Amerisur Resources Share Discussion Threads

[rollthedice] 10/4/2017 07:29

Pretty miserable set of figures even if largely expected. Not surprising that Rex has been offloading with Paraguay written off & production sh###! Non-cash impairment charge ($15.3m) & reduced production ensured 2016 worse than 2015. Cash at end period $45m but planned capex ($44m), cash acquisition of Pacific post period (c$5m) & need to renegotiate unused debt facility (expiring Nov17) raises inevitable questions over funding unless cash is now flooding into the coffers. I couldn't see a current cash position in the RNS. Production of only c3k bopd was way down on targetted 5.3k bopd.

Can't see this setting the world alight even with Q1 figures an improvement over 2016 performance. May yet see a bargain entry point.

[broncowarrior] 10/4/2017 07:13

All looks a bit out of date now given the progress made since then.

[blackdown2] 10/4/2017 07:08

2016 finals out. Nothing particularly surprising in them.

[blackdown2] 09/4/2017 17:48

It's time the BoD got involved in a PI relief effort.

[quidnunc] 09/4/2017 07:55

Good to see that Amer got involved in the relief efforts. Q

[marnewton] 07/4/2017 17:04

A slam dunk defence then!¬)

M

[lucyp00p] 07/4/2017 12:46

I don't believe I have named anybody here. You can apply my comments to whoever you like.

[aceuk] 07/4/2017 12:45

Who won the Fight?

I'd say Giles has certainly won the round but as yet Rex (& co.) are probably conscious.

Probably both sides will back off - there's no point in further damage, be that reputational or financial.

[charlieeee] 07/4/2017 12:05

Ultimately, the problem re all these overpaid executives has come from the change re the way they are paid.

Historically, their pay was voted through by the shareholders on an annual basis, giving proper control to the owners and all directors' position were up for a vote on a rotational basis.

This whole remuneration committee malarkey is a load of garbage: give control back to those who pay.

That said, unlike most resource stocks, this lot have created market cap in excess of funds raised and to say that they have "impoverished" (rather than "reduced the amount by which they could have enriched the company had they taken less wonga themselves") is incorrect.

Equally, as Al101 has said, the concepts of greed and fraud need to be differentiated: I would be the first to say (even though it is not rational)that they showed shown no self restraint when the bottom line did not look that clever and that irked me. It showed a total lack of sensitivity, but then that has rarely been an ingredient of the financially successful. It was heartening that at least they did have sufficient decency to respond to the Mocoa crisis and pulled together with the other oilers to offer practical and immediate assistance and credit to those here who urged them on.

[bryet] 07/4/2017 11:57

Let's get real most people who are at the top in a company look after their self first as investors we just hope their wheeling and dealings bring us a few bob just my thoughts anyway.

[marnewton] 07/4/2017 11:53

Hmm...Lucy...I think the laws of libel apply here...

M

[al101uk] 07/4/2017 11:47

That's the key Lucyp00p, "relentlessly impoverishes a publicly held company". If I believed there was no value in the company as a result of GC, I would sell. I don't think GC is THAT bad or at least I believe the checks and balances that are in place are enough to reign him in (I'd rather he was reigned in further, but we are where we are).

Your analogy confuses morality with legality, two very different things. A starving man is absolutely morally justified in stealing food, but stealing is illegal.

In my view, GC is morally unjustifiable in what he has done in order to enrich himself, but it is legal.

My decision is based on neither, I only care if the company will make me money or not and I believe it will. For clarification if a legally fraudulent activity took place (like in Tesco for example) I'd be gone like a shot.

And finally, there are redeeming qualities in GC that offset, to a certain extent his behaviour.

[lucyp00p] 07/4/2017 11:34

So for the purposes of clarity. If a starving man takes a mars bar he hasn't paid for he's a crook but if an executive relentlessly impoverishes a publicly held company to reward himself for work not done he's just a loveable rogue. Ok I get it. Still looks like a duck to me.

[bigwavedave] 07/4/2017 11:16

More on the Mocoa disaster relief:

[al101uk] 07/4/2017 11:16

Lucyp00p,

"not a Good guy" and having "dubious ways" is not the same as being a crook, neither is being greedy. Some may argue that it's a virtue at the top.

As far as I'm aware fraud is not part of his repertoire and while that's the case I can judge the company as on balance worth holding.

Obviously there are shades of grey and as usual I sit somewhere in the middle.

[lucyp00p] 07/4/2017 09:55

Of course he's a crook. He may not Bernie Madoff but that doesn't make him a good guy. Didn't he even feature in a tell all documentary about his dubious ways?

[al101uk] 07/4/2017 09:48

I think GC might have done a good job or might not. In fact I have no idea, because he doesn't give out enough information for people to make the decision and the company has a mail address for investors that is like a black hole for unfortunate passing space ships.

I'm not a JW fan boy either to be fair.

Is everything GC's fault, almost certainly not, but the similarities between here, KENV and IRON are a little too numerous to be considered co-incidental and he is the common factor.

Being kept in the dark while you see the people running your company pocketing millions is galling in the extreme.

It would be easier if I thought GC was a crook and was destroying the company, I could just sell.

[moneylender] 07/4/2017 08:36

I think GC has done a pretty good job. there are holders here that bought at 2p and have enjoyed the ride up to 60 plus, it was their decision to take some off the table on route. i myself sold out at 20 but still had a ten bagger with that sale, no complaints from me.

[jonnycash1] 07/4/2017 08:21

Clearly the extensive connections the gentleman brings to the party are invaluable. His experience is also a welcome addition. This is also a big day for the stock on the charts. Bullish reversal is now officially confirmed. Fill ya boots. Full steam ahead.

[charlieeee] 07/4/2017 08:11

Just out of curiosity, why blame GC and not JW?

After all, the day to day running of the company is in the hands of the CEO and not the Chairman: if you think that holding back for a couple of months re Plat 22 on account of local unrest was a bad decision, why not call for JW's head on a plate?

GC's brief is strategy and that has been good, particularly the acreage increase.

The new addition is really interesting, since his expertise is in JW's role, CEO/geologist and specifically in the Putumayo basin and he does look to be super dynamic: we could start to see him "de-bottle necking" JW and that might well be what is needed to completely up the anti here.

[bigwavedave] 06/4/2017 19:44

Tony - Yes, good point. Very little trucking.