Hurricane Energy Share Discussion Threads

[rackers1] 21/8/2017 08:46

Off she comes numptySell it while it has a two in front of it.

[gibso6767] 20/8/2017 10:42

hxxp://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Single-Biggest-Bullish-Catalyst-For-Oil.html

[rackers1] 20/8/2017 09:03

And yet hur will remain sub 30Mug

[davidblack] 19/8/2017 15:40

This might add $15 to the value of oil by the time we get to first oil?




The rig count seems to have stalled and as the hedging deals done a few years ago end there is less incentive to chase high cost fracked pupil oil.

[gary38] 18/8/2017 23:24

Oil prices rose sharply on Friday, as the dollar fell and U.S. drillers cut rigs, feeding a rally that boosted global benchmark Brent crude to a weekly gain while U.S. crude was virtually flat on the week.

[davidblack] 17/8/2017 19:10

Worked order of 250,000 went through after close, whether a buy or a sell who knows but I think it was today's sticking point.

[davidblack] 17/8/2017 15:32

what has been confirmed news wise:

FID and updates on FPSO progress
CPR on non Lancaster assets

But no drilling is expected

[oilandgas1] 17/8/2017 14:10

I have not seen any real news about HUR for a while .. what is happening next until the end of the year, does anyone know please?

1) Lancaster FID
2) FPSO status update, Aoka Mizu for the Early Production System contract 2019 Q2 delivery
3) Sep17: Lincoln drill likely indicates a link between Lincoln and Warwick
4) Nov17: cpr for Lincoln & Halifax

[davidblack] 17/8/2017 10:50

Clearly we have a 29.75p seller this morning who got bored with our big 30p seller who has been running the game for weeks. It will be interesting to see how long this takes but it could be a while as a 1% holding is now 18m shares! We are not investors in a small company.

[davidblack] 17/8/2017 10:05

Hi Greysurfer yes on reflection I don't think there was any cash involved. Yesterday's posting seemed to suggest it was shares issued for cash which I think is incorrect.

What has happened I think is the HUR Holding company has "sold" the assets relating to those other exploration areas to the individual subsidiaries in exchange for shares which the holding company now owns. HUR therefore owns 100% of the shares in each company but the amount issued to HUR varies depending on the "Fair Value" of the assets sold, as defined under the new accounting standards rules which are not the same as "Moneys spent so far" approach if all the parties had existed on day one.

My guess also is these transfers may not represent 100% of the cash spend on the properties as it's a good idea to leave those amounts as "Improvements" which can be more easily be written off for tax purposes as against fixed assets.

Do remember they are going to start receiving cashflow in 15-21 months and I am sure AS is more than capable of sprinkling that cash into which ever other entities he needs to so as to minimise the tax bills.

[rackers1] 17/8/2017 09:49

Flatlined this. Nothing going on. Move along now.

[deanroberthunt] 17/8/2017 09:37

might aswell just suspend the stock, flatlined anyhow....Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz tumbleweed

[greyingsurfer] 16/8/2017 17:19

Greysurfing that is not correct, just in this case. Transfer pricing rules the figures for allocating assets must reflect fair value because the Companies were incorporated after the event.

OK.

However, we can be clear it has nothing to do with diviing up the cash raised - yes?

Secondly, what does an accountant view as "fair value" for non producing E&P assets? The convention most companies use is past expenditure, in general. It's not clear to me from the very limited information we have that the figures given are anything different from that, or drawn up in any different way - or that we can determine it (until - perhaps - as you say, the AR comes out).

I do think, however, the take home message is that trying to interpret these figures as telling us something about future plans for any of the assets concerned, or about possible market valuations, is not going to get anyone anywhere useful.

Peter

[davidblack] 16/8/2017 13:52

Greysurfing that is not correct, just in this case. Transfer pricing rules the figures for allocating assets must reflect fair value because the Companies were incorporated after the event.

On the actual spending on these assets that I would guess it will only turn up when as set of accounts are drawn up and we see the inter company balances.

[wessexmario] 16/8/2017 13:52

Twixy,
it's old news, the latest subsidiaries were set up back in March.
It was the time when the last CPR was being finalised and they had formed a good idea of exactly how big the assets were that they had found.

[davidblack] 16/8/2017 13:42

This diviing up of cash resources caused me to look back at what Hurricane assessed the various assets prior to the recent drilling. Its quite illuminating. On a mid case basis these are the numbers from the 2013 CPR report

Basically the 2c case for Lincoln was 207m barrels with Whirlwind almost the same at 205m

The really interesting though is the oil in place figure which mid case for Lincoln is 1056m, Whirlwind 409m but Typhon is actually the biggest at 1307m. There was nothing ascribed to Warwick.

I would be really interested if any "professional "Oily" could make sense of that?

[greyingsurfer] 16/8/2017 13:42

I'm curious why HUR would chose to do this now and not previously, when the various licenses were granted?

They are moving towards being a producer, they've just raised an eye watering amount of cash for the Lancaster EPS. Big changes of situation. A bit of timely corporate forward planning.

The really interesting though is the oil in place figure which mid case for Lincoln is 1056m, Whirlwind 409m but Typhon is actually the biggest at 1307m. There was nothing ascribed to Warwick.

The figures from companies house will have nothing to do with valuations ascribed to the current status of the blocks. Standard E&P accounting is that the book value represents what has been spent on an asset. Nothing more to be read into them.

Peter

[davidblack] 16/8/2017 13:17

Twizy the reason is so you can do separate JV and or financings.

It makes it much easier Corporately if you want to trade assets by doing deals with shares rather than selling fiscal underlying assets.

[wessexmario] 16/8/2017 13:16

Twixy,
It's a normal way of working when a company has multiple large independent assets.
It enables assets to belong to separate legal entities, so that may each have their own contracts, legal charges and liabilities. It enables an asset to be farmed out unambiguously, or sold off, and if things went wrong then one individual subsidiary failing won't collapse the rest of the group.

For example, if they farmed out GLA to BP, and GWA to Shell, there would be no ambiguity what assets are involved (the assets all being owned by the individual subsidiaries).
It makes no difference to the shareholders being sub-divided like this, as shareholders of the parent company own everything, all the underlying assets in the wholly owned subsidiaries also belong to us.

[twixy] 16/8/2017 12:49

does anyone know why HUR would bother to set these companies up?

[wessexmario] 16/8/2017 12:23

by the same reckoning, Hurricane Energy plc (HUR) has a total nominal share value of £1.9M
(the nominal share value being £0.001)


which is completely different to the current share price of around 30p and Market Cap of around £580M

[phowdo] 16/8/2017 12:14

How much does Stobie rake in with directorship fees at all these different companies he has set up?