Trinity Exploration & Pr... Share Discussion Threads

[nafafa] 18/4/2024 23:57

Whilst the large shareholders may not be prepared to sell off cheap, it is they who may conspire to take it private and screw the small shareholders.

[nocents] 18/4/2024 17:48

I second that. When Trinity does rise, it goes into orbit. I have my Grinch -issues with management, but we have the security of the large holders and 5 NED’s who are not likely to see this sold off on the cheap. And the management and particularly the ceo, need to rebuild street-cred. The ceo should be removed if we get a poor update next week. Too many screw-ups.
But this price is not sustainable, especially with free cash flow as it is. And there is no reason why Buenos Ayres should not be drilled and producing in less than a year , as the Jacobin mess-up will have made them more cautious thank goodness. No debt. $74.2 actual received price atm. A few weeks below $73 should negate spt. It has been $76.5 in April.
When Trin dors rise, it won’t be sowly. There are few shares, and the buybacks made that more poignant.
I hope for news on intention to sell part or all of Galeota, and hope the ceo is not put off change because of his mighty regular salary. Time for Newlands et al to intervene. As will we.

[aqc888] 18/4/2024 16:03

Many cases where a share is cheap like this… and then it’s not.

[sleepy] 18/4/2024 13:48

Sad to say that in my experience when a share is cheap like this it is often a reflection of the markets view of management and board

[orbit007] 18/4/2024 12:55

On the last investor presentation in Dec 23, in the Q&A, it was stated that at that point, the next 6-9 months would be about rebuilding the balance sheet. The latest Cavendish broker note is forecasting a y/e cash position in excess of $10m USD. With the current market cap at £15m is it really correct that the valuation of the company is basically going to be closing in on net cash by year end? I think there is something drastically wrong about the valuation here, surely if they just ran down the assets and returned money to shareholders, sold off the offshore prospects in a multi bagger. Market can only be assuming the money made will be frittered away rather than being returned.

[pavey ark] 18/4/2024 11:28

The Investor Meet session will be tied to the date of the Q1 announcement.

Last year this announcement was on the 27Th so possibly a few days earlier this year.

Can't give a date for Investor Meet until all the figures are in for Q1.

[skyship] 18/4/2024 08:53

"The Company will hold a session for investors via the Investor Meet Company platform in the week commencing 22 April 2024, following the announcement of its Q1 Operational Update that week."

Went on to IM to register for the meeting - only to find it is not yet scheduled!

Can this outfit do anything right?

[nocents] 18/4/2024 08:41

Yes. Just a subjective unnecessary post by me.
N.B. I did highlight SPT reform, no hedging, dividend, future BA drilling , no debt, significant FCF, increase in cash by end 2024 etc. And that I would buy on that alone if I could. I’ll stick with that.

[aqc888] 18/4/2024 08:14

Nocents, pour a good few paragraphs of cold water over that rally that started yesterday. Otherwise there will be a greater risk of it continuing today! Then there’d be nothing to complain about - which would be a disaster!

[nafafa] 16/4/2024 23:26

The Jacobin cost over runs would have been more palatable had it actually delivered anything. Going forward; divest unexploited assets and pay special dividend with the proceeds then spend the next few years focused on base production and paying a decent dividend. It is not that difficult.

[andrewbyles] 16/4/2024 19:31

It’s a small consolation, but I note that Cavendish are still forecasting a 1.5p dividend for 2024 (expressed as 1.9 cents) and capex at the top end of expectations (which suggests Trinity are pushing ahead with Buenos Ayres - which I’m pleased about).

The realisation by Cavendish that Trinity requires funding to develop Galeota shouldn’t surprise anyone; the surprise is that Cavendish has only just noticed it. As long ago as the November presentation, which was attended by some of Cavendish’s people, Trinity was saying that they could only borrow about 60% of the $30 million or so Galeota development costs (when I heard that they were proposing to borrow that sort of money I immediately responded by telling them that sale or partial sale was the only viable option).

It’s possible that the reduction in reserves reduces the amount Trinity can borrow, making funding all that bit more difficult. However, I don’t think many shareholders are/were keen on Trinity going from a position of net cash to relatively high debt on a single project (especially after the Jacobin cost overruns, which act as a reminder that oil projects are difficult to price).

[nocents] 16/4/2024 12:32

I highlighted your last comment yesterday ( £3.47 ). Cavendish , fwiw, focused on lack of financing. There are possibilities, but I just think that JB is not proactive enough. Trin has become the lazy company of 2013 which I foolishly in vested in at £14.50 a share(!) Why bother rushing anything if you are taking home half a million a year in salary!
I am afraid I hypothetically expect more obfuscation next week but hope to be wrong.
My opinion is that Jeremy was deflecting from Galeota as a 2C reserve and referring to present drilled and producing assets. He is a number cruncher and not a man of leadership in my opinion.
I appreciate your post Ab. I would , if you are willing, like clarity on whether the relegation of tax losses will affect profit tax on its present bopd, hence present profit. Will it??

[andrewbyles] 16/4/2024 12:00

Were it not for the two rounds of substantial fiscal reform (onshore, then this year offshore), we’d be facing a very bleak future (although Jacobin might not have been drilled, but then the purpose of fiscal reform is to encourage drilling). Fiscal reform has added millions of dollars per year to Trinity’s bottom line (in part because its profit is largely protected from profit tax by the historic losses: for many operators the raising of the SPT limit will increase their profits, but half of that gain will then be taxed as profit tax).

I suspect Trinity’s historic losses will increase further this year. Galeota is valued at almost $30 million in the accounts and presumably that will be written down following yesterday’s news about reserves. Obviously, it will be a non-cash impairment and since there’s no debt (save for an overdraft that matches VAT refunds) no breach of covenants to worry about.

Most of Cavendish’s write down of Trinity’s asset value arises because it says the large tax losses (about $225 million) won’t now be fully utilised. I’ve been told that it may be possible to apply Galeota’s tax losses to the new Buenos Ayers licence by merging whichever subsidiary owns that licence with whichever subsidiary holds Galeota. If that happens and Buenos Ayers holds plenty of oil, the tax losses could easily be utilised and BA will be very valuable. However, I’m concerned by Jeremy’s comment yesterday that “all the Company's current growth scenarios are focused on exploiting the 2P reserves of 12.91mmbls”. Is this a hint that BA is being dropped (it has no 2P reserves; indeed the licence still hasn’t been formally awarded) or is just more of the sloppy communications that we’ve come to expect?

It’s worth remembering that if Trinity can find a way to fund exploitation of its assets, Cavendish’s valuation jumps to 347p.

[nocents] 16/4/2024 11:00

Ab
Would you be kind enough to share your analysis of the practical and potential consequences of the tax modification?

[strathroyal] 16/4/2024 10:11

Is there a bright side to all of this? Despite Nick Clayton being a poor communicator with us plebs, he has done a lot of reorganising since taking over from Bruce, including refreshing the board. The latest RNS is probably another nail in JB's coffin as he must be one of the few, if not the only, senior exec left from those days.

[nocents] 16/4/2024 09:52

This company has over 49% shareholder holdings by large holders. They have potential influence. But may just be sitting back. No idea.
Shareholders have a vote on any takeover. Going private? Not sure.
Be careful when sowing seeds of worry here. Shares can only “ disappear” if the company goes into liquidation/Admin.
It is not fair to worry people.
Hostile takeover ? Maybe, but there are procedures to be followed. The large shareholders don’t hold their shares without influence and will not accept a wipeout. Newlands owns over 10% and could call an EGM if wished.
Don’t sow seeds of worry. We have suffered enough.

[princebuster2] 16/4/2024 09:39

So your holding would just be wiped out??

[lexus880] 16/4/2024 09:06

My post I think the small guy is done for.

19 Mar '24 - 14:05 - 3630 of 3683

0 1 1
I am sad to say I think the writing has been on the wall for some time. This will be taken out for peanuts at the small shareholder's expense.

[princebuster2] 15/4/2024 22:44

What a ‘break up or outright sale’ mean for us shareholders???

[nafafa] 15/4/2024 21:49

Andrew, I apologise as I did not see your post 7143, I do try to keep up with what certain valued posters like yourself have to say, and no doubt I would have responded had I seen it.

[boystown] 15/4/2024 20:53

It may have been mismanaged, we may have lost a lot of trust, there may not be a good word to be said about everything - but nevertheless, <£14m is just crazy given the assets and earnings!?