Harbour Energy Share Discussion Threads

[jelenko] 27/5/2020 10:15

Let's not get too excited at the prospect of the short being closed in a hurry. They will likely close it the same way they opened it. It's only about 6 months work if they feed 1m shares through on selected days. Easy for these people. They probably won't disclose either, that's how these people work. No regard for rules full stop.

[stansmith3] 27/5/2020 09:27

whitesthere will certainly be fireworks if they need to close in a hurrybut i think pmos share price troubles/outlook are based on other issues

[grupo guitarlumber] 27/5/2020 08:46

Premier Oil's outlook is unclear after a mixed trading statement, Berenberg analysts said as they kept their 'hold' rating on the company's shares.

The oil explorer told investors it expected to be cash flow neutral in 2020 with the help of hedging but it also reduced its production guidance to 65-70 thousand barrels a day (kboepd) from 70-75 kboepd in March.

James Carmichael, Berenberg's analyst, said Premier's guidance was that production would dip to just under 70 kboepd rather than a full 5 kboepd drop.

The statement also raised questions about Premier's UK acquisitions and proposed extensions to its debt maturities after the company's biggest creditor opposed the plan.

Carmichael said "the outlook remains unclear" and that more information was needed on the issues raised in the statement. He kept his price target at 30p a share.

"Cost savings and cash flow benefits are positive but reduced production guidance is unhelpful, as is ongoing uncertainty about the UK acquisitions from BP and Dana, and the related May 2021 debt maturity," Carmichael wrote in a note to clients.

"Consensus will clearly need to adjust to the lower production outlook, while clarity on alternative options for the debt maturity would be encouraging."



Iain Gilbert
Sharecast News
13 May, 2020 17:45 13 May, 2020 17:45

[grupo guitarlumber] 27/5/2020 08:43

Premier Oil's outlook is unclear after a mixed trading statement, Berenberg analysts said as they kept their 'hold' rating on the company's shares.

The oil explorer told investors it expected to be cash flow neutral in 2020 with the help of hedging but it also reduced its production guidance to 65-70 thousand barrels a day (kboepd) from 70-75 kboepd in March.

James Carmichael, Berenberg's analyst, said Premier's guidance was that production would dip to just under 70 kboepd rather than a full 5 kboepd drop.

The statement also raised questions about Premier's UK acquisitions and proposed extensions to its debt maturities after the company's biggest creditor opposed the plan.

Carmichael said "the outlook remains unclear" and that more information was needed on the issues raised in the statement. He kept his price target at 30p a share.

"Cost savings and cash flow benefits are positive but reduced production guidance is unhelpful, as is ongoing uncertainty about the UK acquisitions from BP and Dana, and the related May 2021 debt maturity," Carmichael wrote in a note to clients.

"Consensus will clearly need to adjust to the lower production outlook, while clarity on alternative options for the debt maturity would be encouraging."

[grupo guitarlumber] 27/5/2020 08:32

The long term creditors seem to be keeping the faith so as long as they stay confident
perhaps no worries

would be interesting to know what sort of debt is out there and its duration


Financial highlights

Forecast broadly free cash flow neutral for full year 2020 at current forward curve
30% of 2020 volumes hedged at $60/boe including c.50% of Q2 oil production at $64/bbl

Estimated $240 million of capex and opex savings and deferrals secured

Liquidity retained with c.$160 million of unrestricted cash and $330m of undrawn facilities; addressing covenants and drawing profiles with creditors

Court approved creditor schemes of arrangement; re-engaging with stakeholders around proposed transactions and 2021 credit maturities

Net debt reduced to $1.91 billion as at end of April (31 December 2019: $1.99 billion)

extract from company statement

[whites123] 27/5/2020 08:22

shame the market doesnt see pmo as the opportunity group thinkers seem to?

i mean listening to you the market is missing a trick here?


Well for a start, lets consider removing any distortion to the price...
Like maybe a 17% Short position held by the FRAUDSTERS (ARCM).

The short position HAS had a massive detrimental effect on the share price .
So the trick that is missing will become clear once the FRAUDSTERS have closed their short position.

Then, and only then will you have a truer and fairer valuation.

I suspect it will be many times todays share price I could be wrong though, and the FRAUDSTERS goal is clearly to see the total demise of PMO.

[grupo guitarlumber] 27/5/2020 08:16

One must admit looks vastly undervalued when current value compared to its EV


BUT

Not so good when looking at ADVFN key figures
Turnover PS 143.90 p
Pre-Tax Profit PS 9.31 p
Retained Profit PS 14.92 p
Cash PS 17.99 p
Net Cash PS -45.28 p
Net Tangible Asset Value PS * -3.93 p
Net Asset Value PS 102.74 p


Soon to hit again the 32.65p resistence

[stansmith3] 27/5/2020 08:08

shame the market doesnt see pmo as the opportunity group thinkers seem to?i mean listening to you the market is missing a trick here?or maybe people who actually work out the worth have arrived at a figure, instead of the only equation this board knows and usual fall back position of assuming the oil price will be higher in 12 monthspeople been saying that for 48 months already here....if you are playing the oil price why bring in all pmo's baggage in to it?

[whites123] 27/5/2020 08:00

Andy,

The FRAUDSTERS "ARCM" have not altered their short position.
That is if they are acting legally now and disclosing everything.

Why on earth would anyone trust a THIEVING FRAUDULENT outfit like ARCM to provide clarity.
The only reason they were outed is because they were found out.

You say the short is not affecting the share price .. Oh dreary dreary me..... Lets see them close out and see if that has an effect?

Do you still think the valuation would be where we are today?
You are good at twisting information to your own agenda, that is clear...
But a FRAUDULENT outfit such as ARCM need to be taken to task.

They should and must face scrutiny and face prosecution.
Lest a clear signal is sent to the market that fraud is perfectly acceptable.

I hope PMO have an ace up their sleeve to squeeze ARCM like an acne spot they are.

[andypop1] 26/5/2020 22:05

Whites,
You really don't like ARCM do you.
Continually posting unfounded groupthink comments like “they sought to trash the share price” without offering any proof or back up frankly stinks of you trying to blame them for your misfortune.
Do you think the threat of the company raising up to $500m plus costs in the current climate and given the market capital is helping the share price?
ARCM have not directly adjusted their short position since July last year, that is despite the share price ranging from 120p down to 10p, that should be a clear indicator to even the least experienced on here that the short is not influencing the share price and the hedge fund will let the insurance policy run until the monies owed are paid back at full face value.
If, as you say, the short is not a hedge to protect ARCM’s exposure to the toxic debt against the company failing why have they taken it out?

I sense a lot of anger in your posts, maybe you should channel that anger into research and come back with a little more than hope and dreams summed up by your favourite line suggesting PMO having something up their sleeve to deal with the pesky shorter!
The BoDs have encouraged such entities with sweeteners, fees and enhanced interest rates at a time when the cost of borrowing is at a recent low.

Good luck.

[whites123] 26/5/2020 08:13

You do make me laugh Andy.

You wave the flag of ARCM as if they can do no wrong, as if they have the label of Fraudsters unfairly.
You then try and suggest they are merely hedging their bet..

RUBBISH... They acted fraudulently and dishonestly and have sought to trash the share price of PMO.
There never was and never is a "Hedge" to protect their loan.
They are fraudsters, they have been found out, they have not faced criminal charges which I believe they should do, they deserve to suffer at the mercy of a short squeeze of epic proportions.
Growing up we were told not to tolerate bullies, now if a capitalist market we are expected to accept that those with big war chests can act with impunity and total disregard for the law.. And you champion them.. It says a bit about your character sir.

Oil will be over $40 soon enough and fast heading back to $60. IMO
PMO I pray have something up their sleeve to trap ARCM in a squeeze.

Good day sir.

[urals] 26/5/2020 07:09

They have altered LTIP option rules by ADDING SPECIFIC AMALGAMATION CLAUSE to accommodate TAKEOVERsale by amalgamation, as is normal practice for BERMUDA M and A.SALE ANNOUNCEMENT BEFORE JUNE 4 complete with extra amalgamation resolution to be voted through at AGM https://t.co/m1hWBHEe3y

[ekuuleus] 23/5/2020 06:16

I find the idealing platform difficult. The trade sizes are limited to very small, and quotes fail or outside the bid offer range.

I end up in dogs on the platform because of it.

[steve73] 23/5/2020 01:11

Rose, OK - I understand your predicament.

I've been with i-dealing for over 15 years.. 5 GBP/qtr per account (ISA & Standard), which I'm happy with, although their dealing fees aren't the cheapest around. They've given me excellent service over that time, with great phone/e-m support, so I'm happy to stick with them. (Just a pity I keep investing in dogs... but I can't blame them for that..!!)

[andypop1] 22/5/2020 21:45

Rose,
Was your broker charging a percentage or a fixed fee?
I don't know the value of your ex holding and don't want to know but the extremely generous coupon surely covered the fee and left you with a bit of pocket money?
Then there is the circa 50% to come when the bonds are paid out at face value?
Did you sell up as a matter of principle because your broker amended the terms you originally signed up to?
I only ask that as if you believe the bonds are a sound investment it doesn't make financial sense to sell for the sake of a minimal fee.
Good luck.

[rose_by_another_name] 22/5/2020 13:33

Perhaps a more knowledgeable operator at my
old broker would have come up with a different
answer, but it's done now. The new broker was
quite adamant that they could not accept the
transfer. That's IG. I have tried a search on
their platform and it is not one of the bonds
they deal with.

I had two brokers for years, one for my ISA
and one for trading. Neither charged "rent".
Then one instituted a "custody fee" so I moved
my ISA to IG, who weren't charging a fee. Then
within a month, IG started charging a custody
fee. Now my other broker has sold out to yet
another broker and they charge a custody fee,
so I am moving that account to IG. No sense
paying two custody fees.

[steve73] 22/5/2020 13:06

Most on-line brokers will allow you to convert them to a certificate - for a small fee. Ask them again, and insist on it. Who are you with?

But then your new broker should also be able to handle them since they are in CREST... talk to them again... perhaps if you move your entire portfolio to your new broker, they would be able to certificate them for you if they're unable to include them on-line...?

[rose_by_another_name] 22/5/2020 12:49

I asked my broker about converting them to
a certificate, but was told it was no go
(by a lady called Sarah working from home).

[steve73] 22/5/2020 11:00

Rose... with a relatively high spread on the bonds, and the fact that you're obviously holding them long term, it may be best if you simply get them in your own name in certificated form. Most brokers charge c. 10-15 GBP to issue them direct to you.
Obviously, it becomes a little more difficult if you want to sell them, but there should be no problem if you hold to maturity.

[boatman123] 22/5/2020 10:27

Pleasantly surprised were holding our own what with oil and the market down too , must be a good sign

[rose_by_another_name] 22/5/2020 06:32

I have been "forced" to sell my PMO1 bonds
because I am transferring my holdings from
one broker to another, and the new broker
doesn't handle the bond. Not a good time to
sell, but I originally bought when the bond
was at about the same price the last time it
was thought to be in some danger of default.

[nav_mike] 21/5/2020 22:01

Im blaming a shorter who blatantly broke the rules, but I know ARCM can do no wrong in your eyes, so I guess a pointless argument

Back to lurking as currently have no position in PMO