||ORD NPV (DI)
||EPS - Basic
||Market Cap (m)
|Oil & Gas Producers
Tlou Energy Share Discussion Threads
Showing 1901 to 1918 of 1925 messages
|Pretty relentless 4 month slide now.
1) TLOU need to BAN any more podcasts - all they do is accelerate a sell off every single time. The FD was poor but CEO no better on hat last one with his @sell up and buy in June" message
2) GE 3 month extension is due up very soon so let's have a RNS update on what's going on there.
3) Interims due in about 6 weeks. If we can SOMEHOW stay above 6p in the meantime then thats an opportunity for a full general update.
4) Commit this firmly to long term bucket and hope for a return in a year or so.|
|Aka an NDA|
|sdavis of course they would but they can sign a document of confidentiality.
It isn't that nobody knows except the BoD but it is not knowledge for the public domain and I as such understand this.|
|Just take a second and think!Any institutional investment would be preceeded by due diligence. They would have to disclose known flow rates!!|
|Effiert just use the filter button simple. You're obviously worried when you have to use that tone.|
|Sorry wheniamfree, but I do not agree.
My thoughts are in line with what the analysts had covered about matching the flow rates (circa 32.5 boe/day) that they had used in the modelling. The analyst has stated that lesser flow rates may well be commercial but could result in being financially challenging for the project.
After such a long period they have not indicated what the flow rates are and while they may be commercial, they may not be sufficiently high enough to even match the analysts model and as such are hopefully waiting to see if they improve and is my thinking on why they are silent about these. No one despite all the times they have been wheeled out in podcasts have asked if flow rates have exceeded or are short of that model whether they give a specific flow rate number or not.
What's the point of doing multiple podcasts hoping to bolster investment when new funding is on the horizon if you can't give reliable guidance. My concern is that the flow rates could be still too low and they are reluctant to divulge them at a time when more funding is needed and they want those funds at the best possible price. If flow rates were known to be mediocre that imo would damage investor sentiment. I say that in tandem to the fact that they were only able to book 450,000 boe much short of the analysts circa 3.3 mmboe reserves expectation - so if the flow rates are poor that could be why there is such a big difference in reserves booked in comparison to analysts guidance and perhaps also why they had to push the co-operation agreement out to the end of February from last November.|
"How do you know GE and IKH are working hard ?"
It's been announced via podcast multiple times and is the reason why the contracts are kept short to only 3 months, if they weren't playing ball one could assume tlou would move to a another interested party also announced on the podcast. Unless of course they are lying?
"I see this as being in its infancy until TLOU can demonstrate to the Gov that any plan they produce is actually viable"
Hence why the FDP is being finalised prior to submission for the government to review. If the plan isn't economical or viable I doubt tlou would run with it if it's only going to cost them money with no financial gain.|
|Zengas, of course it does make sense.
Let us assume tlou announce flow rates to investors via an RNS and flow rates are stable at X one could calculate this number results in only a specific number of wells for 10MW. That information is now in the public domain not only for a competitor to undercut the price but also for the government to see. By releasing this information via an RNS it is public.
Now for capex, drilling costs $Y per well and a total of $Z for infrastructure/overheads.
If tlou submit their tender to government to supply 10MW at $15 per unit it would be very simple for the government to breakdown costings and profitablity by carrying out very simple maths.
If the flow rates are X and they can assume only 5 wells are needed as opposed to 20 then this affects the overall cost and profitability of the entire project.
(5x $Y)+ $Z
(20x $Y) + $Z
By your own admission you already understand this fact.
If the government realise only 5 wells are needed and tlou are tendering a cost at the equivalent of 20 wells to make 10% profit that gives you a huge basis to negotiate the price down. Keep it quiet and you control the play. Make it fair and the government get a good deal whilst tlou gets a great one. I shouldn't really have to explain this concept on here, surely?|
|WimFree - everything you've said above comes across as though it's all entirely factual (which it definitely isn't), as though you have some sort of inside knowledge (which you probably don't) and is, despite your turn of phrase, actually just your own personal opinion.
I find it deliberately over-optimistic & somewhat mis-leading.
I doubt any other Posters here are being hostile towards you or anybody else, more likely presenting their own opinions, based on their own research.
How do you know the other Party has done no ground work - who are they ?
How do you know GE and IKH are working hard ?
It is a mistake to assume all of this, e.g. TLOU's vision & proposal will amount to everything/anything... it may not, particularly if the Gas isn't there, the Flow Rates aren't there, or it's not economically viable to get it out.
It's incorrect to state the Project can only be based on past performance of a few of the People/Leaders involved with entirely different Projects that took place elsewhere... it could be correct to assess this Project on everything that is known about it currently... which is not a lot.
I would also question how nothing more than a Vision, no Partners, only 1% of required Reserves confirmed and no Flow Rates constitutes being at an "advanced stage"... I see this as being in its infancy until TLOU can demonstrate to the Gov that any Plan they produce is actually viable... I could knock up some fancy Images & Presentation material in a couple of days and say "Look, a Project worth £xxx million, in theory, based on several un-validated assumptions".
I totally agree there is massive potential for Reward, all of which is (IMO) based on equally massive Risks. I certainly see an opportunity on the horizon to take a punt at well below 4.5p/share between now and July, which may reap 'dividends' in the event that TLOU provide a robust & feasible response to the Gov in the Summer.
Good Luck to one & all|
Re the flow rates and not making commercial sense to submit these to tender.
I have never suggested flow rates be submitted to tender - what i have said is that investors need to know. There is no reason to keep them quiet.
The important point is - It only takes one specific amount of gas to supply a 10 MW contract. The flowrates have no bearing on this. For the example 10MW you supply one specific amount of boe.
Whether it comes from 5 wells or 20 wells is the question for investors not the government. The government will only need to know can they feasibly and reliably supply gas to fulfil any contract.
The company has already publically said it expects $10m - $15m in revenues from that 10 MW and again in the modelling used by the analysts - so therefore we know what the boe (mcf) price range is that they hope to get ie $60 - $90/boe.
To suggest keeping flow rates secret as some sort of commercial advantage doesn't make any kind of sense.|
|if only the share price could show signs of life|
|Fair bit of hostility of late. Anyway - Zengas your approach is fine, like any investment we each have our own approach to risk. Many will only invest on a sure thing and reap smaller rewards and others take bigger risks and get in earlier.
The flow rates will only be known later, as I previously stated it would not make commercial sense to submit these to tender. The government ultimately wish to know what the disruption will be, how long it will take and what it will cost them. Anything out of those realms in terms of flows, costs and financing is of no concern and will fall back on to tlou and/or their partners should they tie up. The FDP will allow the government a comparable rate and risk against both of the companies submitting the tender and whilst tlou may submit a slightly increased cost there could be basis for negotiation. Of course, the tender is binding and since the other party has done little to no ground work a submission at this stage may involve them giving a timeline on when they hope to achieve their goals. Without the EIS they are already at best two years behind. With that in mind, how they hope to achieve a figure without simply plucking one out the air is beyond me which is why I don't believe they will submit anything.
In regards the concerns, as we know GE and IKH are working hard with tlou and have been for some time. To assume neither know nothing of at least part of the flow rates when they have both been asked to complete work and are in a cooperation agreement would be crazy. GE are being requested to submit plant ideas and will need to know the economics and fundamentals of what gas is available and at what rates to give any idea on what to work with. With that in mind, IKH only recently invested a large chunk to take a 3% stake in tlou and have yet to relinquish a single share. Let's not make the mistake to think all this is happening for nothing. There is a lot going on here behind the scenes that the government and certainly the markets are not privvy to.
You can at this stage only base the project on past performances. When you look at those in charge, the level of commitment and financial risk they themselves have put forward and consider their previous roles and positions before nurturing minnows in to whales you can only assume that the same is happening here. Any business man knows when to cut their losses. They would not be at this advanced stage if they didn't believe this was one to move forward.
Nobody is advising you to invest, i for one am aware of the risks but at this stage and with the work completed to date the rewards far outweigh those that remain.
|"We model flow rates in line with the previous demonstrated rate of 196 mcfpd"
(equal to 32.5 boe/day per well).
"however, management is confident that much higher rates are achievable".
"We currently model US$15/mcf for the initial pilot development falling to US$10/mcf for a larger scale project"
(equal to $90/boe falling to $60/boe).
"If flow rates, however, disappoint and produce at less than the previous achieved rate, the Lesedi project, while still likely to be economic, will be challenged by higher operational and financial risks".
When they get flow rates into the public domain and sort out their cash position, i'll decide whether to buy or not. Surely if there's as much success or upside as Sunshine Gas or Arrow Energy there's no rush to buy as you don't need to risk buying at the absolute lows or selling at the ultimate high as you can still make multiples as it derisks.|
|errr that was way before i got the heads up on your previous form and i started reading your posting history!!
I would rather ask Mr Bean for his advise!!|
|In November 2015 the broker coverage for investors was 'we estimate initial booked reserves could be in the region of 20Bcf' (3.3 mmboe).
In the 12 months since - they booked just 450,000 boe P2.
They also expected some production - so on both fronts investors relying on broker coverage will be disappointed and especially the reserves at just a fraction of what the estimate would be and especially as capital runs low as pointed out in my previous post.
As for flow rates never being released - The danger in releasing/not mentioning flow rates is that it actually frightens investors if they are too low for the amount of testing time to date. That also makes investors take note of what additional wells will then be drilled and how long before they can actually build further meaningful production rates and additional reserves (another year ?).
If they were good to exceptional, I would have expected them to shout them from the rooftops to support and push the share price higher. This is why I have always found CBM to be exceptionally slow.
Also as for not releasing well flow (and it's probably imo that they are still quite small) - It's nothing imo to do at all with gas prices and giving the game away to the government. You can't keep data secret from the ministry of mines, energy and water. Usually all well data has to be fed back to that department in line with the terms of it's licence and anyway the government will see that at the project development, planning and feasibility stage (page 11 current presentation).|
|It's a question of trust
Are the BOD trustworthy and have a good track record?
Would appreciate some feedback|
|I personally believe the Gov is calling TLOU's bluff by setting a firm date by which they need to provide a detailed & robust response to the invitation to tender.
Anybody can see that TLOU simply regurgitated 2 sets of old, unsubstantiated, hopeful, potential Reserve figures last year and 1 set of new figures that simply said "there's about 1% of what's really needed actually confirmed", in roundabout terms. There were also NO Flow Rate figures, which actually says "we can't really get the 1% out particularly well or cost effectively", in roundabout terms.
Knowing what I do know about ITTs, TLOU have either got to "come up with the Goods", with extremely viable Facts & Figures from all perspectives, or stop pretending they've got something that may not actually exist at all(?).
Can see this dropping back down to 3.5p by late April, pending the Business producing it's response, or not(?).
Then it might fly sky-high like a Rocket, should a credible response be offered-up.|
|With no timeline other than the last RNS, the company has in effect said that we may as well sell up and come back later in the year. No wonder the share price is in decline.|