Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Gulf Keystone Petroleum LSE:GKP London Ordinary Share BMG4209G2077 COM SHS USD1.00 (DI)
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +4.00p +1.40% 289.50p 289.50p 290.50p 292.50p 281.50p 285.50p 803,823 16:35:06
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Oil & Gas Producers 127.6 10.4 4.6 61.5 664.20

Gulf Keystone Share Discussion Threads

Showing 633226 to 633243 of 633250 messages
Chat Pages: 25330  25329  25328  25327  25326  25325  25324  25323  25322  25321  25320  25319  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
25/9/2018
21:12
"Prices for heavy and sour crudes are expected to weaken “potentially severely” from 2020" Hmmm, but isn't that what's in the Jurassic, the only zone the company drill to? Another reason why getting to 75k a day will require additional funds methinks especially as 55k is "predicted" to arrive H2 2019. So I would suggest all the "hype" about what the company will be receiving revenue wise may be considerably lower than "expectations":-).
bigdog5
25/9/2018
20:20
according to Wiki, 😂😂😂😂 8514;😂ԅ14;😂😂;😂😂😂 I always wondered about the senior sources.
oilman63
25/9/2018
19:59
Accelerated share repurchase Accelerated share repurchase (ASR) refers to a method that publicly traded companies may use to buy back shares of its stock from the market. The ASR method involves the company buying its shares from an investment bank (who in turn borrowed them from their clients), and paying cash to the investment bank while entering into a forward contract. The investment bank will then seek to purchase shares of the company from the market to return to its clients. At the end of the transaction, the company may receive even more shares than it initially received, which are then retired.[1] This method can be contrasted with a typical open market repurchase, where the company simply announces that it is repurchasing shares on the market, and then does so. A firm might choose the ASR method as a way of reducing the number of shares outstanding for a fixed cost, transferring the risk to the investment bank (which is now short the stock) for a negotiated premium. By purchasing the shares in this way, it immediately exchanges a fixed amount of money for shares of its stock. It is currently being theorized[who?] that such arrangements are used by management to manipulate earnings figures for incentive compensation and reporting reasons. There are also earnings reporting black-out periods during which companies are not allowed to announce repurchasing of stock, so the ASR product from an investment bank could allow a company to essentially buy back shares during a black out.[citation needed] OverviewRecent ChangesYour WatchlistSearch Widget Definition of accelerated buy-back Some companies turn to a counter-intuitive strategy to return cash to shareholders: shorting their own stock. As companies with record cash on their balance sheets who embark on a spree of share buy-backs, a handful are using a tactic not seen since before the financial crisis, known as accelerated share repurchases (ASRs) or accelerated buy-backs (ABB). In a traditional buy-back, the company uses a broker to buy shares on the open market. It can take weeks or months to complete an announced buy-back. But with an accelerated repurchase, the company asks their broker to short the full amount immediately. In a standard short, the broker borrows shares from other holders, sells them, then later buys shares to return them to the original holder. In an ASR, the borrowed shares are not sold; the company retires them. The broker then buys shares to cover the short, with the company agreeing to cover any losses on the trade. There are several benefits to ASRs and other “structured221; buy-backs, in which companies use derivatives and other tools to engineer buy-backs to achieve pre-set price or volume targets. Accelerated repurchases can generate a bigger short-term boost to share prices, as investors might otherwise ignore a buy-back authorisation that could take years to execute. Some investors are wary of ASRs, as they immediately lower a company’s share count, and boost its apparent profitability on an earnings-per-share basis. Example
therealminotaur
25/9/2018
19:36
Broadford Bay: I still don’t follow what you are saying about 75,000 bopd? btw according to Wiki, “The major producers of sour crude oil include: North America: Alberta (Canada), United States' portion of the Gulf of Mexico, Alaska and Mexico. South America: Venezuela, Colombia, and Ecuador. Middle East: Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, Iran, Syria, and Egypt”. Not just Shaikan lol
oil_investor
25/9/2018
19:29
Perhaps the implementation of the new IMO Sulphur limits on 2010 (down from 3.5% to 0.5%) for maritime fuels should be taken into account when considering the long-term positive expectations for any heavy oil producer? https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/imo-2020-to-cause-one-off-oil-demand-surge-before-market-adjusts-opec/ "Tighter global shipping pollution regulations from 2020 will lead to a temporary surge in oil demand while denting the oil revenues of producers of heavy or high sulfur crudes, OPEC said in its annual long-term oil forecast Sunday. The International Maritime Organization’s global marine fuels sulfur cap of 0.5% in 2020 will produce a one-off jump in crude demand from the global refining system in order to meet for the need for compliant, non-marine residual fuels, OPEC said. “In order to produce sufficient volumes of middle distillates, the global refining system is expected to increase runs by around 400,000 b/d in 2020 (additional to the case if no IMO regulations were adopted),” OPEC said in its latest World Oil Outlook. As a result, global oil demand growth is expected to bounce back to 1.7 million b/d in 2020, from 1.4 million b/d in 2019, OPEC said. But it acknowledged that “as global supply and demand adapt to the regulations, and energy efficiency trends grow, annual demand increases post-2020 are expected to revert to a lower level, some 900,000 b/d in 2021 and 800,000 b/d in 2022 and 2023.” Crude price impact OPEC also signaled that the IMO’s regulations will negatively impact the bulk of OPEC members who mainly produce heavy or high sulfur crudes. Prices for heavy and sour crudes are expected to weaken “potentially severely” from 2020, while light crudes are expected to benefit and command a premium over heavy grades, the report stated...."
broadford bay
25/9/2018
18:49
You cannot say I think gkp have bedbpn buying in stock Or I think a deal is imminent On iii Even though Both are true 😂😂☃️☃️☃ʊ39;🌲😘;🎅🎅🎅
therealminotaur
25/9/2018
18:28
It is like 1984 on ii, the trolls have taken over .
nestoframpers
25/9/2018
17:52
Like I posted yesterday OP Wace have $42 billion of clients money they are playing with , shorting GKP will not be their idea or money they are losing IMO.
nestoframpers
25/9/2018
17:34
Bigdog I must apologize to you for attacking you but I was under orders from my ex best mate. I promise not to spam (my dad sells that) you on the pm’s anymore and can I say how well you have called this.
butchersboy
25/9/2018
17:14
VWAP today just over 290Marshall Wace paying that to close any today Still must have well into 7 figures to buy back It will take very little buy pressure for this to pop 25 plus in a single session
obesepaddington
25/9/2018
17:14
Bigdog5: please give is your funding and cashflow figures to substantiate your belief that achieving 75,000 bopd will require “an influx of funds”. Then we can attempt to understand what you are saying. Stringing a load of words together isn’t how one deals with these things. Numbers are required, together with the assumptions.
oil_investor
25/9/2018
16:49
I don't believe the company will be drilling to the Cretaceous any time soon as their funds will be better employed elsewhere. The Triassic, as I have said countless times carries huge risks, has never been produced from, is highly pressurised and even if production can be made to work from there it will become massively costly and is years away. Ask yourselves, if it were easy, cheap and had little risk wouldn't they have done something about it years ago. Am I correct in that all the "predicted" new wells don't get drilled before 2019 and then only if a Rig is available? So talk of 110k is a little previous simply because 55k a day, by the company's predicted "H2019" is likely to have it's challenges. The next plan up from 55k is the fabled 75k a day and I believe it's more than likely it will need an influx of funds. Then to consider is how many wells and how much infrastructure is possible in the next few years and is it likely that a company known for it's failed predictions and delays will have "plain sailing" on the fabled "sea of oil"? No wells for over 3 years, 3 wells planned for next year, then what. Posters here talk as though 40k is coming next week, 55k by July 2019, 75k by 2020, and 110k by 2021. Dream on you crazy delusionals. Just managing expectations. Aimvho of course and all views for free.
bigdog5
25/9/2018
16:23
You can erase a post but you can't erase history. There are quite a number of us gathering now with grievances against bobobob5 with quite astonishing evidence. All unconnected before now and all with remarkably similar stories. Let's see how we go!
medway3
25/9/2018
16:17
Oh dear I’m sorry oil investor I forgot I shouldn’t use your real name but did you really need to get my posts deleted. You did advise me that you knew everything and I believed you and I’ve lost everything. I don’t want to be your right hand man anymore.
butchersboy
25/9/2018
15:52
nestoframpers: Brent is at its highest for 4 years. The higher prices will help with the July, August and September 2018 Shaikan production payments. Even with the construction of the drill pads and roads, and the forward ordering of equipment, the monies coming in will hopefully maintain a very large cash-at-bank figure. It shouldn’t be too long now before GKP announce that the tanker shuttle service between PF-1 and PF-2 is operational. That will be a big step, with all of the Shaikan production going directly into the Atrush Feeder Pipeline. In my view, that was a key infrastructure requirement before lifting production to 55,000 bopd and then to 75,000 bopd and beyond.
oil_investor
25/9/2018
15:43
GKPhero: I doubt he is involved these days. btw in case you missed it A PERSONAL ESTIMATE OF THE COST OF THE 110,000 BOPD PROGRAMME GKP have provided information in their three current presentations, and in the CPR material, which allows some assessment to be made of what the uplift from 75,000 bopd to 110,000 bopd might potentially cost. The company say that they will give figures after they have submitted their new Field Development Plan (do they actually mean “after the Field Development Plan has been approved by the MNR?”) and it appears to me that the 35,000 bopd uplift is part, but not all, of the full development of Shaikan. That is evidenced by the GKP descriptions of the Triassic and Cretaceous work, within the 110,000 bopd programme, as the “Initial Development” of those two substantial reservoirs. Looking first at the Cretaceous, the current FDP describes only one well, in the low/best/high cases, being drilled. Clearly, one Cretaceous well cannot conceivably address the 56 million barrels of very heavy Cretaceous Proved and Probable Reserves and Resources, let alone the 179 million barrels of Proved, Probable and Possible Reserves and Resources. GKP have said nothing about plans for the Cretaceous, aside from drilling this one initial well. In my opinion, the Cretaceous requires expert development assessment taking into account sustained production data from (at least) that first well. So this single Cretaceous well is, in my opinion, essentially the first Cretaceous Production Appraisal well. The cost of the well is given in the CPR as $23 million (GKP pay only part of that). Quite what that spend is intended to cover, by way of any Secondary Recovery testing etc, is unknown. I would guesstimate the potential output as perhaps 1,000 bopd in an experimental/Appraisal context. Turning to the Triassic, this is much easier to assess. The CPR stated that 5 wells would be required to develop the reservoir. Those 5 wells address 150 million barrels of light oil Proved and Probable Reserves; the Proved, Probable and Possible figure is substantially higher at 410 million barrels. Yet those numbers do not include the very large volume of Condensate, which CEO Jon Ferrier has said were incorrectly assessed as (methane) gas. In my opinion, the situation rather resembles that of the Cretaceous - for whilst the Triassic has been intersected by several wells and flowtests have been conducted, GKP are essentially in a Production Appraisal situation because sustained production has yet to be conducted, and the potential volumes including the Condensate are very large indeed. Initial Development of the Triassic would, in my opinion, comprise one well at a CPR-quoted cost of $23 million. The target volume per Triassic well can be established from the CPR numbers as 4,000 bopd. Two such wells would give 8,000 bopd. Because of the different composition of the Triassic - and taking account of the Condensate - GKP have said in their current Presentations that they will require a separate “processing train” at surface. This might sound expensive, but an Early Production Facility can surely handle the job. EPFs are increasingly used - including in the Middle East - as modular, longer-term or even permanent production facilities. GKP got Shaikan production speedily underway using an EPF as the foundation. These modules can typically be 10,000 bopd, 25,000 bopd or 40,000 bopd capacity each. So one 10,000 bopd EPF for Initial Triassic production could handle the output from two Triassic production wells. Any number of suppliers would be delighted to sell, or to lease, such plant to GKP. Cost? I have the price which was paid for a broadly comparable onshore EPF, capacity 10,000 bopd, with storage capacity 30,000 barrels. Installed, a budget of $15 million ought to cover it. So one Triassic well, complete with a dedicated Triassic EPF, would cost $38 million. So we see that, assuming the “initial”; part of the full(er) Field Development Plan were to kick-off with one Cretaceous and one Triassic well (together with a Triassic EPF), the total cost would be some $65 million and would produce c. 5,000 bopd. We can therefore subtract that estimated production volume from the 35,000 bopd uplift programme figure, to assess what GKP might be expecting, from the Jurassic reservoir, from the “Jurassic infill drilling” which they describe in their current Presentations. So the inference is 30,000 bopd of incremental Jurassic production. GKP’s plan is to produce 75,000 bopd from 17 Jurassic production wells (the current 9, plus 4 to reach 55,000 bopd and a further 4 to reach 75,000 bopd). That represents an average of 4,400 bopd per well. Pro-rata, adding 30,000 bopd of Production would require a further 7.3 wells: round that up to a further 8 wells, averaging 3,750 bopd each. That would give a total of 25 Jurassic wells across a reservoir which was proved by GKP to have a footprint of 135 square kilometres, as stated in presentations. So that represents 5.4 km*2 per well. This represents low-density drilling, even for the Middle East where wells can fairly typically be 2 km apart with field production lives of 60 years not being unusual. Something which isn’t explained is the very long field life quoted by past and present GKP management for Shaikan (“80-100 years”, “beyond the lives of our grandchildren”, “over 100 years”) which simply does not fit the CPR Category 2 figures. Putting that aside, the number of wells which GKP may be planning to drill is surely a pointer to exceptional permeability, which is of course consistent with the 6-mile Radius of Investigation (Transient Drainage Radius) which GKP announced at the Geological Society, with the approval of the MNR and MOL, that they had established. So if it is the case that a further 8 Jurassic production wells would add the 30,000 bopd, the total cost of those are easy to estimate. It would be $23 million per well (from the current CPR) x 8 = $184 million. This then allows the uplift from 75,000 bopd to 110,000 bopd to be estimated: $23 million for the initial Cretaceous production, $38 million for the initial Triassic production, and $184 million for the Jurassic. The total is $245 million. Of course, GKP only pay part of the cost - this appears to be in the range 64% to 80% depending upon the terms of the renegotiated PSC. Such a 10-well drilling programme should be possible within an elapsed time of two years. On that basis, it would represent $122.5 million per annum, of which the GKP element appears to be in the range $78 million to $98 million depending upon the renegotiated PSC Terms. If these estimates are anywhere near correct, several key points would emerge: 1. the production raise to 110,000 bopd is not a Sword of Damocles which some investors might perhaps imagine is hanging over the company 2. achieving 110,000 bopd appears relatively straightforward from an operational perspective 3. the cost is a fraction of the $8 billion which GKP initially said it would cost to develop Shaikan involving “hundreds of wells” under a different geological model (aquifer drive, rather than gravity drainage) 4. funding the programme from income rather than from borrowings or from the issue of equity appears viable (GKP would have the income from 75,000 bopd of Production when starting this work) 5. under the PSC Terms, the investment is recovered anyway 6. the repositioning of Shaikan, as the key MNR oilfield alongside the depleting Tawke, appears possible if the MNR wish to do so. The current Chairman Jaap Huijskes and CEO Jon Ferrier signed-off the following two weeks ago: “We fully appreciate the continued support of all our stakeholders during what has been a very important period in the Company's history. Alongside our partner, MOL, and our hosts, the KRG and the MNR, we remain excited about the next 12 to 18 months, as we stand poised to realise Shaikan's full potential over the coming years”. and this morning Mr. Huijskes said the following: “We are pleased to welcome Kimberley [Wood] to the Board of Gulf Keystone Petroleum. She is a highly respected legal practitioner who has been counselling Boards for the past two decades. We very much look forward to Kimberly's contribution, in particular in this exciting phase of investment and of markedly increasing production from Shaikan." An exciting phase of investment and of markedly increasing production indeed. Explaining to the shareholders how they intend to fund the realisation of Shaikan’s full potential is, in my opinion, desirable. Doing so will remove shareholder uncertainty. Having an Operationsl Plan is only part of the job. That is why one has an Operational Plan and Budget. We shall see what GKP announce. And even if GKP is expected to be sold, one always plans things as if it won’t be sold. That maintains the strength of the negotiating position
oil_investor
25/9/2018
15:09
Brent. Now $82.
4leafclover
25/9/2018
14:50
Being 1,500,000 short at 265/7270In a market that knows....Long and taken more long just now A 300 break taking out 52 week highs and money will drive this 340
obesepaddington
Chat Pages: 25330  25329  25328  25327  25326  25325  25324  25323  25322  25321  25320  25319  Older
Your Recent History
LSE
GKP
Gulf Keyst..
LSE
QPP
Quindell
FTSE
UKX
FTSE 100
LSE
IOF
Iofina
FX
GBPUSD
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:42 V: D:20180925 20:33:53