Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
'Stavros' pid='31737' dateline='<a href="tel:1384429 Wrote:I suggest you state the obvious then "North Oil's prediction for IOC's PPS going forward is south if reality"
who knows, give me the deal details and my HP 12c can tell ya , today unknown
i value a 30 year oil and NG veteran .he knows way more than many on this board so he adds value,thus the post
you my friend know way more than almost everyone on this board.and he adds no value for you but this board has thousands of readers who know way less than you and North Oil .
or give me the metrics and I will give ya the price objective
NAV is not a Price objective
Posts: 1,598
Threads: 195
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
303
JFT: You ask the right question WHO KNOWS? .... Dr Michael Hession knows but he's not telling.
The Shorts always thought they knew the answer but now they know they don't .... AND they're worried.
What I said about North Oil is that he didn't state his basis. Pavel Molchanov has a $100 price target based on a $1 per mcf equivalent deal. His figure is based on the average Asia deal values for the past 5 years of $1.22 that included many irrelevant projects.
Pavel goes further and says he will re-state his views after the deal numbers are revealed ... possibly momentarily ... because he now knows his basis is too low.
People surmise the following if IOC selects XOM:
+ $400 Million up-front cash ( ie more than the syndicated loan amount of $250 Million)
+ 10%+ ownership of PNG LNG Trains 1-3; ca$h flow beginning 3Q 2014
+ Carry for the drilling of several additional dilineation wells
+ Large percentage ownership of the condensate produced in E/ A brings ca$h flow within 18 months
If IOC selects someone else you know for sure that the details had to trump XOM by a significant amount.
I come to a deal value of $2.50 per mcf at the minimum.
I also believe that after the number are known the PPS will reflect the deal value and not the artificial level being maintained by short sellers and the Market Makers of the world.
So we wait ... but this time no longer than 6 more weeks.
Drivel Maven with Personality
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
'Stavros' pid='31739' dateline='<a href="tel:1384434 Wrote:JFT: You ask the right question WHO KNOWS? .... Dr Michael Hession knows but he's not telling. The Shorts always thought they knew the answer but now they know they don't .... AND they're worried. What I said about North Oil is that he didn't state his basis. Pavel Molchanov has a $100 price target based on a $1 per mcf equivalent deal. His figure is based on the average Asia deal values for the past 5 years of $1.22 that included many irrelevant projects. Pavel goes further and says he will re-state his views after the deal numbers are revealed ... possibly momentarily ... because he now knows his basis is too low. People surmise the following if IOC selects XOM: + $400 Million up-front cash ( ie more than the syndicated loan amount of $250 Million) + 10%+ ownership of PNG LNG Trains 1-3; ca$h flow beginning 3Q 2014 + Carry for the drilling of several additional dilineation wells + Large percentage ownership of the condensate produced in E/ A brings ca$h flow within 18 months If IOC selects someone else you know for sure that the details had to trump XOM by a significant amount. I come to a deal value of $2.50 per mcf at the minimum. I also believe that after the number are known the PPS will reflect the deal value and not the artificial level being maintained by short sellers and the Market Makers of the world. So we wait ... but this time no longer than 6 more weeks.
GOD bless ya buddy. If you are right IOC would be worth $200 plus per share . To many moving parts today for a more specific value for me.
Posts: 1,080
Threads: 26
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
137
'Stavros' pid='31739' datel Wrote:JFT: You ask the right question WHO KNOWS? .... Dr Michael Hession knows but he's not telling. The Shorts always thought they knew the answer but now they know they don't .... AND they're worried. What I said about North Oil is that he didn't state his basis. Pavel Molchanov has a $100 price target based on a $1 per mcf equivalent deal. His figure is based on the average Asia deal values for the past 5 years of $1.22 that included many irrelevant projects. Pavel goes further and says he will re-state his views after the deal numbers are revealed ... possibly momentarily ... because he now knows his basis is too low. People surmise the following if IOC selects XOM: + $400 Million up-front cash ( ie more than the syndicated loan amount of $250 Million) + 10%+ ownership of PNG LNG Trains 1-3; ca$h flow beginning 3Q 2014 + Carry for the drilling of several additional dilineation wells + Large percentage ownership of the condensate produced in E/ A brings ca$h flow within 18 months If IOC selects someone else you know for sure that the details had to trump XOM by a significant amount. I come to a deal value of $2.50 per mcf at the minimum. I also believe that after the number are known the PPS will reflect the deal value and not the artificial level being maintained by short sellers and the Market Makers of the world. So we wait ... but this time no longer than 6 more weeks.
Briefly, the surmise of the condensate is a significate item. Think string when you look at the upcomming drilling. A thin layer at E/A to a stack at Triceritops.
On the ground, there is already a vetical infrastructure for condensate in region.
Above ground...experience,knowledge and appetite.
So... when the dinner bell rings, recall the words spoken prior to taking you seat at the table.
"Robust returns" And that my friends, is straight from the Tigers mouth.
Cheers for you all.
![<img src=]( "Cool") " border="0" class="smilie" src="images/smilies/cool.gif" />
Posts: 1,670
Threads: 49
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation:
91
'Tusker' pid='31741' datel Wrote:
'Stavros' pid='31739' datel Wrote:JFT: You ask the right question WHO KNOWS? .... Dr Michael Hession knows but he's not telling. The Shorts always thought they knew the answer but now they know they don't .... AND they're worried. What I said about North Oil is that he didn't state his basis. Pavel Molchanov has a $100 price target based on a $1 per mcf equivalent deal. His figure is based on the average Asia deal values for the past 5 years of $1.22 that included many irrelevant projects. Pavel goes further and says he will re-state his views after the deal numbers are revealed ... possibly momentarily ... because he now knows his basis is too low. People surmise the following if IOC selects XOM: + $400 Million up-front cash ( ie more than the syndicated loan amount of $250 Million) + 10%+ ownership of PNG LNG Trains 1-3; ca$h flow beginning 3Q 2014 + Carry for the drilling of several additional dilineation wells + Large percentage ownership of the condensate produced in E/ A brings ca$h flow within 18 months If IOC selects someone else you know for sure that the details had to trump XOM by a significant amount. I come to a deal value of $2.50 per mcf at the minimum. I also believe that after the number are known the PPS will reflect the deal value and not the artificial level being maintained by short sellers and the Market Makers of the world. So we wait ... but this time no longer than 6 more weeks.
Briefly, the surmise of the condensate is a significate item. Think string when you look at the upcomming drilling. A thin layer at E/A to a stack at Triceritops.
On the ground, there is already a vetical infrastructure for condensate in region.
Above ground...experience,knowledge and appetite.
So... when the dinner bell rings, recall the words spoken prior to taking you seat at the table.
"Robust returns" And that my friends, is straight from the Tigers mouth.
Cheers for you all.
![<img src=]( "Cool") " border="0" class="smilie" src="images/smilies/cool.gif" />
Tusker-Thank you and Stavros for your comments.When all my (many) grankids gather 'round me and ask" Papua(for poppa), how many BMW's will the condensates from Tricera and E/A buy us in the future", I simply answer " I don't know 'cause their ain't enough zeros in my quiver". PS....I love the word ' condensates'.
Posts: 154
Threads: 7
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation:
45
There is no “basis” for any price prediction at this point. We don’t know the deal. Even when it’s announced, we won’t know the important details. Analysts who say the stock is worth $200 or $400 are full of it (but not necessarily wrong).
To predict a price, you have to make a host of assumptions. There are widely variable issues: costs (XOM say they’re going to be huge overruns), sales contracts with end buyers to be negotiated, future taxes – down the road, poor governments can and do impose higher tax regimes on supposedly sacrosanct terms. And, OMG, LNG pricing. LNG contracts are typically priced in currency and spot energy baskets. Prices you see today might not be the prices we get in the future. Personally I think the LNG market is headed for trouble. Yes, the whole Far East needs more energy, but there’re enormous untapped gas supplies in the world. Qatar alone has 1500 TCF. Siberia has limitless gas to backdoor into China. Australia, the US, etc., have large projects with plenty of supply upside.
So many uncertain elements mean risk, which means a discounted stock price. I was asked for a price prediction, so I gave it. I fully admit it’s blue sky. Note my last sentence: “I disclaim all of it”. That said, I based my prediction, not on applying mathematical precision to the unknowable future, but on 50+ years of investing. I simply think IOC will move up in tranches as uncertainty is removed. Hession’s CC exposed the essence of what will happen in a very credible way. The stock has reacted wonderfully. But you have to ask yourself: how much of the deal is priced in at this point? Transformational or not, trees don’t grow to the sky.
P.S. While there’s a large overlap of the world of shallow idiots and the world of Yahoo posters, don’t assume it’s 100%
Posts: 6,851
Threads: 697
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
441
Yet MS and other IBs do have much info to firm a basis for price targets. They know much more than we do and Calio coming out yesterday with his analysis and targets has merit. Again though this is based on execution at EA and highly risked Tri and others. His update yesterday is very good to read in its entirety.
Posts: 12,025
Threads: 1,809
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
227
["There is no “basis” for any price prediction at this point."]
Admitting that it isn't exact science and that risk exist, but there is a basis for valuation:
- Resource (E/A) metrics
- Comparable deal valuations
I believe that E/A falls within the top of the resource category (based on well data, independent reports, CEO comment) so something of a premium to the average deal metric in the region, provided by RJ (in the order of $1/mcf, if I'm not mistaken) is warranted.
Further cemented by the fact that one of the bidding parties is Exxon, who, by virtue of having already almost completed complementary assets, would be able to monetize E/A gas at a significant discount to others.
["I was asked for a price prediction, so I gave it."]
By whom? This seems to be your first post.
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
Some are paid to make stock price projections vs others that do their own work . Part of the problem here is definition. A price target is not NAV. That's confusing to some.
Morgan stated recently with their asumptiond that IOC was worth $105 with a deal using their guesses , their NAV in a different report was $225 . Yes there is a difference
Westlake stated an NAV of $225 with a price objective of $115 when they were revealing that work .
Macquarie first research report had an NAV over $200 a share and price objective around $100
Others will enter the party with their work . I expect a Goldman research report.
All the research houses will get another run at these numbers when the deals announced and I expect some reports to be book reports
One of the heavy unknowns is what will the shorts do and when. It's fair to say major pain for them last week . If part of last weeks rise was short covering then we have many more shorts to cover. Or what percentage of the shorts covered last week and will some be required to cover next week . I am in that camp that some shorts will be forced to cover Monday and more believers will enter the IOC arena.
The markets in my 50 years of experience anticipate and over shoot in both directions. IOC has more upside from here but exactly what's fair in price requires input variables which are missing today. I wait and marvel at last week . Look at what the markets did to Tesla and more recently to Twitter. IOC has more profit potential than either stock in the next few years than both put together. I base that on a third train at Exxon and condensate production. Both very reasonable assumptions.
Others can take their own stab at what the deal terms look like.
Posts: 12,025
Threads: 1,809
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
227
Yes, JFT, I have to agree with that.
But we forget another interesting possibility. Ok, agreed, they're based on two "what if's"
- Exxon the bid winner
- IOC will get equity in their existing LNG plant
That would mean cash flow coming sooner rather than later (as soon as next year). Now, the second issue is the biggest 'what if.' But even if the first one holds, and Exxon is the winner, IOC could get equity in the third train (remember, Hession changed things when he came on board...).
That as well means cash flows sooner rather than later, as an additional train, apart from being cheaper, can also be build faster. Cash flow in two, rather than four or five years.
|
