ADVFN Logo

We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now

Toplists

It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Hot Features

Registration Strip Icon for default Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.

BLVN Bowleven Plc

0.165
0.015 (10.00%)
28 Mar 2024 - Closed
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Bowleven Plc LSE:BLVN London Ordinary Share GB00B04PYL99 ORD 10P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.015 10.00% 0.165 0.10 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.15 233,534 16:40:05
Industry Sector Turnover Profit EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap
Oil And Gas Field Expl Svcs 0 -2.02M -0.0062 -0.24 491.2k
Bowleven Plc is listed in the Oil And Gas Field Expl Svcs sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker BLVN. The last closing price for Bowleven was 0.15p. Over the last year, Bowleven shares have traded in a share price range of 0.111p to 3.35p.

Bowleven currently has 327,465,652 shares in issue. The market capitalisation of Bowleven is £491,198 . Bowleven has a price to earnings ratio (PE ratio) of -0.24.

Bowleven Share Discussion Threads

Showing 91151 to 91175 of 92900 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  3656  3655  3654  3653  3652  3651  3650  3649  3648  3647  3646  3645  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
25/11/2018
09:53
Good morning Slipanchor3.

I read warbaby43 post and used what he wrote '80km' . On a revised assumption of it being 80 nautical miles ; the price to Episeyo now is in the approx range $172 to $276 million USD.

cyan
24/11/2018
22:50
80 nautical miles = approx 148 kilometres to Episeyo.
slipanchor3
24/11/2018
16:14
Extract;


"This cost has come down, more substantially in offshore pipes where larger diameter and longer distance pipelines are proposed. By some estimates, the cost of offshore lines has reduced from more than $100,000/in.-km to around $25,000 to $40,000/in.-km. Thus, a 400-km, 48-in. line would cost around $480 million to $770 million today, versus double that amount 20 years ago. The rising cost of steel, accounting for 45% of the cost of a typical pipeline, has offset some of the gains in pipe construction and fabrication costs."

80km...maybe $100-$200 m USD based roughly on the articles numbers.

40km ....maybe $50-$100m USD. Seems very reasonable

cyan
24/11/2018
14:04
Thanks for that slipanchor3, so c 40km to Bioko and 80km to the Episeyo, and if either of those are to be routes to monetisation, then I can't help but think that the government would heavily favour the Cameroonian option of Episeyo but ball park pipeline costs on top of liquids stripping and storing infrastructure?
warbaby43
24/11/2018
11:05
warbaby43

A little further about 80 nm.

slipanchor3
23/11/2018
15:02
With a hat tip to 1MSN who posted this link on LSE:



The full piece might well be relevant but does anyone have "interfax energy" access?

Is my recollection correct that the Episeyo is a considerably greater distance from Etinde than Bioko, c100km v c40km distant?

warbaby43
17/11/2018
13:42
Good afternoon warbaby43.

I am unaware of any attempt by Lukoil to divest themselves of ETINDE in the 17 months since that TASS article. Indeed, they have stuck the course through the appraisal drilling.

The vast improvement in POO since 2017 will certainly be a big consideration.

In the coming weeks the partners will be considering their options. In December OPEC will meet and there may be production cuts to support POO, driving it North of $70 again.

The high price of gas will also be a factor in the mix. Its all about an appropriate off take solution that satisfies the government.

cyan
17/11/2018
11:16
"That day I recorded that BRENT was just $48.25.

Brent is far higher now . $67.87 as I type" ++

Yeah, good point cyan, and now with costs across the Big Boys driven down and large amounts of cash being thrown off, thanks to the Saudis' stupidity in trying to take on the Texans, W Africa might well now be less marginal for Lukoil.

My guess remains, though, that it will still be an estimate across the three countries of future capex requirement v projected revenues. Indeed, I guess that one reason why Etinde FLNG would suit Lukoil would be that the major front end capex would be outside the JVP

++ Not just Brent oil that's risen either:

warbaby43
16/11/2018
13:15
Good afternoon warbaby43.

Thanks for reminding me of that. Its important to note the context. The line immediately before referred to the then LOW POO;




June 14 2017
Lukoil’s projects in West Africa

"Lukoil’s projects in West Africa await an investment decision because of volatility on the oil market, he went on.

"We are optimizing the portfolio of our overseas projects. We are making investments into attractive projects. Other projects are at a stage of reviewing jointly with project operators, particularly in West Africa. We have not withdrawn from them; they are at a waiting stage. Nigeria, Cameroon, and Ghana - all these projects are at the stage of waiting for the final investment decision," the top manager said.

Lukoil made a significant cut in overseas projects, Matytsyn said. "This is because the Russian oil producing business turned out to be much more stable and not susceptible to fluctuations in oil prices. Operations in other jurisdictions are more exposed to oil price fluctuations. Many companies, not only our one, postpone or cut such projects," he said."


"Lukoil’s projects in West Africa await an investment decision because of volatility on the oil market,"

That day I recorded that BRENT was just $48.25.

Brent is far higher now . $67.87 as I type

cyan
16/11/2018
11:46
cyan, your post 16698 last July indicates that Lukoil might, indeed, make the strategic decision to withdraw, but it is most likely that any such exit would be by way of a package transaction of their W Africa assets in total and not just from Cameroon:

"We are optimizing the portfolio of our overseas projects. We are making investments into attractive projects. Other projects are at a stage of reviewing jointly with project operators, particularly in West Africa. We have not withdrawn from them; they are at a waiting stage. Nigeria, Cameroon, and Ghana - all these projects are at the stage of waiting for the final investment decision," the top manager said.

However, worth noting that it was only in 2014 that they docked into these projects in Ghana, Nigeria and Cameroon:

warbaby43
16/11/2018
11:03
cyan, absolutely agree that NewAge will pursue this and will find a way to get it over the line. And in the process Bowleven’s share should be monetised through a corporate transaction... and I suspect Lukoil will similarly seek to recover their investment at this stage, rather than participating in a non-operated development. THis means that 50% of Etinde will be up for grabs as an investment opportunity .. would NewAge take the lot, or seek another partner...
rm137
15/11/2018
16:14
Good afternoon RM137.

I think the partners will proceed. I note your risked comments but imo, its inconceivable NA and LUKOIL will just chuck the towel in writing off such huge sums.

Remember that ,at the time, in 2014, some were moaning about the farmin to this large shallow water asset, was far too cheap . We will just have to go with the flow and await an announcement from the partners. I hope we will get a 'ball park' assessment on the unexpected liquid rich discovery before xmas.

Yes, NA is the logical buyer of BLVN . Good old Kevin left us useful losses that would make a buy of BLVN a bit more attractive to them or others

NA are private and I suspect they would like to list one day but doubt BLVN's aim status appeals ; a main listing more likely preferred.

cyan
15/11/2018
14:42
cyan, from experience in similar circumstances, I would suggest that decision taken by Lukoil and NewAge to invest prior to appraisal results would have been based on a risked view of the outcome of that appraisal. Given pre-drill statements of intent from NewAge around FLNG, we can reasonably assume that their expected risked outcome would have exceeded 2TCF gas in place, plus the associated liquids. Hence the basis for the $250MM investment decision would not have been the proven discovered volumes at the time but much larger risked outcome ...that wasn’t then realised by the appraisal results. In short, we cannot assume that any further investment decision will follow simply because of the original investment decision made 5yrs ago as the risked outcome hasn’t been delivered.

Further, Lukoil at least will support a development decision on point forward economic return, and it’s likely that their decision will also be impacted by the capital available after other development opportunities in a large global portfolio. NewAge’s financial backers will also support FID on point forward economics, but NewAge’s limited development portfolio, and the potential involvement of other NewAge’s backers in other parts of the value chain would probably reduce the economic hurdles for the upstream development required at FID.

I believe your conclusion of 40 to 50p share value to Bowleven is a decent assessment, assuming FID, based on what is now known about the Resource potential. And therefore should be the expected outcome of a successful corporate transaction. Netherless, a successful transaction will still depend on FID, and on finding a buyer that is willing to buy into the development risk. The logical conclusion is NewAge buying out, or backing into Bowleven, assuming that NewAge’s backers want the extra capital exposure, and the additional exposure to development risk.

rm137
15/11/2018
13:23
Lets hope Mr Hart rejoins soon before the low teens beckon....

Clown Ocean have proved the undoing of this shambles of a share....

pjj71
14/11/2018
09:05
The question you have to ask is this; did NA and Lukoil put together a quarter of a billion dollar investment package on a throwaway gamble that their might be a lot more gas?
I doubt it.
The volumes have increased but not by as much as we would have liked and we have an unexpected new liquid rich discovery to weigh up.

After listening to conference call answers and reading the press interview; I think BLVN will be sold in totality for a price anywhere between 40 and 52p.

BLVN have significant losses that a buyer could use for tax purposes and makes such a transaction more attractive.

In COC's 2017 open letter they clearly signalled such a sale as a 'likely scenario'


15.2.17 COC open letter contained these lines;

"With Bowleven becoming an efficient, one-asset company with available tax losses to shelter future taxable income, we view it as a likely scenario that the final monetisation of Etinde would take place in the form of a corporate transaction, i.e. an offer to all shareholders by a third party."

crownoceancapital.com/Open_Letter_to_BLVN_Shareholders.pdf ·

cyan
14/11/2018
01:30
As I see it, no one foresaw the fairly dismal results from IM6. I think it is fair to say that most were expecting a continuation of IM5, with at least 0.5tcf being added. I am sure the initial seismics indicated that, otherwise the drill wouldnt have taken place.For newage and lukoil, it is a question of crunching the numbers (and the political risk) and seeing what the margins are like. If they don't work, then walking away isn't the end of the world for them. It isn't something that blvn have any control over.
fft
13/11/2018
18:45
Cyan
As I said thats a standalone decision because the asset straddles the boundary.

EG will want too much to process Etinde gas , African politics kill most business before it starts.

d1nga
13/11/2018
13:24
Gas prices are skyrocketing. Some-point soon, Bowleven will catch up.
svenice7
12/11/2018
21:33
DiNGA

Have a read of the link Warbaby43 kindly provided;



First paragraph;

"The governments of Equatorial Guinea and Cameroon have officially agreed that two contiguous gas discoveries in their maritime border area represent a single resource, and that the gas condensate field would be jointly developed by the two nations."

Looks like they can cooperate on resource issues.

cyan
12/11/2018
15:56
cyan

african politics will not allow it to happen IME

d1nga
12/11/2018
14:57
Hi D1NGA

"I'd say there's not much chance of cameroon and eg ever coming to an agreement for etinde gas "

Well, I say; do they want the additional cash flow or not?

EG is just one possible solution 'route'.

cyan
12/11/2018
14:47
having worked in africa a good few times over the past 30 years (oil industry)
I'd say there's not much chance of cameroon and eg ever coming to an agreement for etinde gas , yolanda/yoyo is a different standalone case

d1nga
12/11/2018
14:16
Good afternoon warbaby43

"surface infrastructure" can not answer that query .

Yes, I too picked up on the word "NEW" in respect of FLNG; a new build. I think we will be routed to an existing EG facility. Probably work out a lot cheaper.

cyan
12/11/2018
14:05
cyan, " We might even route to EG now instead of NEW build FLNG" - yup, and while this, undated unfortunately, has probably appeared before it's worth repeating:



So far as Cameroon/EG governmental O&G relations are concerned these would appear amicable:



p36 of this May 2018 Noble Energy presentation does indicate location of Yoyo/Yolanda and given its geographical relationship to Bioko it would likely that its 60mmscfd+ would be headed in that direction so there is a question of ullage and I would note again that the plant's contract with BG (Shell) ends in 2024.

I also note cyan that in his Q&As Our Eli is careful to use your phrase "NEW build FLNG" though I'm not sure there is any particular significance in that though I also note that in the IM-6 Conference Call at around 27.55 he does refer to the government wishing to see (FLNG) development "with the Hilli precedent."

While the odds remain strongly against it, an FLNG project isn't, for me, quite parrot dead yet.

BTW, am still asking as in 18103:

"The JV may explore options involving a reduced surface infrastructure and an investment case that requires less capex funding. This may leave FLNG as a medium-term gas export solution whilst the other near-term development phases are agreed with the Etinde JV stakeholders"

The phrase "surface infrastructure" appears several times, so in the Etinde context what is it likely to entail?

warbaby43
12/11/2018
09:50
Good morning warbaby43.

I have been arguing that logical case for sometime; $250 m package was for 50% of a known asset. It had possible upside, but that was an unknown at the time of the deal. We have since added value, but not as much as we liked.

I think its inconceivable that NA or Lukoil will walk; they did DD and already recognised ETINDE's commercial value at circa 1TCF.

Everyone has got hung up on FLNG. There are other options. We might even route to EG now instead of NEW build FLNG.

Lets again reflect on what was paid on the then smaller asset numbers; a $250m package for 50%.

Lets assume the lower percentage share for BLVN; 20%.

If $250m WAS the value of 50% of ETINDE (some at the time thought that FAR too cheap) it follows 100% could be valued at $500m.
With 20%; a fifth we can theorise that BLVN's share is valued at %100 USD or £78 Million Sterling.

£78 million Sterling , and based on shares in issue of 335,272,933 shares in issue equates to 23.2p per share.

Add that to the current assets cash etc we get to BLVN share price 'fair' value of circa 48.5p.

cyan
Chat Pages: Latest  3656  3655  3654  3653  3652  3651  3650  3649  3648  3647  3646  3645  Older

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock