Touchstone Exploration Share Discussion Threads

[che7win] 11/5/2024 11:44

TXP has quadrupled production and due to double again by year end.Current revenue run rate 85m dollars per year.All three wells this year successful.I compare TXP to other companies and they favour very well e.g JSE, AXL, I3E.TRIN takeover looks like a very shrewd move, even if they just run for on shore cash flow, it's immediately earnings enhancing.Oilis much more valuable, we certainly couldn't produce 1m cashflow per month for 24m costs and low risk.Combined, we will save millions dollar costs. Why do u think we need offshore expertise? We are combining the best engineers from both groups.Then there are the tax losses which should save 5-10m per year.Cutting 30-40 of staff, listing costs, entire board of directors.Add in around 10m cash from TRIN balance sheet and VAT on top.This is a fantastic tie up from both sides.TXP success and TRIN up to 3 pounds value per share accelerates upside.2 times cashflow for TRIN, and they get to join at best time in 3 years. 150p is enevitable as we're oy at the beginning of ramp up.

[redartbmud] 11/5/2024 08:24

I have been reflecting on this momentous news.
My conclusions are:
1. PB has proved, time and time again, that he cannot effectively manage and control the existing operations in Txp.
2. The larger company will give him even more scope for his Baayups to muddy the waters.
3. The T&T government will be able to exert more pressure and control over one business, rather than two, and maybe take a bigger share of any pot of gold at the end of the rainbow - should there be a miracle sometime down the track.
4. The more I read, the more desperation I read into the script.
5. This is the last throw of the dice.

red

[kaos3] 11/5/2024 05:06

Spawny yes

As said before - do they have doubts in their (surplus cash) delivery mostly caused by geology and started an epic can kicking saga? All the way to the retirement.

Probable

[kaos3] 11/5/2024 05:04

There is a huge difference in competence by a buyer

One buys with a proof of past success and proof of competence eg cash

One buys with a hype and hope fiat eg shares

Txp had a chance to be in the first category just by delivering and waiting a few months but chose not to. Why?

[spawny100] 10/5/2024 22:47

Chrysalis - my only logical conclusion to TXP wanting to buy TRIN is that Ortoire isn't delivering (and isn't going to deliver) the wall of cash that Baay has been baying on about. Current financials and production rates add weight to this conclusion.

[joey1998] 10/5/2024 22:44

Those of us who've been around a long time in capital market O&G know what a merger/buyout means on AIM. It really is almost never good news. TXP had a moment in time; it looked, for a while, like it had broken orbit from the dross. But it never actually achieved escape velocity. It never will. It's a trade, not an investment. And there are better trades out there.

[flyinghorse1] 10/5/2024 22:24

DH,
There’s supposed to be a large condensate contribution at close to oil prices given the high CGR ( from testing wells) unless that’s evaporated.
It’s a key reason Trinidad gov keep the SPT as the countries gas generates lots of condensate that’s SPT cash generative.
FH

[chrysalis99] 10/5/2024 15:51

My concern would be that PB is muddying the waters if it turns out that Ortoire ain't anywhere near what he's sold to all us data-impoverished public shareholders. How many times have we seen that tactic deployed by unscrupulous CEOs in the junior resources sector.

[kaos3] 10/5/2024 14:19

what worries me is the general posters behaviour profile of specific shares - a huge red flag in my mind

i call it a cult share

characteristics-
* lots of industry shareholders and almost insiders shareholders are strongly supporting shareholders
* first superb following and enthusiasm and racing sp
* takes too long and disappointing delivery
* spats and opinions start on BBs
* insider superior posters move to exclusive telegram and discord etc
* simpletons like me are left alone but can join later
* all the time the company does not perform just yet to the plan ... but is only one step away

panr, pxc are not the right ones to say but hey ho

[dunderheed] 10/5/2024 14:18

Fh1 I agree but the gas price is substantially lower than I'd like to see and for once, am not criticising Clown for that because, I can understand his reasonings and whilst I have no idea what volumes at what prices have been negotiated, I'd at least have tried to tie gas price into volume bands. So whilst I hear completely the risk profile has changed from what you originally bought for, I do think a little extra oil profiles will balance up the (relative) "low" gas contribution?!
I remember when big Huey completely ruined EOG and changed strategy in such a material manner I sold out, so I am completely empathetic though of course. As ever all IMHO.

[flyinghorse1] 10/5/2024 13:47

Ill also state a key reason i bought Txp ( depsite all the rns hype etc) was its land based only and has gas now so more modern mixed fuel base.
Seems like the former caveat of being a TXp investor will be wiped out post deal.
The risk profile changes overnight. Wonder how Canadian investors feel

[kaos3] 10/5/2024 13:25

As we did not have enough on our hands.

BAa laser focused competence will get spread too thinly because of the deal i am afraid. which could leads to unfortunate operational hickups.

But hey - he will have additional support from the trin expert team.

[chessman2] 10/5/2024 13:19

KS, like DH I’m an underwater disappointed holder so I’d have to agree with fh1.

Unfortunately my faith in PB is nearly nonexistent!!

[flyinghorse1] 10/5/2024 13:01

KS-Good game lets see what others would say:

Id go for -Because he's deal blind and does not understand offshore operations.

[flyinghorse1] 10/5/2024 12:10

KS-Parity at best on share ratio offered.
Id want to see a recent(ie 2023/4) report from an independent assessor on decom showing $53mm-that will inflation link going forward and rig/crane etc availability

Id also want to see the 2P split for Galeota (ie what currently producing and its economic cutoff if no new drilling, and whats to be drilled , its feasibility and cost and timing).

Your statement "lets assume"-that's scary. Is Paul Baay at TXP saying , I want this deal so "lets assume" what Trin are saying is correct?

You would appear to have not worked in oil and gas so are missing my point about offshore asset costs/liabilities.

[king suarez] 10/5/2024 12:01

So what do you think TRIN IS/WAS worth?

Let's assume the decom liabilities are accurate - $53m. TXP receive $10-$12M cash flow p/a (before synergies). This covers decom in approx 4 years with the $5m net cash in bank also?

2P Oil reserves are 13mb - @2,700bbl/s day that is about 13 years (before any potential infil drilling to increase 2P).

So TXP get net 9 years of profitable production, discount that today and what's it worth? That's over $100m net cash. Not taking into consideration any synergies of corporate cost cutting, tax loss allowances to enhance TXP asset cash flow etc.

The price was £24m.

Unless the reserves report and forecasts are generally complete nonsense then it is on the face of things a good deal?

[flyinghorse1] 10/5/2024 11:50

KS-Unfortunately that job is TXP's to do via due diligence on behalf of its share holders.
Normally an engineering outfit is commissioned to do an asset survey (mainly offshore) to look at things like infrastructure, asset life, pipeline integrity, ability to drill from platforms, general condition ,electrics, crew boats etc etc.
Like we all do when buying an expensive asset.
It just seems that in oil and gas deals this goes by the wayside to save/make the deal.

Ill go back to my initial point -deal price (Share ratio) in my opinion is to high given the offshore liabilities/costs.
However-its likey whats required to get the undertakings from the major share holders to pass the threshold of 71% share holders.
Probably why its structured to give TXP shareholders no say what so ever. I would expect Trin holders to vote 100% for this deal.

[sleveen] 10/5/2024 11:46

I suggests peeps read the old Bayfield/Trinity RNSs from 2012 onwards (pg 27 of old ADVFN RNSs).

Interesting and may address some of FH1 concerns.

Currently on pg26/2013.

[flyinghorse1] 10/5/2024 11:35

KS -Im not going to educate you unfortunately.

[flyinghorse1] 10/5/2024 11:33

Sleveen,
At the end of the day any offshore asset will have an economic cut off based on realised price for production minus cost of that production.Oi companies often look profitable at group level but unprofitabe at asset level (reasonable as you may carry an underperforming asset for many reasons)
So no one is safe (ie oil price drops-production suddenly economic). Adding cheap new production offshore not easy, especially nearshore Trinidad-low well production rates and high drilling costs.
However no one will want to enter abandonment liability of ending a field as they have likely not provided enough $ to perform it.
Managing/sweating old offshore assets is like the final call in pass the parcel.