&G Analyst at RJ.  Compare the risk he took to the risk that Pavel takes in having a chicken target of $100.  Who had the greater skill and made use of those skills??

[jft310]

Fair to say WA was a senior analyst and was more aggressive with his price targets. But the industry has changed since WA left RJ.
Think the 2007-2010 melt time.
Pavel might have stronger sentiments but is prevented from putting them out by his compliance dept. The roost these days is ruled by compliance. This is something we will not get discovery on.

[admin]

As it happens, I don't think Pavel has done anything to be ashamed off. His cautious stance up until now has been quite on the mark, and his price target is simply based on NAV calculations that takes a de-facto P1 level and multiplies it with a price average for deals in the region.

Personally I think the latter is a little too conservative, as E/A isn't just your garden variety resource, but gives him room for increase when deal metrics become known.

[Dmarque]

As it happens, I don't think Pavel has done anything to be ashamed off. His cautious stance up until now has been quite on the mark, and his price target is simply based on NAV calculations that takes a de-facto P1 level and multiplies it with a price average for deals in the region. Personally I think the latter is a little too conservative, as E/A isn't just your garden variety resource, but gives him room for increase when deal metrics become known.

That's just the point isn't it?  He hasn't done anything to be ashamed of.......That is what playing it too close to the vest is all about.....TO NOT FAIL. However,  behavior like that results in providing minimal information that does us no real service.  Reminds me alot of a Prevent Defense.   If you keep playing that way then in the long run you get nowhere because you're not playing to win .....you just keep playin' to not lose.  The confident and agressive team pulls ahead of the meek team playing to not lose.

Sorry......I dont see the value in doing work that is merely......"Nothing to be ashamed of".   I prefer those who do the fine detail work and come to a  REAL conclusion and are sure enough about their work to stand behind it and make a real and useful prediction.

[katytrader]

As it happens, I don't think Pavel has done anything to be ashamed off. His cautious stance up until now has been quite on the mark, and his price target is simply based on NAV calculations that takes a de-facto P1 level and multiplies it with a price average for deals in the region. Personally I think the latter is a little too conservative, as E/A isn't just your garden variety resource, but gives him room for increase when deal metrics become known.

That's just the point isn't it?  He hasn't done anything to be ashamed of.......That is what playing it too close to the vest is all about.....TO NOT FAIL. However,  behavior like that results in providing minimal information that does us no real service.  Reminds me alot of a Prevent Defense.   If you keep playing that way then in the long run you get nowhere because you're not playing to win .....you just keep playin' to not lose.  The confident and agressive team pulls ahead of the meek team playing to not lose.

Sorry......I dont see the value in doing work that is merely......"Nothing to be ashamed of".   I prefer those who do the fine detail work and come to a  REAL conclusion and are sure enough about their work to stand behind it and make a real and useful prediction.

Well, sorry, I think admin has it about right.  I am at an age and stage of life where I want to know what the low figure is and what is the reasoning.  Pavel gave it quite clearly.  Confident and aggressive?  Buy calls.  Preferring to not lose?  Sell otm puts.  I have been quite happy with the latter for some two years running.  You might want to dig up G. Allison's classic work on Groupthink to better understand how the outlyer aids analysis.

[ArtM72]

As it happens, I don't think Pavel has done anything to be ashamed off. His cautious stance up until now has been quite on the mark, and his price target is simply based on NAV calculations that takes a de-facto P1 level and multiplies it with a price average for deals in the region. Personally I think the latter is a little too conservative, as E/A isn't just your garden variety resource, but gives him room for increase when deal metrics become known.

That's just the point isn't it?  He hasn't done anything to be ashamed of.......That is what playing it too close to the vest is all about.....TO NOT FAIL. However,  behavior like that results in providing minimal information that does us no real service.  Reminds me alot of a Prevent Defense.   If you keep playing that way then in the long run you get nowhere because you're not playing to win .....you just keep playin' to not lose.  The confident and agressive team pulls ahead of the meek team playing to not lose.

Sorry......I dont see the value in doing work that is merely......"Nothing to be ashamed of".   I prefer those who do the fine detail work and come to a  REAL conclusion and are sure enough about their work to stand behind it and make a real and useful prediction.

The "prevent defense" sets you up to lose.  Simple.  The basketball analogy is the "four corners offense" where you hold the ball and pass it around the four corners until it gets intercepted and the other team takes it in to score.  DePaul back in the late 70s ran the 4 corner offense.  They had three players destined for the NBA, Cummings, McGuire and Bradshaw.  Two of them went to the NBA Hall of Fame.  They were close to undefeated but DePaul didn't even make it to the Sweet 16 because of the "four corners offense."  Had a big lead at the end and started passing it around.

You're right.  If you want something inside the box, hire a mortician.

[jft310]

As it happens, I don't think Pavel has done anything to be ashamed off. His cautious stance up until now has been quite on the mark, and his price target is simply based on NAV calculations that takes a de-facto P1 level and multiplies it with a price average for deals in the region. Personally I think the latter is a little too conservative, as E/A isn't just your garden variety resource, but gives him room for increase when deal metrics become known.

That's just the point isn't it?  He hasn't done anything to be ashamed of.......That is what playing it too close to the vest is all about.....TO NOT FAIL. However,  behavior like that results in providing minimal information that does us no real service.  Reminds me alot of a Prevent Defense.   If you keep playing that way then in the long run you get nowhere because you're not playing to win .....you just keep playin' to not lose.  The confident and agressive team pulls ahead of the meek team playing to not lose.

Sorry......I dont see the value in doing work that is merely......"Nothing to be ashamed of".   I prefer those who do the fine detail work and come to a  REAL conclusion and are sure enough about their work to stand behind it and make a real and useful prediction.

Well, sorry, I think admin has it about right.  I am at an age and stage of life where I want to know what the low figure is and what is the reasoning.  Pavel gave it quite clearly.  Confident and aggressive?  Buy calls.  Preferring to not lose?  Sell otm puts.  I have been quite happy with the latter for some two years running.  You might want to dig up G. Allison's classic work on Groupthink to better understand how the outlyer aids analysis.

Some of the research houses have stepped up.

Morgan told us $235 before hired as an IB , NAV estimate

Westlake told us $215 NAV

Macquarie was in the same range before hiring as an IBer

The IOC big research guns were quieted when hired as an IB to do the deal. That's the compliance dept at work. They are in control.Meant to protect investors and themselves.

[TomCrooz]

Pavel was right. Those of us longs who invested funds after Antelope 2 was tested would generally have been better off putting our money in index funds. But then, the right time to invest in this stock since Antelope 2 has always seemed to be now. Can we agree if anyone takes Pavel's recommendation today planning on a 25% return in the next 12 months would be investing his money wisely?

Nobody would dispute that.....AND that is why the advice is worthless.  It is so friggen obvious~!  An Analyst is supposed to be able to make those assumptions on his own.

HISTORY:  
When Wayne Andrews first recommended Ultra Petroleum the stock was under $5/share.  Upon completing his analysis his target was $100.  A year later theUltra was trading for $100.  Shortly thereafter he made the same discovery of InterOil.  Instead of writing a report on IOC he tendered his resignation and bought all the IOC he could get his hands on (At less than $2/share).  That is conviction~!

Pavel has no b@lls~!  His targets are merely calculations of what will not undermine his position with his company in the event that his is wrong.  If he was good he'd make those assumptions.....I don't see the value in declaring a target of $100 for IOC when we all know that the company is significantly worth more than that even without the HARD WRITTEN deal consumation.  THAT is just what he should sharpen his pencil enough to determine if he is going to take the role of an analyst.  He's a beaurocrat~!  More intent on keeping his job than serving those who read his reports.  We certainly have enough cowards in Washington and clearly we have them on WS as well.

Just to be clear! I was talking with WA a couple of days before he left RJ and IOC WAS at 12$/sh. This was right after the 2008/9 crash.

So the gist of what i was saying is wrong because his entry price was $9-12 and not $2?   Come on......

Bottome line is that Wayne knew a highly under-valued property when he saw it and was willing to risk security of a well paid position to take advantage of his assumptions.    He left a cozy career as a well paid analyst at RJ to bank on his calculations of the assets of IOC and invest in it.  He was precluded from doing so while employed as an O&G Analyst at RJ.  Compare the risk he took to the risk that Pavel takes in having a chicken target of $100.  Who had the greater skill and made use of those skills??

Many at the time Wayne left RJ saw it as a negative....a conflict of interest that somehow may have clouded his IOC research notes/opinions to RJ clients.  I always felt  that leaving a nice job at RJ and taking a significant cut in pay to instead get IOC stock options was a major vote of confidence in IOC.  It was very soothing to me as an IOC shareholder.  With Wayne also being a geologist, I thought he must have really seen something special to hop a plane to PNG.  I also talked with Wayne many times before he left RJ.  When the stock was mid 20's, I think his 1 yr target price was a ridiculous $75.  Off the record, he was talking $300-$500 5 yrs out ( this was 2007).   Hasn't done that in the hoped for timeframe, but just maybe.....

[admin]

["Many at the time Wayne left RJ saw it as a negative....a conflict of interest that somehow may have clouded his IOC research notes/opinions to RJ clients."]

That argument suffers from time-inconsistency. He was at RJ BEFORE he joined IOC. Unless you assume he wrote these research reports at RJ as an open solicitation letter, the argument really is nonsense.