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 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.30 | 1.17% | 26.00 | 25.50 | 26.50 | 26.00 | 25.75 | 25.75 | 1,014,738 | 08:06:15 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Crude Petroleum & Natural Gs | 323.28M | -91.27M | -0.1688 | -1.54 | 138.99M |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
03/10/2024 07:27 | 22594, good post MT. 22596, don't disagree but there should be an over riding TSR clause linked to "performance" as well IMHO. | dunderheed | |
03/10/2024 07:21 | MT, it'll probably be because enough of the conditions of his LTIP, unrelated to the issue you notes, were met. The composition of LTIPs is not in the public domain. | winnet | |
03/10/2024 07:20 | Good to see PB putting a decent chunk of his money into JSE!! Now please exceed your self set expectations/guideli Good luck!!! | ashkv | |
03/10/2024 06:53 | Yes, and very welcome. Although for perspective, it's 1.5% of the circa $10m+ he has trousered, including circa $2m of 'overseas allowance support' in shareholders funds in the 6 years since the London AIM IPO. In addition to his base salary he is getting around $300k a year in living expenses, plus performance bonus(up to 150% of salary), pension, health and life insurance cover. With the share price still 15% below the IPO price, Paul Blakeley needs to deliver big time over the next 12-18 months. ps: why the remuneration committee thought he was worthy of $830k in performance related pay over the two years - 2021 and 2022 - the period of the Montara Venture debacle, which saw the share price commence a period of freefall, has never been explained to shareholders. | mount teide | |
03/10/2024 06:46 | Its a good sign. | 11_percent | |
03/10/2024 06:39 | Okay, 150 grand is quite a lot of cash. Good stuff Blakely. | winnet | |
03/10/2024 06:11 | Pretty clear message from Paul b. Excuse me mr Market what are you doing? :) | nigelpm | |
03/10/2024 06:03 | Hefty director buy | mirabeau | |
01/10/2024 17:05 | Technically, I thought this was in a nice place before the results. Now the moving averages are not our friends as we dipped below... I suspect we may have issues in the 31-33p area. A lot depends on the oil price, once through the 100 and 200 MA regions, it could be game on. No more F-up's Blakley. Note. I do feel that the failure of these Siemens electric motors is highly unfortunate, but I am beginning to wonder if JSE is just "one of those businesses". I mean, we all have friends that we stay away from, as they tend to be unlucky... is JSE just one of those business? Note 2. I hope not. | winnet | |
01/10/2024 15:34 | Greats posts on here at the moment, thanks KS in particular. Hopefully today's share price gain is repeated on a bit more of a regular basis and we can at least get to a new 12 month high. I've increased slightly at just below 27p, so it would be nice to see the back of any number starting with a 2. | lloydypool | |
01/10/2024 15:27 | Great work from both KS +MT, many thanks.. | birotop | |
01/10/2024 15:22 | Thanks - you are welcome. Took me an hour or so this morning to dig through the accounts and summarise. The answers are in there, broadly, but without familiarity of how they present things it's easy to make incorrect assumptions I'd say. I would expect and hope that they have everything broken down segmentally internally for each field for management to look at so they know what the margins are - but we investors won't get to see this in an aggregated annual financial report. I could perhaps IR for some historical info explicitly on Montara, but I don't know to what level of detail it would be reasonable to request!? | king suarez | |
01/10/2024 14:52 | KS - That's a tremendous piece of analysis. Thanks. 'Perhaps this helps better explain some of the jump in operating costs? They do these big repair jobs every 3 to 5 years that are reported within recurring operating costs during the year, even though it's not consistently happening every year. If you dig into the notes it describes what kind of stuff they do, but I guess it is lumpy and doesn't help smooth the cost profile - ideally they should probably be estimated up front and amortised evenly across each financial year, but perhaps they are never sure on timing, scope of work and cost?' You've indirectly identified and explained very well how the cost of inspecting and maintaining an FPSO to Classification Society Rules, where in-water surveys and continuous survey inspections are carried out in lieu of dry dockings, can typically create the potential for large cost variations yr to yr, due to the widely varying type of examination work carried out during each year of a 5 year continuous survey cycle. | mount teide | |
01/10/2024 13:00 | Not yet out of the recent down trend but certainly a welcome recovery since the momentary dip below 26p. Looking at the chart, 35p is quite possible on any good news to spark buying. | lord gnome | |
01/10/2024 12:12 | MT, JSE first report 'operating costs' exclusive of any workover costs, non-recurring repair and maintenance and lease operating costs. They then report the opex/bbl inclusive of all these adjustments (subtracting workovers and maintenance but adding back lease operating costs) so you have: 2019 reported production costs $120m, adjusted production costs $113m 2020 reported production costs $105m, adjusted production costs $97m 2021 reported production costs $207m, adjusted production costs $120m These are the total production costs for JSE and we have no obvious way of working out what the split is between Montara and Stag during these periods other than taking IR's word over their internal guidance? It is the 2nd adjusted production costs on which they report the opex/bbl. For reference - adjustments: 2019 workovers -$30m +$16m lease costs 2020 workovers -$22m +$18m lease costs 2021 workovers -$67m +$11m lease costs (project 'Clover' adding to workover costs) In 2021 workovers and repair and maintenance (R&M) were higher due to Covid. They report R&M in the initial production cost, but non-recurring R&M is removed in adjusted production costs. We're now told R&M costs will be higher on a recurring basis going forward to sustain the assets, partly due to cost inflation and partly due to them needing to do more work to keep things in good condition? Here are some of the recurring R&M costs: 2019 - $24m 2020 - $23m 2021 - $45m - increase of $5m due to Penmal and $18m Stag/Montara due to 1/3 and 1/5 yr work costs 2022 - $60m - ? for Skua 11 repair works 2023 - $56m - FPSO storage tank repair works etc Perhaps this helps better explain some of the jump in operating costs? They do these big repair jobs every 3 to 5 years that are reported within recurring operating costs during the year, even though it's not consistently happening every year. If you dig into the notes it describes what kind of stuff they do, but I guess it is lumpy and doesn't help smooth the cost profile - ideally they should probably be estimated up front and amortised evenly across each financial year, but perhaps they are never sure on timing, scope of work and cost? Maybe I should ask for a job in IR?.... | king suarez | |
01/10/2024 11:24 | Hi KS Its a calculation to establish how much the OPEX/bbl would rise if the higher Montara production figures in the earlier years had actually came in at the 2024 guidance of 5,500 bopd For example: With an OPEX cost of: $23/bbl x 9,000 bopd = $76m a year Assuming the costs remained broadly the same at $76m/yr, at 2024 guidance of 5,500 bopd, the above calculation would see the OPEX lift to $38/bbl from the decline in production. Its one of the calculations O&G operators who charter in FPSO vessels do to determine the increase in cost of the FPSO/bbl during the charter period to establish the potential lenghth of commerciality of the field, since the charter cost of the FPSO is by far the largest element of the total field operating cost. Harbour Energy have an FPSO on long term charter on the Catcher Field for which they are contracted to pay circa $200m a year during the initial fixed 10 year charter period, with options to extend. So, on 60,000 bopd of intial production the cost of the FPSO was $9.1/bbl. However, by the time the field has declined to 10,000 bopd the cost of just the FPSO would have surged to $55/bbl. | mount teide | |
01/10/2024 10:46 | Hi MT, "If an average of the actual OPEX costs for 2019-2021 were adjusted for the lower Montara production figure guided for 2024 and 2025, it would increase OPEX to circa $33-36/bbl." Sorry, I've read that sentence a few times and I can't work out what you're trying to say or how you derive that opex/bbl? | king suarez | |
01/10/2024 10:36 | KS thanks, and to IR for providing some useful further information. '2021 was unsustainably low due to COVID impacts' This raises a further question - why then was the 2019 and 2020 OPEX/bbl so low? 2019 - OPEX: $22.85/bbl Actual - ALL Montara and Stag Production 2020 - OPEX: $23.10/bbl Actual - ALL Montara and Stag Production 2021 - OPEX: $26.22/bbl Actual - Montara, Stag and H2/PENMAL Production 2024 - OPEX: $60.00/bbl at Guidance of 5,500 bopd - Montara 2025 - OPEX: $52.00/bbl at Estimate of 5,500 bopd - Montara If an average of the actual OPEX costs for 2019-2021 were adjusted for the lower Montara production figure guided for 2024 and 2025, it would increase OPEX to circa $33-36/bbl. AIMHO/DYOR | mount teide | |
01/10/2024 09:18 | It's only 4 years ago, but based on those 2020 OPEX numbers and Brent averaging $42 for the year, JSE started paying a dividend. Here we are in 2024, with Brent averaging $83 for the year to date, and the state of the balance sheet means shareholders can only dream of a dividend. With the share price on its knees, Blakeley's Proactive comment of 'The business today, has never been stronger'is risible. I'm surprised Bernard didn't fall off his chair on hearing that one. | pughman | |
01/10/2024 09:04 | Good work KS. I do like the way that IR respond to questions and seem to be so open with information. Contrast that with other companies which don't even reply to requests from PIs. Clearly a company which values its investors. | lord gnome | |
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 |
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