Parkmead Share Discussion Threads

[fanshaw] 16/10/2018 17:38

How does Saint Fardels Bear fit you.

[fardels bear] 16/10/2018 15:59

Still being patient, fanshaw...

[fanshaw] 16/10/2018 15:46

Thanks tournesol for the explanation you obviously know how involved these J V are,

Fardels Bear how are they hanging these days Im slightly subdued and quiet at the

moment.

[fardels bear] 16/10/2018 15:06

That'll quieten him down for a bit.

[tournesol] 16/10/2018 14:57

Fanshaw

It's more complicated than you seem to think.

The size of the task has nothing to do with the market cap.

E&P companies do most of their business transactions via a complex web of joint ventures (JVs). Each JV will deal with a specific asset, group of assets, or complex project and will be managed by one of the JV partners which has been elected as operator by its collaborators. There will be a detailed JV agreement which can run to hundreds of pages.

Each JV will incur expenses in a number of different currencies and pay them from the JV Operated bank a/c and will then make cash calls on the JV partners for their share of the costs. Any JV income will follow a reverse process, first being offset against expenses then any surplus being distributed to JV partners.

What makes this particularly complicated is that many items of expense may relate to more than one JV and will need to be apportioned according to some agreed procedure. For example the Operator might charge their seismic analysis team to JVs on the basis of timesheets they keep showing which JV they have spent time on. Accommodation and travelling expenses might then be pro-rated in line with the time analysis. Corporate overheads then get apportioned in a similar manner.

This gets more complicated when transactions are converted into a different currency (which is most of the time) - since inevitably FX rates change and gains/losses arise because of timing issues. Those gains/losses themselves need to be apportioned.

What emerges from all this is a set of charge-back accounts that gets sent to partners and which partners then subject to very very rigorous examination to identify errors, inaccuracies and omissions - and there are always some of those. Those then get challenged, reviewed and corrected and revised accounts are issued. And they are then subject to scrutiny and all the above is repeated.

Correcting errors in one set of charge back accounts often results in changes to another different set.

Until every partner has accepted and signed off on the charge back accounts, it is impossible for any of them to finalise their own statutory accounts. If they all work to the same year end that is bad enough, but when some work to different year ends they do not have the same time pressure as others and can try to use delaying tactics to gain leverage in negotiation.

And all of the above is done separately for each JV in which a given E&P is involved.

A company like PMG can't finalise its accounts until all of the JV partners with whom it works have agreed all of the JV accounts for every project.

It can take an inordinate amount of time and energy to get all this done. Beleive me I've known accounting teams work 90 hour weeks under the lash of a frustrated CFO and still reach the 11th hour without things being ready.

I used to be the IT Director for a major E&P and I can tell you that the run up to year end is pretty stressful for everyone involved in finalising the accounts from the JV accounting team to the IT people to the staff in the cafeteria. They are all under the cosh.

[fanshaw] 16/10/2018 14:23

For a company with a market capital of approx 55 million why does it take nearly

5 months to produce final accounts, The company appears to being run like a castle

industry

[fardels bear] 16/10/2018 11:49

Is that like 10,000 PMG and a million squillion bonds?

[fhmktg] 16/10/2018 11:48

That would be nice ,mallorca- perhaps Tom might update us on what he and his Mrs have been doing with the 1million loan from the company as well.

[tournesol] 16/10/2018 11:04

Still my 2nd biggest holding (ignoring bonds that is)

[mallorca 9] 16/10/2018 09:47

They are working as part of a consortium. They will have to update by Nov full year results.

[chutes01] 16/10/2018 08:09

sure there is

[yasrub] 16/10/2018 08:01

Good Morning Tournesol

I think the implication is that there is appetite for PMG at this level - perhaps behind the scenes there is positive progress - well that is what I am hoping !

[tournesol] 16/10/2018 07:59

Surely there is a dog that's not barking here?

Am I the only person who spotted the very strong rebound which occurred the other day against significant market weakness?

What does that imply?

[fhmktg] 15/10/2018 11:13

A month to go!

[mallorca 9] 15/10/2018 09:15

Full year results and update are not too far away now.Hopefully an update showing significant activity.

[robs12] 14/10/2018 21:04

Maybe some news this week... :-)

[fardels bear] 12/10/2018 16:29

Or maybe not as long as all that?

[chutes01] 11/10/2018 19:59

next news Nov ?

[fardels bear] 11/10/2018 17:36

I expect he's just disillusioned, flower.

[tournesol] 11/10/2018 17:17

fanshaw

why do you say ...Tom having collected a vast number of oil and gas prospects in North Sea now seems unable to get other companies interested….

[mallorca 9] 11/10/2018 15:14

As always, all know that explosive news could suddenly arrive.Hard to imagine that PMG won't develop its assets.I still think they are working with a consortium to put things together - hence the long delay in updating.

[fhmktg] 11/10/2018 13:42

Strong buying is supporting the current share price

[fardels bear] 11/10/2018 07:55

I think Tom will surprise us yet.

[francoismyname] 10/10/2018 20:25

You can’t say things like that about Tom. People will tell you they are putting you on filter.

Your right of course. Toms lost the plot a bit here. Might as well give the funds back to shareholders if he can’t find anything better to do with them than sponsor the scottish cricket team ffs

[fanshaw] 10/10/2018 19:33

It seems that Tom having collected a vast number of oil and gas prospects in North Sea

now seems unable to get other companies interested. Should his strategy have been to

buy small producing fields as other have done successfully till he was able to finance

development costs himself. The dealmaker appears to have lost his Crown.