We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emerald Energy | LSE:EEN | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B01NJN34 |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 747.50 | 0.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | O | 0 | 747.50 | GBX |
Emerald Energy (EEN) Share Charts1 Year Emerald Energy Chart |
|
1 Month Emerald Energy Chart |
Intraday Emerald Energy Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18/6/2023 | 01:05 | EMERALD ENERGY A YEAR OF TRANSFORMATION | 12,401 |
| 14/1/2019 | 18:21 | EEN - Undervalued & Oversold | 35,307 |
| 22/12/2010 | 23:32 | Emerald Energy - Serious Long Term Investors Only | 26 |
| 09/9/2009 | 08:54 | The Latest Bob Threat | 10 |
| 12/8/2009 | 16:58 | Emerald energy | 11 |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 25/10/2020 10:14 by chestnuts I met Bob at a EEN agm, a true gent , had many a good conversation with him, he will be missed. |
Posted at 25/10/2020 09:56 by pendragon2 Learned a lot from Bob as the EEN story unfolded to make a lot of people very happy and I much regret his passing. Sad news. |
Posted at 23/10/2020 07:35 by brad44 That is sad news. Hope all other ex Eeners are doing well, after een I went in to TPL frying pan to fire!!!! |
Posted at 14/1/2019 18:21 by archie meads I'm afraid the take-over details escape me but you could try putting your request on "captainfatcat" 's thread, which was more often used towards the end, and on the GKP thread, where a number of EEN old timers sometimes turn up. Alternatively, search for a poster called 7kiwi, who, if he's still around, may know who you need to contact. Good luck. |
Posted at 14/1/2019 18:11 by crmatthews Hi All,Its a long shot and I wonder if anyone could help me? I bought 22,000 shares in Emerald Energy EEN at penny share level on the AIM probably 1994 or thereabouts. I have mislaid my share certificate and wondered if anyone could help. My email address is book@elbaprivatehire All the best Clive |
Posted at 26/12/2015 20:19 by seangwhite The next EEN is PCI and its following the old Irish oil company pattern.GLTA |
Posted at 24/12/2014 18:42 by dfgo Merry Christmas to the old EEN gang have a good one. |
Posted at 19/11/2011 14:37 by captainfatcat Cheers I imagine the troubles in Colombia and Syria would have hit the old EEN share price like a sledgehammer. |
Posted at 04/10/2009 08:58 by bobobob5 eddie: AB restated on Friday at the meeting what he'd said to me years ago: "I put the information out there, but it's up to you to interpret it". There is a significant 'clue' that he gave on Friday, which nobody seems to have studied so far: the date at which Sinochem first approached Emerald. We now know that this is April 2008. So...by studying the RNSs around that time we can deduce what it was about Emerald that interested Sinochem. It's very EENteresting, because that date preceeds the spudding of Gigante-2 by a mile, and it also preceeds the drilling of Ombu. So we know that the initial £4 figure could only have taken account of some 'risked' upside at Gigante and Ombu. And progress with Colombia, in general, was not exactly 'headline news' at that time, production kind of "OK but quite some way below what was hoped for". But that initial offer was at the time that Kurbet East was starting to move ahead at a rate of knots. We had the early horizontal drilling done, and the potential prospect of something like 40,000 bopd of oil from the FFD (on the zero water cut case). Not long before, Emerald was being talked of as "The Cash Machine" in parts of the City because of the very high levels of revenue that were anticipated. So I am pretty sure that Sinochem was motivated by the potential of Block 26. At that time, hiddendepths and myself were of the view that the K-dolomite (and to a lesser extent, the Butmah) gave a really significant low-risk upside, because of the KHE-1 discovery RNS. Now this line of thought is revealing, because it suggests that Emerald was *not* seen by Sinochem, at that time, as some sort of distressed asset due to funding issues going forward, involving Capella. That said, funding Gigante development would have been more tricky, but I somehow doubt that Sinochem would have been after Emerald to get its hands on the (apparently imaginary) "one billion gross barrels" in that structure. btw AB said at the meeting that the original naming of the structure as "Gigante" (obviously 'Giant' in Spanish) was not a very good move... Sinochem were surely after the B26 assets. It's very interesting that, at the time that Sinochem must surely have been getting ready to approach Emerald, i.e. in the period prior to April 2008, the EEN share price has been stuck at about £2 (actually about £2.10 +/- 15p or so) for some 18 months, which was obviously a daft undervaluation - as repeatedly pointed out on here by many including Kiwi and myself. So their initial £4 would have looked, to some of us at that time - had we known - that at least Sinochem had got some sense, even if the rest of the market did not. Clearly, the board were not happy with a 100% premium to the plateau price, though Sinochem wanted the B26 asset, so the drilling continued to prove-up KHE, and Ombu came in, and the price moved up, and the deal was finally done... My feeling is that Emerald moved slightly over that period, from a relatively easy play in B26 to a more valuable but more capex-demanding one because of Ombu. In parallel, the potential of B26 also kind of shifted over that period: The KHE Fairway took a more dominant position, and the 'deeps' were kind of put on the back burner. Insofar as the K-dolomite and Butmah are concerned, Sinochem would have known that there was no movement on them, but unless they had information not in the public domain, they would presumably not have thought this was related to any lessening of expectation, but more to capex issues and the (always vital) need for managers to prioritise. My guess is that Sinochem would prefer to have 100% of B26 rather than the 50% non-working interest. They approached Gulfsands early in 2009 about buying them out, but were reportedly told "no"; Gulfsands did not know that talks were continuing between Emerald and Sinochem. Incidentally, AB used the identical "we get them all the time" wording on Friday that he had used maybe three years ago, in that earlier case to describe approaches for Gigante. It seems to me that numerous oilers have approached Emerald for several years, but clearly none of them was offering anything that was considered relevant or appropriate. This is why I repeatedly said on here:"if another major wants to buy Emerald, and has the money, there will be a counter-bid". There never was, but it is absolutely not because they never knew about the company and its assets and the 750p broker targets (and about this thread...) etc. They just did not want to, or could not afford to, pay the price. I have to say that I'm not happy with the current GPX share price. I have been holding these for years, since before any drilling started in B26, and my price is 95p. Less than a year ago, despite the major finds in B26, I was still at break-even. How could that possibly make sense? As you know, Gulfsands couldn't understand it either. It has subsequently picked up a bit on the back of the Emerald rumour and bid, but even so...it's hardly good. Maybe the Sinochem deal will provide the facilities for GPX to fulfil its potential, but on the other hand, they might simply buy it. I have no idea what will happen, but the share price suggests to me, if to nobody else, that the market (whatever that is) doesn't exactly expect fireworks in the near-ish future. bob but imho DYOR etc as always |
Posted at 16/9/2009 04:08 by pendragon2 A sort of contrary view, though you all know I think the take-over price should have been nearer 10quid, though not as high as Bob's 12, as things are now.If I were to take a bidders view of EEN and the acceptance of its takeover valuation, it might go something like this: The business is in good shape, however the oil price uncertainty is an issue. The income looking forward will include a fall off in production at CR and Vigia, which have contributed most of the cash seen in the last five years, until Syria came along. Ecopetrol backing in to Gigante a couple of years back meant G1A stopped contributing significantly to the business and now gives the company less than 500bopd, (with proportionally high production costs) though it enabled the drilling of G2. As only 50% of G2 production is attributable to EEN, assuming that means between 1000 and 2000bopd, it will be some time before the exploration costs are paid off. In the mean time Ombu/Capella needs to be financed and though it may be a very significant discovery, uncertainties in the oil price mean it will not turn a clear profit for at least 5 years, if not longer. EEN's share of Syria is about 25% of production, so 4,500bopd max for at least a couple of years when the field production centre is working. The contract sees EEN's share fall as production rises and a series of one off payments arise. Will another $50m for a larger processing facility really pay for itself in a reasonable timescale? The operator has a slightly different interest to EEN and the national company yet another set of interests. However, the margins in Syria narrow as development in B26 proceeds. For all its attractions, EEN's rate of development is becoming more long term and will suite a larger company with strategic rather than commercial priorities. from the seller's point of view: EEN's management defined their interests as 'low cost, low risk' exploration. The company is gradually moving away from these parameters and the rate of increase in the market cap we have seen is unlikely to continue. Previously fund raising has been rather small scale, some tens of millions. The figures arising in the foreseeable future are closer to the hundred million which will bring far greater dilution than previous rounds. Trying to fund development from income is an option, but three large commitments - Syria, Gigante and Ombu - would be a strain on the business. The business will grow, but the chances are that this kind of growth would not be reflected in the share price either because of dilution or the inability to pay dividends. Does it make sense to move the management team to another business opportunity. I think probably yes, if there is a chance that the currently weak share price of SEY brings in the possibility of a significant recovery when the business is stabilised. Are SEY's opportunities in the field as promising as EEN's? Possibly, but there are always risks. However, is there a chance that the concert party can realise a substantial increase in the value of their holdings via SEY over 5 to 7 years? Probably yes. Is that likely to be greater than the increase in the value of EEN? Probably yes. Is there an uncertainty in the global economy that to wait might make it more difficult to reposition in the coming year, meaning it makes sense to sell now rather than wait? Possibly yes. EEN has moved from 25p to 7.50 (1:30) under the concert party. Will EEN's share price get to around 100 in five years (1:15) - perhaps but probably not. SEY has a depressed share price for several reasons. Is is possible SEY will move from 1.30 to 39 (1:30), I doubt it, but moving from 1.30 to 19.5 (1:15) could be achievable fairly quickly, say 3 good years..... Obviously managers get the opportunity to exercise their options, as they leave the company, so that is attractive for them. By whitewashing the concert party situation earlier this year, the concert party now have a window of opportunity which will not recur if there is a further round of fundraising which would dilute their interest, perhaps below the critical level at which they lose effective control of EEN. Do the concert party wish to concentrate on EEN for the rest of their careers or follow new opportunities? Why not go now? My position. Without the current management, EEN becomes a completely different business and the new owners can be expected to exercise their control (with or without the full bid succeeding) with a different strategy to the concert party. I think this reduces the company's prospects in the medium term and makes me feel it is time to move on. I'm not keen on accepting the bid, but am acquiescing. Without key managers, I don't want to see the bid fail and I would now expect AB to resign at, or after the AGM, whichever way the decision goes. (btw: I recall putting 8.40 in my prediction for the share price at end 2009, but can't find the full poll at the moment. How many of us are ahead of our predictions by accepting 7.50 now?) A graph from the share price on Jan 1 though 7.50 in October would let us all know) |
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
