We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Savannah Energy Plc | LSE:SAVE | London | Ordinary Share | GB00BP41S218 | ORD GBP0.001 |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 26.25 | 0.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Drilling Oil And Gas Wells | USD 212.5M | USD -60.87M | USD -0.0464 | -5.66 | 344.45M |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | O | 0 | 26.25 | GBX |
| Date | Time | Source | Headline |
|---|---|---|---|
| 28/6/2024 | 13:39 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc Result of AGM |
| 17/6/2024 | 18:45 | ALNC |  IN BRIEF: Savannah Energy still suspended amid South Sudan acquisition |
| 17/6/2024 | 07:00 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc South Sudan Acquisition Update |
| 07/6/2024 | 14:35 | ALNC | CORRECT: Savannah Energy widens loss to USD68.9 million in 2023 |
| 07/6/2024 | 12:08 | ALNC | Savannah Energy shares plummet as loss widens to USD68.9 million |
| 07/6/2024 | 07:00 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc FY2023 Results, Notice of AGM, Posting of Report |
| 17/5/2024 | 07:00 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc South Sudan Acquisition Update |
| 05/4/2024 | 19:27 | ALNC | EARNINGS AND TRADING: Savannah waiting for government approval of deal |
| 05/4/2024 | 17:24 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc South Sudan Acquisition Update |
| 03/4/2024 | 12:19 | ALNC | EARNINGS AND TRADING: MediaZest optimistic; Volta Finance NAV up |
Savannah Energy (SAVE) Share Charts1 Year Savannah Energy Chart |
|
1 Month Savannah Energy Chart |
Intraday Savannah Energy Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 26/7/2024 | 14:26 | Savannah Energy - High Growth Sustainable Energy Specialist | 2,969 |
| 29/2/2024 | 18:18 | Savannah Energy | 232 |
| 23/1/2023 | 08:36 | New name, new hope? | 7,492 |
| 14/10/2022 | 05:23 | SAVE with charts | 11 |
| 28/3/2022 | 16:12 | Looks like zengas was wrong | - |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 26/7/2024 09:20 by Savannah Energy Daily Update Savannah Energy Plc is listed in the Drilling Oil And Gas Wells sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker SAVE. The last closing price for Savannah Energy was 26.25p.Savannah Energy currently has 1,312,194,545 shares in issue. The market capitalisation of Savannah Energy is £344,451,068. Savannah Energy has a price to earnings ratio (PE ratio) of -5.66. This morning SAVE shares opened at - |
Posted at 04/7/2024 18:27 by porschefund If SAVE does acquire Calabar Generation Company Limited (the owners of the Calabar power station), SAVE’s balance sheet could be further enhanced by the possible write-off of Contract Liabilities of circa $365m. The majority of which (as the largest TOP customer) relates to Calabar IFRS 15 take or pay gas not taken. If the value of Contract Liabilities is not written off by both Calabar and SAVE it would seem likely that the figure would at least disappear on consolidation. |
Posted at 13/6/2024 13:22 by zengas If you go back to FinnCaps valuation of 4th Jan 2022 using $60/b Brent and fully diluted.They had the NET valuation as 1. 3 TOP cases/ Accugas = $570.7m. 2. 80% Net Uquo 74.2 mmboe 2P @ $4.40/boe. = $326.4m. 3. 51% Net Stubb Creek 7.1 mmboe 2P @ $9.1/boe = $64.6m. Above $961.7m/£740m net to Save. They also had Saves net share of the contingent resource valued at $25.6m for Uquo + $21.7m for Stubb Creek = $47.3m which value Saves net share of Nigera operations for $1.009 billion or £776m. My own workings are considerably less in places - Gas contracts have risen since 4/1/22 but i've left Accugas valuation as then = $570m. Reduced the Uquo price per 2P boe X 20% to $3.50/boe = $261m. Reduced the Stubb Creek price per 2P/b x 50% to $4.50/b = $32.3m. (This totals $863.3m versus FinnCaps $1009m). Added the value of the Sipec acquisition (S/Creek) at $60m. I've added the 2C Uquo/S/Creek and Sipec 2C value in at 50% discount to at least $30m. For me this represents a more sensible achievable sales valuation at $953m/£733m now for the Nigerian assets. (using £1=$1.30 exch rate) That's gives a fully diluted share price of 51.8p. FinnCap have $163m for the Niger 2C which will convert to 2P later this year and AK says this is worth $150m. I've discounted this to $100m/£77m = 5.4p Current net debt with the late payment and Sipec factored in (see my 7/6/24 post 2903) $430.9m/£331m) = 23.5p. I get a valuation of at least 57p net debt free or 33.5p with debt for Nigeria and Niger which i believe i have significantly discounted. If you use the same $3 per 2P barrel that FinnCap used for Doba and apply that to South Sudan - basing it on 300 mmbls (this was on the AI reported figure) that's $900m base value (The headline price was $1250m). Using $900m/£692m = 49p/share fully diluted for South Sudan - how much will be debt idk. My base case is 49p S.Sudan, 51.8p Nigeria, 5.4p Niger = 106p on a net debt free basis. Current Net debt is around 23.5p. If South Sudan was left with $300m net debt then that would equate to another 16p or 40p net debt in total that will come down even if only selling 15,000 bopd in S.Sudan ie 30%. Like i say i've discounted this way below the analyst figures, haven't included anything for the expected additional resources/exploratio There's some minor value that i haven't considered in laying the ground etc for the Solar/Wind/Hydro projects being in motion. Finally $1.22b claimed in damages from Chad Doba, Totco,Cotco etc. $400m on success factoring in the loss/dilution to the company/shareholders at the time would be worth just shy of 22p. Imo no matter how you look at it, it's worth much more than the current 26.25p depending on what combination assets we have or gain and supposedly more in the pipeline. |
Posted at 13/6/2024 07:51 by buffythebuffoon ‘I’m sure Petronas have more they would like to get rid of in Africa, SAVE having built a strong relationship with Petronas, I would imagine once this is over the line SS, there will be more on offer from Petronas.‘Oh great, another 5 years with the share price going nowhere. Hey, at least we’ll be on the map. ‘I think all holders here deserve it after the long wait..’ You could argue that as investors here we absolutely don’t deserve it! Not that deserving anything was relevant. Do you think that consoles patients with Motor Neurone Disease. Buffy |
Posted at 17/5/2024 10:41 by mount teide 'Also I have been wondering if any of the delay is due to the damaged pipeline. Would you as a CEO want to sign on the dotted line for $1.25bn of oil assets with no current route to market. There would have to be some serious T&C’s build in to any final sign off.'Only if SAVE were getting the assets for a small fraction of the headline price, due to the amount of cash-flow accrued to SAVE from the effective economic date of the deal.....as is likely. Plus, assuming the deal receives the expected Government approvals and consents, it would be a smart and not unreasonable move from SAVE to secure some form of 'insurance policy' from Petronas, to cover/share the ongoing financial impact of the damaged pipeline, should it continue beyond the completion date of the deal. The South Sudan Government's $13bn 'cash for oil' deal signed with the Qatari firm is potentially a strong positive development in this connection - as it offers a very high incentive for the Government to secure the early repair/remediation of the export pipeline and, and to upgrade the level of security deployed to protect the staff and operational infrastructure in the producing fields and, the export pipeline. |
Posted at 13/5/2024 22:26 by divmad Zengas, a question. What do you estimate the share price potential of Save based on its Nigerian assets and nothing more? |
Posted at 08/4/2024 16:46 by ashkv AK is the worst CEO - enriches himself and penuries share holders.SAVE appears to be a scam - permanently suspended. AK / SAVE need to be investigated by FCA / Authorities - SAVE appears to be a scam. What about the Accugas/Nigerian refinance!!! Absolute shambles - Friday evening RNS Third rate corporate governance - and absolute basket case / self serving / self dealing incompetent CEO!!! Hopefully SAVE doesn't go belly up with our money!!! |
Posted at 20/3/2024 17:19 by gisjob2 What have SAVE got themselves and us into in SS. Such a shame when great smaller deals like the Stubb Creek one can be done.To be honest I'm surprised the SS Government haven't snapped SAVE's hands off if they want to invest in SS via the Petronas assets. A willing junior wanting to invest in the assets rather than a major not so willing. Maybe the SS Government are inadvertently doing SAVE a favour by seemingly not supporting the deal. It could be the best thing in the long run, albeit with some short term pain to the share price no doubt!. The main benefit of a successful acquisition in SS is the effective date of the deal. |
Posted at 13/3/2024 16:20 by gisjob2 Kinkell,Who's sensible time frame do we have to be on ? Yours ? I've been invested here for years so lets not suggest the 'fast buck' argument. We probably disagree over the lack of development of Niger since drilling 5 successful wells, which cannot be put down to recent security issues in the last year. I guess overall we disagree on a lot to do with SAVE. AK may be trying to build a major company but he has chosen the 'difficult areas' you mention and if NOT successful with SS on the back of Chad going south, with by his own admission plenty of options regarding acquisitions over the last few years, it couldn't be classed as successful. I'm not sure how you can suggest that Chad was not a failure, last time I checked we weren't allowed anywhere near the project. How is that not a failure ?. As for SAVE being an investment, anyone buying when it came to market years ago is still underwater and the share price has never been as high, so not a successful investment either over the years as it stands today. |
Posted at 13/3/2024 08:04 by kinkell RR - 2651. Thank you for your comment.I don't need to tell you how difficult it is to predict short term share movements, particularly since the long suspensions and radio silence have generated a great deal of emotional response! Assuming SS fails I would expect the share price to reflect the fundamentals of the business if not immediately then fairly soon. That comes down to an up-to-date report on Accugas, an assessment of the current position in Niger, the position regarding the acquisition of a the mooted next acquisition (eg partnership with the host government) and any other relevant information eg renewables. I think Zen's view of the likely share price in these circumstances is likely to be much more valuabled than mine but I would not expect a discount to the suspension price. If ss proceeds I would expect a sharp increase in the share price, for it is worth. |
Posted at 01/3/2024 12:39 by zengas RRI posted the below post exactly 10 months ago when some were saying they should pull out of the deal then. That time period should have shaved a further $300m imo off the settlement figure not counting the original effective start date. What is any different now in the last 10 months that imo would not have been considered after all this time since. Why would Save imo suddendly flip flop now so unprofessionally at any sudden blip especially when they've continued this far into an 11 month neighbouring war and pull out when repairs/maintenance could be resolved at any time as well as significant efforts being made to resolve the war. As i said in the following post, i'd be absolutely surprised if they had not factored in the potential for exports being offline for 3-6-12 months at any point in the risk mitigation. ' ZENGAS - 01 May 2023 - 14:05:30 - 1367 of 2622 Re should or shouldn't SAVE walk away from the S.Sudan deal. That depends how you look at it. First of all i believe any deal has to be non recourse to the parent group/other asset holdings just like Chad, Cameroon and Accugas Nigeria. Therefore i don't see it as putting the group at risk and no one would be that reckless least of all AK without ring-fenced financing. If anyone is likely to pull the deal it could be the actual entity that is/was there to finance it and not so much Save. It could be Petronas themselves who finance it - do or will they offer a financing agreement like Exxon and on what terms. They may be even keener to leave more than ever now especially as they also operate in Sudan where their complex/office in Sudan has been damaged in recent days with people unable to leave. Any opportunist will see the potential in S.Sudan. Perenco themselves were reported as interested. Things continue as normal so far and the main worry is going to be relying on one export route - so yes i see now as the time for S.Sudan to address and develop an alternative route faster than ever. They have land bought at Djibouti for this purpose. Can any deal be structured in a way that Save can continue say if oil exports were offline for 3-6-12 months at any point ? and it might not happen - totally unknown but i'm sure that risk has been considered. AI reports Save will predominantly only be a partner in S.Sudan - they won't have too many to pay as they need little staff, it all comes down to the loan financing and perhaps length of it. Seplat managed to survive in a one country jurisdiction with its oil exports severely constrained for a number of times over many months while alternatives were found and the original export route re-instated. What about the breaking story back on 18/1/22 when AI reported that it was a grand plan by the Vitol - Savannah duo for S.Sudan. Vitol is awash with serious cash and more so this past few years of high oil prices, and somebody like them could be more than willing to see this through with Save as they gain access to marketing the oil. I may be wrong but to leave S.Sudan high and dry because of what's going on with it's neighbour would be a big blow for the South Sudanese (not their fault) and anyone thinking of investing in S.Sudan pre June if the Savannah Petronas deal collapsed - so again i'd be surprised if Save decided to pull the deal on neighbouring instability. Yes they could delay it or suspend it but i think that would open the deal to other potential buyers. I do not want to see the deal collapse and i don't think Save will either but it will be more so in the hands of the right financing terms relative to the above.' |
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
Hot Features
Premium
