Petroneft Resources Share Discussion Threads

[seangwhite] 29/12/2014 01:55

Let's just say the share price reflects the dear and old BOD's end of term score cardAs now weary old boys they should take this rather low mark ( as indeed the share price is fairly low) and move on or just quietly retireVGLTA with POO as now for cast for 15 we really need it!!

[ravin146] 27/12/2014 17:08

^^true. Maybe it's frustration, over the year. Q1 we will be lucky to hit 7p from the levels we see here, after the oil price depression and Russian economy basically in recession. Horizontal results will need to be soo good to attract investors. I think some posters here believe that if bopd of certain wells reach target or just above target we'll see the share price double. Unlikely...any news, must be surprising, as it's that surprise factor which re-rates stocks and attracts investors. This stock is just not that popular enough to fuel a share price jump, as a 300 bopd horizontal result for t-5 may just get this to 5p wow lol. Investors demand must be there simple.

[steelwatch] 27/12/2014 13:46

Sean - you had a comprehensive update only 9 days ago and the market has is shut, so why the outburst above?

[jyoti1] 24/12/2014 16:36

Haha waiting for this since last 2 years ...

[kevjones2] 24/12/2014 16:10

Happy Christmas everyone. Let's hope the share price rises in the new year.

[ravin146] 24/12/2014 14:32

Interesting to see bp looking acquire rosneft's Russian stake?! tc

[ravin146] 22/12/2014 20:55

Loll. Valuations are a complex game, and there are various ways. Won't even go into them. My view only, that's what these bb are for, but I don't think expenditure should be split. What is split is current production and current value of field (whatever that is, valuations again with assumptions galore). The expenditure from oils total money is all ptr's cash, which was injected as it is the cost of the farmout. The real question is, if, ptr and oil were to close today. And let's say simply oil has put in £10 so far which is sitting in ptr's account/spent on assets. Does that then get split? Or is that ptr's to keep, with the remainder of the potential development money collected via a sell off of oils assets and then sharing value of field sale price. After typing the above...it's not simple lol doesn't someone have brokers valuation breakdown. The accountant will have followed the book. Gla

[steelwatch] 22/12/2014 13:46

Final observation from me on the subject:

it isn't a question of the amount PTR receive(d), but the benefit they receive from the investment which they would not otherwise have had. Glass half full of rosé here, LOL

[seangwhite] 22/12/2014 13:07

Logan

I second that, lets save our thoughts for the results on T5 and then hopefully there might be some light at the end of this long and somewhat winding tunnel.
Bet the news wont be until February as it should take our own dear old BOD a long time to spin it.

VGLTA

[loganair] 22/12/2014 12:37

Can we put this arguement to bed now and accept the differing opinions on how much OIL have spent and PTR have received.

[dbarr0n] 22/12/2014 12:31

RCT... A double ditch springs to mind ..

[rcturner2] 22/12/2014 11:51

PTR have received $35m + half of the $45m. The other half of the $45m, OIL have spent on themselves. So the total value of half the license is $57.5m not $80m.

[dbarr0n] 22/12/2014 11:45

RCT ... How is it dishonest ?,
I gave valuations based on the farm out for before and after the $45 million is spent.

[dbarr0n] 22/12/2014 10:01

RCT ... OIL India have had to outlay $35 up front + $45 on development so a total of $80 million to acquire 50% of licence 61,
The 2P reserves on licence 61 are not going to change so they have paid $ 1.38 per barrel based on reserves.
Also production was 2,100 bopd when the deal was signed not 2,600bopd as you state and production was 2,300 bopd at the start of the year when the deal was dated.
So the bought 1050 bopd - 1150 bopd of production and hopefully when Oil India has spent the $45 million on development the company will be producing 5000+ bopd 50% = 2500+ bopd.

So hopefully, we will have increased production from pre farmout.
We will have no debt.
Running costs will be halved.
So all we have lost out on is 50% of reserves.

[rcturner2] 22/12/2014 09:42

sean, the farmout was a good deal for Petroneft, they effectively turned half the assets into cash and as you say removed the debt problem. They now need operational success. What I don't like is people pretending that the farm out was better than it was, which I consider to be dishonest.

[steelwatch] 22/12/2014 09:36

RCT - well lets hope next years 1,000 m horizontals surpass that.

[seangwhite] 22/12/2014 09:31

RcTYou seem to ignore the fact that the farm out paid off the debt PTR had.It was managing these loans that meant there was no possibility of increasing output.The new PTR can now at least attempt to get to a 5k output and also invest to increase its total P2 reserves .I am no defender of the BOD but the deal could be a catalyst for the share price to grow in the next year.VGLTA

[rcturner2] 22/12/2014 08:47

Steel, I can just about agree with you, but before the farmout, production was 2600 bopd, so it has to reach 5200 bopd just for petroneft to stand still.

[steelwatch] 22/12/2014 08:18

RCT - Technically, yes, but in reality, no.

With no farmout at all, Petroneft could well have gone under, or, in the unlikely event the lenders could have been staved off, limped along on dwindling production from existing wells without any prospect of restarting drilling.

Of course Natlata would have, in such circumstances, walked in to uncertain effect for shareholders. MTA springs to mind here.

So, PTR's continued existence, regardless of other hypothetical outcomes had OIL not farmed in, and share of any future production is entirely due to the $35m cash up front to clear debt and the full $45m investment into bringing getting back to drilling new wells.

In reality, it could be argued that PTR has only, in fact, traded away half of all dwindling pre-farmout production and its share of any future production is entirely reliant on the full $45m investment by OIL.

[rcturner2] 22/12/2014 07:33

It's not 80m though it's 57.5m.You have to halve the 45m expenditure on the field as only half of that money is for the benefit of petroneft.

[dbarr0n] 22/12/2014 00:38

RCT..
You must be blind as well as everything else. Put on your glasses and read the rest of the post.
Your friend should get his advice from somebody else.

Licence 61.
£ 51.2 million = $ 80 million div 58 million barrels = $ 1.38 per 2P barrel, or div by 707.245 million shares = 7.23p per share.
The above is the valuation of 50% of licence come 2017 based on the farm out deal when Oil India have spent $ 45 million developing the licence.

£ 36.8 million = $ 57.5 million div 58 million barrels = $ .99 per 2P barrel, or div by 707.245 million shares = 5.2p per share.
The above is the current valuation of 50% of licence 61 based on what Oil India have paid for it.

Licence 67.
50 million barrels net to Petroneft @ $ .50 barrel = $ 25 million or £ 16 million div 707.245 million shares = 2.25p per share.
The above is a pure guesstimate and alter it as you like and add to one of the figures above.

But as I said before Oil India didn't pay what they thought 50% of the licence was worth now or then.
They surely expect their investment here to be worth a lot more..

[rcturner2] 21/12/2014 22:00

You said:

"Licence 61 £ 51.2 million = $ 80 million div 58 million barrels = $ 1.38 per 2P barrel"

Totally misleading.

[dbarr0n] 21/12/2014 20:19

Rct .. How dare you say my post is misleading...
The cost to Oil is $ 80 million once they have expended the $ 45 million, this is fact and what I have stated..

[dbarr0n] 21/12/2014 20:12

Crudde ..
The valuations above are based on what Oil India paid for their 50% share of licence 61.
If you go on Ryder Scotts figures 50% of Licence 61s proved and probable reserves at $ 85 will generate a future income of $1.2 billion discounted at 10% = $ 450 million or £280 million.

Licence 67..14 million barrels proved and probable reserves at $ 80 will generate a future income of $176 million discounted at 10% = $ 76 million or £47 million.