Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
The real problem is the uncertainty over the size of the certification payment. These 3 new wells have no bearing on Elk/Antelope and that certification payment. Look closely at the CSFB report and their comments about the second half of 2015. That's when the size of Elk/Antelope is set and the payment generated. Either you believe in the Phil regime asset size talk, believe the GLJ reports,believe the The Knowledge Reservoir report, believe the former CEO of Marathon estimates. believe the Laurie Brown comments or not.
The over whelming evidence suggest Elk/Antelope has enough gas for a 2 train LNG plant. And that's exactly what the the analyst reports state.
Yes finding new assets outside PRL 15 is bullish but doesn't help with the size of the Total payment. Those new assets if found could yield a new deal for those assets in a new sell down. More reasons to be long Interoil and wait out the drill bit.
Posts: 6,851
Threads: 697
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
441
Posts: 12,025
Threads: 1,809
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
227
'sydbod' pid='50005' datel Wrote:
I worry that Nolan may well be correct here.
It is looking like the whole market may be turning downwards, not just IOC. OIL/GAS prices are looking very weak and significant new gas will be coming on line over the next year or so. Global economic activity looks to be winding down except for the USA.
I am seriously starting to think of decreasing my exposure to the stock market by at least 50%, and wait until things appear to be more stable, maybe by middle 2015. (IOC is only a small part of my holdings so please don't take what I say as just being targeted towards IOC)
Well, the funny thing is that if you go back into his previous messages he's always saying we're going lower. It's a curious thing for a long to say with such consistency, but perhaps he's onto a new investment philosophy..
Or perhaps my assumption that he's long is just that, an assumption..
Posts: 549
Threads: 16
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation:
119
Yes, E/A is substantially all of the firm value, based on certification. But the new managment and company has very little credibility at this point, therefore that future value is more heavily discounted. I won't list all the missed deadlines this year, but executing on any one builds credibility allowing the market to assign a higher present value to those payments. Current stock price relfects doubts/uncertainty as to ultimate size and timing. You can say al you want its worth $200, $300 or $400 but all we have is E/A right now and a mgmt team that has run into issues resolving IPI, and all three exploration wells. That and a weak tape and here we are. Not at the end of the qtr yet so still time on B or R but MH put himself in a corner here. Hopefully we don't run into those issue on cert wells. The new team hasn't realized that they need to replace Lucy as the ball holder.
Posts: 60
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2012
Wrong again admin. I am long but have sold over half my position. By the way, when I have stated we go lower, we have. My measuring stick is when the pumpers on this board increase their number of posts and consistently spin. Then I know we go down. Most of the spin, over 7 years now, has been wrong. Good gauge.
Posts: 12,025
Threads: 1,809
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
227
'Nolan' pid='50013' datel Wrote:Wrong again admin. I am long but have sold over half my position. By the way, when I have stated we go lower, we have. My measuring stick is when the pumpers on this board increase their number of posts and consistently spin. Then I know we go down. Most of the spin, over 7 years now, has been wrong. Good gauge.
How does that make me wrong? What I asked you is that if you see us going lower, you should sell, and now it turns out you did.
You're entitled to your opinions, no problem there, but as one who invariably states that we're going lower, you seem a curious long to me..
There are other definitions available for people who invariably see a stock going lower, now I think of it, and they even use some of the same language ("spin" "pumpers" etc.)
But perhaps that's just a coincidence.
Posts: 1,670
Threads: 49
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation:
91
'Nolan' pid='50013' datel Wrote:Wrong again admin. I am long but have sold over half my position. By the way, when I have stated we go lower, we have. My measuring stick is when the pumpers on this board increase their number of posts and consistently spin. Then I know we go down. Most of the spin, over 7 years now, has been wrong. Good gauge.
Nolan- Good point about"most of the spin". The baby is getting spanked pretty hard today. Hope MH has some" soothing cream" b/4 qtr. ends to put on our "red" behind ! Good luck.
Posts: 840
Threads: 40
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
181
09-26-2014, 03:24 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-26-2014, 03:42 AM by admin.)
imo, when the most people think we are going lower, that's where ioc will bottom
ironically, ioc today is trading pretty measured on a beta basis with its lng group, gtls, cbi, xop. In face its trading right along with them. Remember ioc is in a good amount of ets's and index funds, enough to affect noticeably in a thin mkt. Lastly, on a relative strength basis, ioc is leading the group last 6 mos along with cbi. They all act like they're being harassed by big shorts. We also are dealing with 3rd qtr EOQ, usually one that is sold into, especially with fiscal year endings starting end of Oct and Nov. There is a decent chance intermediate bottoms in the energy sector, unusually weak this quarter will come about around EOQ next week. I'll best guess that later in Oct, IOC will be higher again.....fwiw............trans
bottoms are made when most investors are selling....
Posts: 549
Threads: 16
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation:
119
excellent points Trans. Management deadlines aside, this is not a good day to judge IOC's stock performance. A lot of noise in the market and low volume in a number of names.
Posts: 2,505
Threads: 219
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
109
'steve3752' pid='49962' datel Wrote:
Relker: Are you a lawyer? You are giving a legal opinion which I believe is wrong.
IPI has rights created by contracts. These are private rights. The government of PNG cannot alter the terms of private contracts no more than the the U.S. government could.
I am not commenting on what those rights are. Just that the PNG government cannot take them away.
fI PNG will not allow OSH to develop A plant how can OSH even match the TOT after. I think preemptive right here means first refusal?
|
