Trinity Exploration & Pr... Share Discussion Threads

[nocents] 18/4/2024 08:41

Yes. Just a subjective unnecessary post by me.
N.B. I did highlight SPT reform, no hedging, dividend, future BA drilling , no debt, significant FCF, increase in cash by end 2024 etc. And that I would buy on that alone if I could. I’ll stick with that.

[aqc888] 18/4/2024 08:14

Nocents, pour a good few paragraphs of cold water over that rally that started yesterday. Otherwise there will be a greater risk of it continuing today! Then there’d be nothing to complain about - which would be a disaster!

[nafafa] 16/4/2024 23:26

The Jacobin cost over runs would have been more palatable had it actually delivered anything. Going forward; divest unexploited assets and pay special dividend with the proceeds then spend the next few years focused on base production and paying a decent dividend. It is not that difficult.

[andrewbyles] 16/4/2024 19:31

It’s a small consolation, but I note that Cavendish are still forecasting a 1.5p dividend for 2024 (expressed as 1.9 cents) and capex at the top end of expectations (which suggests Trinity are pushing ahead with Buenos Ayres - which I’m pleased about).

The realisation by Cavendish that Trinity requires funding to develop Galeota shouldn’t surprise anyone; the surprise is that Cavendish has only just noticed it. As long ago as the November presentation, which was attended by some of Cavendish’s people, Trinity was saying that they could only borrow about 60% of the $30 million or so Galeota development costs (when I heard that they were proposing to borrow that sort of money I immediately responded by telling them that sale or partial sale was the only viable option).

It’s possible that the reduction in reserves reduces the amount Trinity can borrow, making funding all that bit more difficult. However, I don’t think many shareholders are/were keen on Trinity going from a position of net cash to relatively high debt on a single project (especially after the Jacobin cost overruns, which act as a reminder that oil projects are difficult to price).

[nocents] 16/4/2024 12:32

I highlighted your last comment yesterday ( £3.47 ). Cavendish , fwiw, focused on lack of financing. There are possibilities, but I just think that JB is not proactive enough. Trin has become the lazy company of 2013 which I foolishly in vested in at £14.50 a share(!) Why bother rushing anything if you are taking home half a million a year in salary!
I am afraid I hypothetically expect more obfuscation next week but hope to be wrong.
My opinion is that Jeremy was deflecting from Galeota as a 2C reserve and referring to present drilled and producing assets. He is a number cruncher and not a man of leadership in my opinion.
I appreciate your post Ab. I would , if you are willing, like clarity on whether the relegation of tax losses will affect profit tax on its present bopd, hence present profit. Will it??

[andrewbyles] 16/4/2024 12:00

Were it not for the two rounds of substantial fiscal reform (onshore, then this year offshore), we’d be facing a very bleak future (although Jacobin might not have been drilled, but then the purpose of fiscal reform is to encourage drilling). Fiscal reform has added millions of dollars per year to Trinity’s bottom line (in part because its profit is largely protected from profit tax by the historic losses: for many operators the raising of the SPT limit will increase their profits, but half of that gain will then be taxed as profit tax).

I suspect Trinity’s historic losses will increase further this year. Galeota is valued at almost $30 million in the accounts and presumably that will be written down following yesterday’s news about reserves. Obviously, it will be a non-cash impairment and since there’s no debt (save for an overdraft that matches VAT refunds) no breach of covenants to worry about.

Most of Cavendish’s write down of Trinity’s asset value arises because it says the large tax losses (about $225 million) won’t now be fully utilised. I’ve been told that it may be possible to apply Galeota’s tax losses to the new Buenos Ayers licence by merging whichever subsidiary owns that licence with whichever subsidiary holds Galeota. If that happens and Buenos Ayers holds plenty of oil, the tax losses could easily be utilised and BA will be very valuable. However, I’m concerned by Jeremy’s comment yesterday that “all the Company's current growth scenarios are focused on exploiting the 2P reserves of 12.91mmbls”. Is this a hint that BA is being dropped (it has no 2P reserves; indeed the licence still hasn’t been formally awarded) or is just more of the sloppy communications that we’ve come to expect?

It’s worth remembering that if Trinity can find a way to fund exploitation of its assets, Cavendish’s valuation jumps to 347p.

[nocents] 16/4/2024 11:00

Ab
Would you be kind enough to share your analysis of the practical and potential consequences of the tax modification?

[strathroyal] 16/4/2024 10:11

Is there a bright side to all of this? Despite Nick Clayton being a poor communicator with us plebs, he has done a lot of reorganising since taking over from Bruce, including refreshing the board. The latest RNS is probably another nail in JB's coffin as he must be one of the few, if not the only, senior exec left from those days.

[nocents] 16/4/2024 09:52

This company has over 49% shareholder holdings by large holders. They have potential influence. But may just be sitting back. No idea.
Shareholders have a vote on any takeover. Going private? Not sure.
Be careful when sowing seeds of worry here. Shares can only “ disappear” if the company goes into liquidation/Admin.
It is not fair to worry people.
Hostile takeover ? Maybe, but there are procedures to be followed. The large shareholders don’t hold their shares without influence and will not accept a wipeout. Newlands owns over 10% and could call an EGM if wished.
Don’t sow seeds of worry. We have suffered enough.

[princebuster2] 16/4/2024 09:39

So your holding would just be wiped out??

[lexus880] 16/4/2024 09:06

My post I think the small guy is done for.

19 Mar '24 - 14:05 - 3630 of 3683

0 1 1
I am sad to say I think the writing has been on the wall for some time. This will be taken out for peanuts at the small shareholder's expense.

[princebuster2] 15/4/2024 22:44

What a ‘break up or outright sale’ mean for us shareholders???

[nafafa] 15/4/2024 21:49

Andrew, I apologise as I did not see your post 7143, I do try to keep up with what certain valued posters like yourself have to say, and no doubt I would have responded had I seen it.

[boystown] 15/4/2024 20:53

It may have been mismanaged, we may have lost a lot of trust, there may not be a good word to be said about everything - but nevertheless, <£14m is just crazy given the assets and earnings!?

[andrewbyles] 15/4/2024 20:35

I think you’ll find nafafa that you’ve avoided reading my position on shareholder action. You’ll see my position set out in posts such as 7143.

Incidentally, I don’t remember any other shareholders being present when I questioned the directors at length during last year’s presentation and pressed them to agree to sell or partially sell Galeota. I don’t get the impression that many people here have been communicating with the board to set out what changes they’d like to see, as I’ve done at length over the past six months or so.

My position remains as set out at 7143. Unless Trinity’s directors manage to pull an incredibly large rabbit out of a very small hat next week, my view is that Trinity no longer has a future as an independent company. It’s time for a strategic review that should lead to a break up or outright sale.

[aqc888] 15/4/2024 18:55

Will be interesting to see what petrofac have to say about Galeota. The more information, the more saleable it will be, 27.5mmstb is still worth alot more than the market cap of Trinity…

[nafafa] 15/4/2024 18:53

My continued concern is this all plays into the hands of major shareholders, who could well be looking to take the company private for peanuts. Failing to garner sufficient support for small shareholder action may cost us all dearly. Interesting that, to my knowledge, AB has avoided stating his position on such action. Looks like the AGM may be the only opportunity to be heard.

[nocents] 15/4/2024 18:01

Reading and digesting Cavendish is not the same as believing they are correct. They had bopd wrong, oil price foreard curve wrong, share price price wrong etc etc. i trust next to nothing written or spoken in our dodgy, self-serving market world.
You really should stop reading things into people and what they post. It is a big error of yours.
Re.action..we tried. Another error.
It is up to the major holders, not us.
I keep telling you this.

[nocents] 15/4/2024 16:56

Fell walking. How wonderful! Good 4u.
I feel like it has been a day of abseiling with Trin.

[arlington chetwynd talbott] 15/4/2024 16:51

nocents - it is a real shame that you are still setting any store by non-independent research / marketing communications from Cavendish. As I have said before, read their disclaimers. TRIN is a classic AIM story that has reached the point where it is time to look away. Folk should have moved against the BoD long before now.

[princebuster2] 15/4/2024 16:43

Trin is to shares what Yoko Ono is to singing!!