We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Jadestone Energy Plc | LSE:JSE | London | Ordinary Share | GB00BLR71299 | ORD GBP0.001 |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-0.20 | -0.76% | 26.00 | 25.50 | 26.50 | 26.50 | 26.00 | 26.50 | 1,394,552 | 11:00:15 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Crude Petroleum & Natural Gs | 323.28M | -91.27M | -0.1688 | -1.54 | 141.69M |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
01/10/2024 07:30 | Had a further response from IR... Their bit: For Montara, I don’t recognise the US$56mm operating cost figure you quote for 2021. Can you point me to its source? My bit: Apologies, this is coming from another poster on ADVFN who has guesstimated from the opex figures in the annual accounts - something like the below: 2020 - OPEX: $23.10/bbl Actual Montara Production: 9,045 bbl/d - Est OPEX/bbl: $20 Stag Production: 2,359 bbl/d - Est OPEX/bbl: $32 Stag 2021 - OPEX: $26.22/bbl Actual Montara Production: 7,647 bbl/d - Est OPEX/bbl: $23 Stag Production: 2,394 bbl/d - Est OPEX/bbl: $35 Their bit: "Thanks for the explanation. Within reason, we are open to disclosing historical financial figures to avoid any errors or confusion due to guesstimates." My bit: "The guidance states for 2024: Montara operating costs in 2024 are currently estimated at c.US$120 million. So if I understand correctly you are suggesting: 2021 - operating costs c$74m 2022 - operating costs c$95m 2023 - operating costs c$95m 2024 - operating costs c$120m 2025 onwards - operating costs c$95m Which is essentially a 62% increase between 2021 and 2024, but then drops back somewhat - 2024 being an exceptional year?" Their bit: "The key point from my reply to your original message, and our disclosures this year, is that 2021 nor 2024 are indicative of a “normal” year of operating costs at Montara, and therefore comparing 2021 with 2024 isn’t a fair comparison. 2021 was unsustainably low due to COVID impacts, while 2024 should be a high-water mark for the asset, as we catch up on R&M backlog, tank work at peak, subsea inspections and of course the shuttle tanker which has now been released. You’re correct in that we guided for c.US$120mm Montara opex earlier this year, based on the latest internal forecast we are tracking a little below that due to a continuing focus on cost control. In January, we said that: “Going forward, operating costs at Montara are expected to average c.US$95 million per annum for several years with production now expected to cease in 2030.” In other words, this wasn’t a forecast for any particular year, but an average of annual operating costs over the remaining economic life of the field. We will continue to look at ways of reducing costs at both Montara and Stag to create value and prolong field life." | king suarez | |
30/9/2024 20:13 | Bernard straight in with the key question. | nigelpm | |
30/9/2024 18:20 | I've got a low 6 figure sum invested here at an average of 33p It's scary how confident paul is The early cashflows from the akatara could be enormous I've bought a barrel load since I found out they were trying to buy woodside assets in February. They must be well backed from banks to be doing that sort of stuff | bubbabubbabubba | |
30/9/2024 15:01 | Duplicate post | farmscan | |
30/9/2024 15:01 | I knew you would. | farmscan | |
30/9/2024 14:46 | OK got it now | fardels bear | |
30/9/2024 14:41 | Your powers must be greater than mine farmy | fardels bear | |
30/9/2024 13:51 | I've just watched it. | farmscan | |
30/9/2024 13:44 | This video is unavailable. | fardels bear | |
30/9/2024 12:20 | hxxps://youtu.be/eH6 Right, which poster is Bernard? | winnet | |
27/9/2024 17:57 | Can't be far away from full sales from akatara so could be smart buying. | nigelpm | |
27/9/2024 17:14 | Late trade print from 15.17. Someone took 500,000 at 26.5p. Hopefully this will be back up on Monday. The offer didn't stay sub 26p for long. | lord gnome | |
27/9/2024 15:08 | someone is busy - 900,000 shares bought in six tranches in the last hour or so. prices these trades are printing at, are the same that I have been quoted to buy all day. | sea7 | |
27/9/2024 11:26 | that is me. thank you FB | kaos3 | |
27/9/2024 11:20 | Gobbledook | fardels bear | |
27/9/2024 09:45 | Less than 26p to buy if anyone wants a top up. Just added a few more to help out the sellers. Most of today's trades are buys, but showing as sells because the price is well below the midpoint. | lord gnome | |
27/9/2024 09:06 | FB * from the last report realised gas prices /copy paste/ ........realised gas price per thousand standard cubic feet (US$/mscf) 1.64 1.41 1.53............... * i stated MY remark is idiotic - not anybody else, eg not people. would be rude * as a response to the units statement /copy paste/ from above ....I interpreted that to mean $1/MMBtu (not mmcf, sorry) - natural gas is heading towards $3 currently (Henry Bug) - obviously higher in Asia..... i hope that helps | kaos3 | |
27/9/2024 08:50 | But it's probably not the same unit and our units are being sold at $5.60. Not $1.50.Go pull some leeks and reflect that if anybody's gonna call people idiotic it'll be me. | fardels bear | |
27/9/2024 08:13 | in my gardening mind - we are selling a unit of gas for cca 1,5 USD produced, so same unit can not be 1 USD in the soil. factor of multplication is in 10s even 100 just an idiot remark whole asset for 1 usd means there are hidden liabilities there which i am not aware of is decomissioning not being fully paid on the go as part of opex... so it can not be that | kaos3 | |
27/9/2024 07:13 | You could be right guys, maybe he meant for Shell to take it off his hands for nothing to avoid any decom costs. I should have pressed him on that... You'd like to think some kind of small royalty on production could be agreed, but I guess depends how hardball Shell play over it. Would seem a shame to let a resource that potential size go for 'nothing'? | king suarez | |
27/9/2024 06:14 | Yes I've got to admit I interpreted it as that but KS would know better ie as a dollar for the asset. Shell will push for a tough deal unless they are desperate for the gas and whilst that could be the case, who knows what is in their strategic plans? IMHO. | dunderheed | |
27/9/2024 05:18 | KS, Naive and probably totally wrong maybe but I interpreted it as the whole resource, JSE finish with the oil, no way out (to them) for the gas, ultimately free decom by Shell? Free of decom, if that were the case, why wouldn't they sell now if they could get $400M and get out of Montara? | fireplace22 | |
26/9/2024 11:46 | Seems like the bargain of the century. | fardels bear | |
26/9/2024 10:57 | OK - maybe I am mixing up measures here. Paul said "give me a dollar for it!". I interpreted that to mean $1/MMBtu (not mmcf, sorry) - natural gas is heading towards $3 currently (Henry Bug) - obviously higher in Asia. Paul wants to sell Montara gas to Shell, rather than develop it, so he's saying give me a dollar/MMBtu today for Montara gas and he's happy. If am I right, and he can prove up 300-500bcf that is $300-$500m potentially? more than twice the current market cap - is that achievable by 2030 end of Montara life? who knows, half that would still be a stellar result with zero development risk? | king suarez |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions