Serica Energy Share Discussion Threads

[orchestralis] 25/4/2024 15:48

Is this the share buyback pushing up the price?

[undervaluedassets] 25/4/2024 10:58

I dunno... my thinking here is simple.. This floated at a £1 in 2005 (hugely speculative and arguably overvalued then)

It is now £2 having turned itself into a serious oil and gas producer .. and given extraordinary growth to date, it is now, IMHO hugely undervalued.

That is my simple take on everything.

I watched the results presentation and it is clearly management's intention to keep growing

meanwhile, we have a near 12% yield to enjoy.

Price should be a multiple of what it is. And I think investors will work this one out.

[nigelpm] 25/4/2024 10:22

It's not easy to make it comparable - that's the issue.

If you go Net cash to Net cash that's also not sensible given the uplift to reserves/cash flow

It would have been far better to have put all Tailwind related cash flows separately but I guess that would have been messy.

In summary would have been no harm in showing it but being clear about it.

[oilinvestoral] 25/4/2024 09:06

"I can understand the rationale"-----The obvious rationale is window dressing as it makes the figures seem much better

[oilinvestoral] 25/4/2024 09:05

"The difference is tailwind's debt."-----BINGO! And therein lies the quarter of a billion dollar problem !

[croasdalelfc] 25/4/2024 07:23

A decent buy back amount - let's hope it continues - I calculate 1.8% could be bought back at an average of 200p

[nigelpm] 24/4/2024 23:29

I would have preferred if they've shown net to net cash and put all the tailwind related stuff in a box as part of the bridge. That's how I'd have done it but I can understand the rationale for gross to gross given the debt taken on provided a large uptick in reserves etc...

[nigelpm] 24/4/2024 23:03

The difference is tailwind's debt. Every moment otherwise is listed out in the bridge.

[oilinvestoral] 24/4/2024 22:25

I knew you couldn't help yourself and would've chirped in again! You're Back filtered ! I could literally write that the sky is blue and you would disagree with me ! Since you disagree with everything I write why don't you just filter my posts and leave me be!

[nigelpm] 24/4/2024 22:02

My point is net cash 1 year ago at the end of 2022: £432.5 million!

There's a helpful bridge in the IMC meeting to explain the movement since.

[creditcrunchies] 24/4/2024 21:20

I'm always critical when they deserve it my investments are anywhere from 35k worth upwards mainly in SIPPS. This company needs to protect itself from more than commodity prices they need to protect themselves from self destructive politicians that are hell bent on destroying the UK. They hit the nail on the head with their comments in the RNS the short term tax raid will destroy jobs, will create massive trade imbalances, take away UK national security, leave the UK population open to spiking energy swings as they import more energy from anywhere they can get it and long term lose tax revenue as the north sea industry shuts down

[oilinvestoral] 24/4/2024 20:55

I'll reduce my posts here as there is no debating with some people. If SQZ literally posted management have been fraudulent (not saying they are), some people would still fully support them! It's a share not a football team! You are allowed to be critical of management! It's not illegal

[oilinvestoral] 24/4/2024 20:52

My point is net cash 1 year ago at the end of 2022: £432.5 million! Wonder if one of the accountants can get the abacus out and calculate how much it would've been without taking on over a quarter of billion dollars of private equity debt ! That's why I was surprised at the question posed

[stemis] 24/4/2024 20:02

Serica are net cash as well aren't they?

Yes, £78m.

Also worth bearing in mind, when looking at graphs of share price performance, that since the 'offer' by KIST, SQZ have paid 31p in dividends whilst KIST have paid...nothing.

[oilinvestoral] 24/4/2024 19:41

“Serica are net cash as well aren't they?”


———;——̵2;—



I’m not sure if you are joking or being serious framscan.

How much would cash have been without spending capex on TW assets and taking on their debt?

[farmscan] 24/4/2024 19:35

"They are NET cash! That’s the whole point m! We’ve gone one way they’ve gone the opposite way!"

Serica are net cash as well aren't they?

[andymunchkin] 24/4/2024 19:33

hOws gOng bOUnts??

[bountyhunter] 24/4/2024 19:19

The offer from Kist was rejected in July 2022. It's pretty obvious from the chart I posted which company has underperformed the most since then.



Granted AA has a good track record however increasing gas exposure wouldn't have panned out well here imho. Returning the SQZ cash pile to investors would have been my preference as I said at the time (rather than either deal).

[oilinvestoral] 24/4/2024 19:14

Let's see where both companies are in 12 months time! On a LT basis I'm willing to bet that good management at KIST will release value in the end !

[oilinvestoral] 24/4/2024 19:13

Also the selective period in the chart ignores the fact that KIST went up 6 fold in the run up in gas prices.

[bountyhunter] 24/4/2024 19:12

Regardless it's not done their share price much good since that merger was mooted and rejected. Shareholders should have got Serica's cash not Kist (or Tailwind) but at least Tailwind had substantial tax losses to carry forward to compensate.

[oilinvestoral] 24/4/2024 19:10

Gas exposure aside , net cash would've protected the downside!

[oilinvestoral] 24/4/2024 19:09

They are NET cash! That's the whole point m! We've gone one way they've gone the opposite way!