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 | 00:00:00 |
| 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 333.85M | USD 14.86M | USD 0.0113 | 23.23 | 344.45M |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | O | 0 | 26.25 | GBX |
| Date | Time | Source | Headline |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/12/2024 | 07:00 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc Operational and Financial Update |
| 04/11/2024 | 07:00 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc South Sudan Acquisition Update |
| 01/10/2024 | 12:34 | ALNC |  EARNINGS: Savannah Energy swings to profit; Creo loss widens |
| 30/9/2024 | 17:01 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc Half-year Report |
| 30/9/2024 | 16:28 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc South Sudan Acquisition Update |
| 03/9/2024 | 06:00 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc South Sudan Acquisition Update |
| 07/8/2024 | 17:43 | ALNC | TRADING UPDATES: Savannah Energy's Petronas deal falls through |
| 07/8/2024 | 14:20 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc South Sudan Acquisition Update |
| 02/8/2024 | 06:00 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc South Sudan Acquisition Update |
| 28/6/2024 | 12:39 | UK RNS | Savannah Energy Plc Result of AGM |
Savannah Energy (SAVE) Share Charts1 Year Savannah Energy Chart |
|
1 Month Savannah Energy Chart |
Intraday Savannah Energy Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/12/2024 | 07:25 | Savannah Energy - High Growth Sustainable Energy Specialist | 3,434 |
| 06/12/2024 | 15:51 | Savannah Energy | 238 |
| 23/1/2023 | 08:36 | New name, new hope? | 7,492 |
| 14/10/2022 | 04:23 | SAVE with charts | 11 |
| 28/3/2022 | 15:12 | Looks like zengas was wrong | - |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 12/12/2024 08:20 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 23.23. This morning SAVE shares opened at - |
Posted at 14/11/2024 15:05 by rockyride UNBELIEVABLE how so many posters (paid or not) keep plugging this company. The proof will be in the relist price. AK has had 2 years to add value to the share price Suspended price 26p and let's see what we relist at, not what the share price may be in another few years time. |
Posted at 04/11/2024 22:37 by zengas Pldazzle your guess is as good as mine and are they all or some of them ? On the Petronas asset deal, i can only wait to see what's presented for shareholder approval to make that decision whether i'd like it or not (if it gets that far).Niger - Only have the present regimes statement that contracts etc with investors will be honoured. Last valuation for the assets was $153m. I don't doubt that there is anti western sentiment but if you read up on the present situation the juntas in all 3 countries have lost major support and matters now seen worse under their rule after the initial and early support for throwing out western military etc. Chad - just wonder why you assess it at between 5-10p which would be $85m to $170m at current exc rates versus $1220m claimed. If as recognised the assets were ours - then we have to start with their valuation to us. The oil field assets were $245.4m. The pipeline $288.3m. Total $533.7m There was a 9 year baseline return at $60/b oil of an average $39.1m/yr = $351.9m. There was a 9 year baseline return from the pipeline of an average $37.4m/yr = $336.6m. That's from the relisting document presentation in 2022. Add all the above and you get $1222m - the same figure that SAVE is now claiming. We will need to see what or if the capitalistion rate is/used on the expected profits over a recognised timeline the company would have expected to make and/or the discounted future earnings method. I personally expect close to the individual valuations for the oil fields and pipeline interests as two seperate asset entities = $533m which would make up the bulk of the claim as how far down can it really be discounted if one thinks about it carefully. Rather than 9 - perhaps 2.25 years miminum of the expected baseline yearly returns or $172m. Maybe as high as $700m which would be significantly ahead (if awarded) of my hoped for 25-33% of the overall $1220m figure. That's how i arrive at it from the info available and trawling through many other claims online. I'd expect an interest rate award to be applied to hinder and penalise the longer it goes unpaid. Ways and means to recover it and there's always a potential sale as discussed before on here. With that looming, there's always a chance that it may not go the full distance given Chads acknowledgement and saves willingness to discuss with them. If anyone else wants to have a stab at the compensation case - by all means but those figures appear to match the 2022 presentation and i can't see how the pipeline and oil fields could be materially undervalued from those 2 individual asset figures. Yes i beleive the 9 year expected baseline return figures could be materially reduced but then we've also had oil at nearly $75-$80+ this past 2 years. We saw how Save turned a $1m investment into a $16m loan with $4m recovered at Fenikso/Lekoil so i would expect them to be equally determined to get maximum fair value for the damage it did to us in throwing us off course not to mention shareholder sentiment with PIs especially. |
Posted at 04/11/2024 14:47 by gisjob2 We disagree on how much support SAVE have from the Government.I believe they have very little due to no minister whatsoever posting any sort of support for SAVE's acquisition of the project over the 2 years and the Government seeking US funding from Caltech to acquire the projects themselves, trying to pull the rug from under the SAVE-Petronas deal when it was still live. They've demonstrated their true intentions. I've seen no counter proof of any positive comments, decision or actions by the Government to support SAVE I believe there's no chance of AK getting a decent deal in South Sudan and would be happier if that is the result. I just wish he'd stop wasting his time there. As far as I'm concerned any deal there is a bad deal. Even AK managed to get something in SS, recent history has shown he could never move it on in the future without yet another arbitration where the Government try to milk the company. A 'Hotel California' situation. |
Posted at 02/11/2024 16:09 by highly geared The only way to look at SAVE is return on investment to shareholders ( capital gain and/or dividends) over a reasonable period of time versus remuneration/ compensation of the BOD over the time period who are charged with delivering said shareholder value. 10 year share price chart anyone? |
Posted at 02/11/2024 12:56 by gisjob2 Zengas,You can be blunt as you like but that doesn't change anything or make you right. Let's not rewrite history ! I did not jump to any conclusion regarding Nigeria. I have never been against Nigeria as a country to do business in, particularly a gas project. I have spent time in Nigeria myself working as a Civils contractor for a multi-national oil company so I'm more aware of the country than most on here and know it's certainly no South Sudan. I was never against the 7E deal, I did want AK to also spend more time developing Niger where we had a 100% strike rate after 5 successful wells and by AK's own admission had a development plan that he reneged on without any explanation to shareholders. Accountability is the issue for me. I was happy with the 7E deal as it was almost 100% gas onshore. This didn't give AK carte blanche to bin his (repeat his) proposed development of Niger without ever explaining his reasoning to shareholders. Even now since the troubles in Niger eased and a new pipeline available, progress has been glacial regarding testing/readying the wells for production. This is either because no progress has been made or AK has not deemed shareholders important enough to update. Re-financing has also been progressed at a glacial rate. My only issue with AK on the 7E deal was the lack of updates given to shareholders when the acquisition dragged on and his own stated deadlines were missed, while not progressing Niger, which seems to be a pattern of his. He had no control over the 7E completion dates so should never comment on such matters. I could always see the positives of the 7E deal if completed unlike any foray into South Sudan. AK successfully completing a deal in Nigeria has no positive or negative impact on how successful AK will be pulling off a deal in South Sudan. Personally I hope he's massively unsuccessful in this despot country and SAVE returns to the day job of Nigeria & Niger or expansion into an additional sensible country. I also seem to remember AK talking about a farm-in partner in Niger many years ago to speed up development, those were the days. Likening the reaction to the lengthy 7E acquisition to South Sudan is tenuous to say the least the only common point is the lack of progress on Niger, which even now allowing for a couple of years for the war has been glacial. As for not understanding the complexities of any deal in South Sudan, I can completely understand the magnitude of the job in hand which is a very good reason to give it a wide berth. The desperation Petronas have shown to exit the country in the way it has confirms what a despot Country/Government it is. It would have no trouble in spitting out a minnow like SAVE. If South Sudan is such an opportunity then I'd be happy to see any report or comment from the SS Government in the last couple of years supporting SAVE's forthcoming investment. No.... I thought not. |
Posted at 31/10/2024 18:34 by gisjob2 Rockyride,I completely agree that AK has somehow managed to bewitch the nomad. I've finally had enough of being kept in the dark by AK. His record of delivery in the last few years is shocking whether it's the forays into depot countries like SS, the continual delaying of any notable work in Niger (I can't imagine any other company being so slow on this having drilled 5 out of 5 successful wells many years ago) and the constant delays in sorting out the refinancing. But worse than all this has been the way AK has treated shareholders with contempt by keeping them constantly in the dark about the business as a whole and the progress of any acquisitions. AK has taken his eye off the ball and forgotten what his day job is instead indulging in some fantasy world of playing 'multinational oil company boss' for the day. He's failed to deliver anything of note for the last couple of years and should resign. The least he can do is get SAVE relisted and let any disgruntled shareholders end this misery and sell up. It's not clever to preside over a halving of the share price, anyone is capable of doing that. AK needs to end this farce. |
Posted at 07/10/2024 19:16 by gisjob2 It's not hindsight. Never been a fan of South Sudan and have said so constantly. I also cannot believe that South Sudan was ever the answer after the Chad debacle.I would give our CEO recognition if he hadn't managed to preside over a halving of the share price since listing, delaying Niger testing and development for years and still not managed to complete the refinancing. Along with getting us involved in South Sudan and managing to keep us suspended for two years while spinning this out still further when everyone knows it's a dead duck but AK it seems. I cannot believe AK has managed to meet any of his KPI's this year or last. I'll give AK recognition when he puts his 'pretend Multinational oil company boss clothes' back in his dressing up box and concentrate on the day to day running of the company and when the share price resembles that of the first day of trading. It's not clever to halve the share price, anyone can do it ! |
Posted at 03/8/2024 20:21 by thommie Both of us know that this actions from corrupt autocrats are not planned for long term prosperity for their country or their people. It's all about personal short time profits. And who says that save overtaking the assets will lead to more investments? They wont be operator and I doubt that SS will be the priority for CNPC. They have far more new fields to develope than to invest into land locked stranded assets that need a country at war with a damaged pipeline for transporting of the oil. Ofc save can try to switch their mindset, but if Cnpc thought that it's more profitable for them to invest their money into SS they would have taken over petronas stake directly with pre emption rights when save announced the deal. But they were not interested. It's a super mature asset, its psc under the current terms runs out in 4 years. It's obvious that if the deal goes over the line save will be buying cnpcs interest as well next to prolong the field life under extended licence terms. If SS steals it from save nothing will happen, cnpc wont invest anything into it and will just run it down till its economics pass a treshhold where the field will be abandoned. Thats game over for the SS state finances in about 4 years. The problem is, corrupt regimes just dont care about that, they dont think longterm. Giving save the asset is their only way of a chance to profit from oil in the future. And only of war in sudan ends soon. |
Posted at 03/8/2024 11:54 by thommie Upwego, as outlined by some posters on here that spoke with save management at the agm it's not saves decision to not relist. It's said that nomad said they wont be able to relist if the deal isnt approved or instead terminated. So to say even if save wish to do so, they cant.And as I said before, and thats exactly what Mount teides article said... Salva Kiir planned to copy the chad situation with petronas, to just take over the asset for free by claiming the exact same deal with the same backdated production since 1/1/2022 and it's asset price reductions to not need any financing and to just take over the asset for free by waiting long enough. His problem now is that since the pipeline disruption the effective price isnt reducing anymore. So time might be on our side, as he may lose elections in november because of the financial situation in SS due to the sudan war and the related pipeline damage. Ofc it's a dream to think any new leader wont be corrupt, but maybe it's possible to find alternative ways with him that werent possible with Kiir. If he gets reelected I dont see any approval coming anytime, then it might be good to just terminate the deal, as even with the effective date we would need to serve the interest for a loan for the final payment for the asset. Even if its just 300-400m we would need to find 40-50m$ in interest rates per year, as it's possible that the pipeline wont get operational anymore till the sudan war ends. And that could take years or decades from now on... It might be frustrating to just terminate the deal, as we all expected to be rich after the closing of this Super deal (it was before sudan war started...), we could end up loosing around 30-50% of the share price after relisting without SS. But we were at 30p before that without any deal on top of accugas. Since then our core business developed well and will improve as well in the future to be worth that 30p and even more in my opinion. So I guess after some time the share price will be back to 30-40p even on accugas alone. And Im sure we will get something out of the ICC case Re chad nationalisation that might just double or triple the share price on its own. So whatever happens maybe even if its frustrating after such a long wait, it's best to hope for a ternination of the SS deal just to get out of that war mess and corruption lot of SS... |
Posted at 13/6/2024 12:22 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. |
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
