Petrotal Share Discussion Threads

[pro_s2009] 04/3/2021 01:25

Threats of trouble brewing again.




.

[thommie] 03/3/2021 22:22

surely nothing but a cheap top up opportunity... good newsflow recently. I really like what they are up to and the detail in information they are now sharing with us again.first I was a bit upset about the realised price of 53$ brent for the 2nd pilot cargo to manaus. but looking up the brent curve I realised that brent rose so fast I already forgot it was in the 50s over the first 2 weeks of february :)I didnt expect them to complete the planned cargo in time as the production declined because of the esp failure. Lets look forward.

[birotop] 02/3/2021 19:05

17.7 to 17 approx...jeez get a life.

[junky monkey] 02/3/2021 18:42

Any ideas for the dip today?

[wanobi] 01/3/2021 10:51

great posts McFly, many thanx for sharing your analysis, cheers Wan :-)

[mcfly79] 01/3/2021 10:49

It’s great to see the presentation include the 3 year figures at $60 oil.


At $60 oil the following figures are given:


*3 Yr EBITDA of $460m
*3 Yr free cashflow of $305m (EBITDA minus 152m capex)
*3 Yr closing net cash of $262m


The figures don’t include the Petroperu true-up which is worth an additional $39m at current prices.


The figures are also based on management's own internal production forecast, which is lower than the forecast used in the reserves report.


Not bad compared to a $200m market cap!

[mcfly79] 01/3/2021 10:36

Very encouraging presentation.


It highlights how conservative management’s internal production profile is:


Page 20 shows the Internal Management 2P production profile for bopd as follows:


2021: 11.5k
2022: 17k
2023: 11.5k
2024: 8.2k
2025: 6.5k


The EBITDA projections (page 12) and free cash flow projections (page 20) are based on this management forecast.


However the graphs on pages 8 and 12 show the 2P production profile used in the NSAI Reserves Statement that was just published. The figures from the charts look broadly as follows:


2021: 11.5k
2022: 17k
2023: 15k
2024: 12k
2025: 10k


A much slower fall off in oil production after the peak in 2022.

[pro_s2009] 01/3/2021 08:13

2018 June folder........someone really messed up the website.



.

[spangle93] 01/3/2021 08:07

Thanks doughcyclone, it's a dense read

Some interesting information on potential within Block 95, and on Block 107, but I was hoping to hear more about "potential acquisition" other than $20MM set aside

[bad gateway] 01/3/2021 07:59

That was good of them and thanks for posting doughcylone.

[doughcyclone] 01/3/2021 07:52

I messaged them and they are working on it. In the meantime I got the pdf sent to my mail. Here you go.

[qs99] 01/3/2021 07:30

haha, yes that is pretty village really, their IR team will no doubt get a rollocking

[pro_s2009] 01/3/2021 07:28

Lets hope its not short for "operations went wrong"....... LOL

[brileyloucan] 01/3/2021 07:27

...and it says "opps! something went wrong" instead of Oops!!

[pro_s2009] 01/3/2021 07:22

RNS about new presentation.


404 error.....their Investor Relations pages on the website are down.


Complete F.U.

[jbravo2] 25/2/2021 10:00

Yes it’s surprising this hasn’t moved further with this oil price. It’s due a jump at some point

[mount teide] 24/2/2021 16:30

Brent jumps again to $67.25 - up 2.83% for the day.

[spangle93] 24/2/2021 12:56

I should be charging him ;-)

[thommie] 24/2/2021 11:16

hTTps://mobile.twitter.com/BurggrabenH/status/1364491242944528385

[thommie] 24/2/2021 09:21

I think it's quite a good sign that we see an improvement on RF taken into account the wells were shut in or producing on reduced rates, resulting in only 50% of the possible production without further drilling in 2020. as I have no clue how they decide wether to increase or decrease the RF my guess is it is dependent on the delivered production from wells. as they were not producing at full steam throughout the year it might be hard to foresee the real possible performance. so I dont expect them to be more cautious. while the ceo is very optimistic in his comment that RF will improve from year to year.

[mcfly79] 24/2/2021 08:55

Auctus have a short note out this morning and have increased their target price from 50p to 60p.

[mcfly79] 24/2/2021 08:55

Thank Spangle.

[spangle93] 24/2/2021 08:45

McFly - to some extent the NPV figures will be distorted each year because the assumption about future prices will vary with every reserves review. It used to be that the future NPV had to be calculated using the WTI price on Dec 31 of the previous year, but as you can imagine, that led to all sorts of weird stuff if the price spiked or dipped at that time, so now CP's can now use a bit more discretion.

The underlying principles are
1. Reserves rose by more than has been produced
2. Opex has been significantly reduced
3. Capex to develop the 2P is broadly flat
4. Combining 1 and 3, future devex/bbl is lower

Intuitive from above (especially 2), you'd expect field life to extend rather than contract, but that would depend heavily on long life projects of oil price.

As we covered about 40 posts ago, NSAI saw no reason to double the RF, as some were suggesting based on analog fields. However, as long as they keep on each year growing the 2P by more than the production, they will eventually get to the higher RF ;-)

However, is there a hint that this is the direction of travel? The stand out figure is the 25% increase in 3P reserves - but oil in place remains unchanged in these estimates. Consequently, the 3P reserves must envisage a greater recovery of OOIP than previously (18% vs 14%) or vs 2P (also 14%). Strictly speaking for RF, you should also include the historic produced volumes so this is illustrative rather than rigorous, and no-one should really base investments on just a consideration of "the possible". Nonetheless, it's an interested sideshow.

[mcfly79] 24/2/2021 07:25

Very happy with this.


The NPV figures are being distorted by the changes in oil price.


If they had applied last years forecast prices to the new reserves it looks like the NPV for the 2P reserves would increase from $1.098bn to $1.31bn.


Largely as a result of saving $232m from operating costs (plus the increase in 2P reserves.)