Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Yeah, bad luck in Welwischia, this may help and rising oil price because of the unrest in Iraq lifts all oil producers.
Compared to earnings share price is fine. But in case of this stock I would look at cash flow. Earnings comprised of asset write ups are just part of an accounting world. In real world the cash flow matters.
Second I want to see rising boepd and not just 2p reserves.
The share price popped up nicely, but nothing has changed. This company is debt loaded, has negative EPS and may soon follow STP the way into bankcruptcy.
I bought a first tranche last year at about 0,62 CAD and recently at 0,54 CAD. Always not much. Trading Pennystocks is just gambling.
I don't trust Madalena's Management and I expect the worst from Argentine politicians, but buying after the drag down effect of private placements sometimes pay off.
Those who believe in the story of this seeking alpha author: are You aware of the fact that LNREF bought Eagle Ford acres from CWEI and just a little later seems to have written up the reserves by 7.4 Million BOE.
Yes, their is an independent resource estimate, which supported this write up, but what has the author told about the credibility of independent auditor?
Why should CWEI have underestimated these acres so heavily?
Are You kidding? These pennies per klick don't cover the hours of research. Selling such information to institutional investors would be much more valuable for the author - if it isn't a pump 'n dump.
The story behind Madalena is fine, but this endless dilution kills shareholder value. Selfish management should sell assets instead of new shares.
No logic to follow. I've asked some questions. Can You answer them?
And by the way: not to answer is an answer too...
Calm down...
I haven't said, that I don't trade pennystocks and I haven't said, that I didn't bought some LNREF.
This difference is, that I take this risk into account, and thus trade it as a such.
I hope You do Your research way more carefully than how You read comments here.
Concerning HRT and Madalena: My careful approach has worked very well. I buy only small portions of pennystocks and these both I got really cheap. Small loss currently but big potential. The same today with Gulf Keystone and Petroceltic. They came down because ISIL guerrilla conquered Mosul and thus created fear concerning the safety of Kurdish oilfields. Bought small positions in them this afternoon.
And why do You think they sold the shares so cheap and below value when they IPOed at the ASX? And if the seeking alpha-author is correct in his assumption, why the heck does he shares this valuable knowledge for some pennies instead of selling this information privately or buying the shares in his own account?
Come on, guys! We all know that this pennystock looks like a pump&dump scheme, sounds like a such and smell so too.
Further it is easily to assume that the iniators of the scheme bought very low and the seeking alpha pro subscribers a little bit higher but still low. Playing this game means to get in at an relative early/cheap stage and hope, that the pumpers still have something to drive it higher again.
Never wrestle with a pig. Because you both get covered with mud—and the pig likes it.
Crying out that someone is wrong just because one dislike the content is childish. Anyway, no need to discuss this further.
The fact is that Nelson Tanure holds nearly 20%. Probably there is an agreement between him and Discovery.
So what? Was Marcio Mello a Saint? This guy caused a lot of the problems HRT is still suffering from and he has got a compensation which is IMHO not appropriate. Mello treated the company as if it was solely his own and made bad decisions.
If Nelson Tanure would like to get HRT cheap, nothing would have been easier as borrowing and spending the borrowed money for more exploration licenses and exploratory drilling and then conduct a prepackaged bankruptcy. That is what Walter Dawson did with Tuscany Drilling.
The best in the interest of all shareholders would be rewarding the shareholders - either by a share buyback or dividends. This obvious, but - I agree - it won't happen. A reverse split is some kind of cosmetics, but it is a good step. It minimzes the effect of the GDR fee, fulfills the requirement of the stock exchange and HRT won't look like a penny stock anymore.
That's right: there is a lot of back door practices, death spiral trading, pump 'n dump schemes, prepackaged bankcruptcies, etc. Pennystocks bear an inherent risk of being a target for this. It is for a reason that some institutional investors don't buy small caps and pennystocks.
Anyway, HRT has done recently some actions I liked. Selling a further stake of Solimoes and equipment was one and paying down debt another. If Nelson Tanure really plans an takeover, he would have buyed assets and borrowed money. The easiest way to bring down the share price is spoiling the sheet. This would have been possible without asking the shareholders.
The best protection of all shareholders is to return money in the pockets of the shareholders.
Nobody has to sell shares. It is Your free will to buy or sell shares. If the company buys back shares, it is a question of demand and supply whether they find sellers.
Of course, if You sell Your shares Your percentual stake will be zero. Despite this the proportion of those not selling there shares, remains the same. If NT's stake rises, my stake rises too.
Further the buy back increases the share price, which makes it more expensive for NT (and others) to buy more shares. It gives You the freedom to sell at higher prices.
Anyway if NT wants to achieve full control, the easiest and cheapest way to do so is making HRT spend all the cash, run out of money and then conduct a prepackaged bankcruptcy. In this case You won't get anything for Your shares.
I prefer returning the money to the shareholders, either by share buy backs or a special dividend, and shrinking the company to the existing profitable assets, which is Polvo.
Northsun, You are free to ignore common knowledge like the links, which I've postet, but that doesn't changes the facts. A share buyback makes it more expensive for NT to buy more shares. It would increase the share price, which is in the best interest of all shareholders. Anyway, if You don't like share buy backs, I wouldn't mind to receive a special dividend which returns at least 75% of current cash/marketable securities to the shareholders.
The management shouldn't burn more money by CapEx, but return it to the shareholders. Of course, currently all other assets than Polvo are cash flow negative, because they require further CapEx for exploration/development. Thus they should be sold. Instead of requiring CapEx this would increase the cash.
Concerning Your question: I haven't voted. Anyway I respect and appreciate the efforts of all independent shareholder and their participation.
To improve the quality of the discussion I would advice to read this:
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/sharerepurchase.asp
"Share repurchase is usually an indication that the company's management thinks the shares are undervalued."
and
"Because a share repurchase reduces the number of shares outstanding (i.e. supply), it increases earnings per share and tends to elevate the market value of the remaining shares."
Yes! The market strongly undervalues HRT shares. I don't think that neither any shareholder nor the management is of a different opinion. This the usual remedy is a share buy back.
Here You will find that a share buy back is even a kind of protection against someone seeking a controlling stake or a majority:
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/buyback.asp
"Companies will buy back shares either to increase the value of shares still available (reducing supply), or to eliminate any threats by shareholders who may be looking for a controlling stake."
So one could ask whether those fighting against a share buy back may act in the interest of Nelson Tanure, who is supposed to try increasing his stake.
1. Some fellow commentators and shareholders seem to assume that buying back shares after the reverse split would mean that HRT money is used instead of Nelson Tanure's money. He would raise his percentage ownership of HRT without spending any of his own money.
That is obviously wrong. If HRT buys back shares the number of shares decreases , which means that the NAV per share increases proportionally. Neither the stake of Nelson Tanure nor anybody else stake in the company rises or falls. A share buy back has no effect on the shareholder structure. If Nelson Tanure wants to increase his stake in HRT he has to buy share with his own money. A share buy back doesn't change this.
Thus stating that Nelson Tanure would raise his percentage ownership of HRT without spending any of his own money if HRT buys back shares is obviously false.
2. Some people seem to assume that a reverse split affects the trading liquidity. That is in my opinion without merit. Trading liquidity is currently very low. Obviously the actual number of shares outstanding doesn't support trading liquidity. A lower number of share won't solve this, but won't decrease trading liquidity either. A reverse split is neutral in this respect but it solves the problem, that the stock exchange demands a higher absolut price per share. Market capitalization and the shareholder structure are not effected. That is a mere question of math. and not of opinion. The product of number of shares and price per share cannot be changed by a reverse split, but just by the market and the decisions of market participants.
What would improve trading liquidity? Trading liquidity is a question of frequency and thus a share buy back would increase trading liquidity. If HRT buys back share this causes more transactions and thus more frequency. Secondly a share buy back increases the share price. Further it should increase market capitalization since it can give the market the impulse to better connect the share price to NAV.
CSIQ enjoyed a nice ralley from the lows in 2013. Anyway, performance of the past doesn't matter.
Negative: CSIG is a Chinese reverse takeover and thus I would like to see improved corporate governance, transparency, independent control and finally a perspective for rewarding shareholders by returning earned money in their pockets.
Positive: Among the Chinese solars CSIQ has the best/most downstream business. They should try to increase it further. Anyway solar projects bear the risk of delays, cost overruns or changing prices.
Maybe CSIQ can buy upstream capacity for cheap, when YGE bankcrupts.
Robnhood, I never said that HRT could improve liquidity by the reverse split. In my humble opinion the reverse split will neither improve nor damage trading liquidity. Your post contains no arguments disproving this.
Trading liquidity will rise with the market cap and market cap will rise, with further farm downs.
Selling the remaining WI in Solimoes would increase cash, decrease CapEx and de-risk the company. Acquiring the Brazilian licence blocks last year was a mistake. HRT hasn't the financial strength to explore this and return on invest is far away. Then farm down Namibian licence blocks.
All these asset sales would generate enough excess cash for a substantial share buy back or dividend.
In my view the current depressed share prices are caused because the management scared the markets by considering to acquire assets.
I think the problem is the endless dilution. I appreciate that Madalena is debt free, but in this a making moderately use of the debt facility would have served the shareholders better. Beside this they should sell the Canadian assets to focus themselves on the Argentine play. Skale down CapEx and in case of funding gaps farm down working interest in the licence blocks, which require most CapEx.
Northsun0: no need to hammer something in other one's head, if You have reasonable arguments. But if You want to compensate lack of plausability of Your thesis by caustically words, this makes Your case not better.
The reverse split doesn't changes trading liquidity. Whether You trade 60000 GDS at 0.17 CAD or 1000 at 10.2 CAD makes no difference.
If You haven't seen, read post #4048. it is one of Your own posts or at least a post published under Your name. In post #4048, published Tuesday 06/03/14 11:26:49 AM user "rzbern" cites a post reading "These guys are insane, gonna steal the company.....pretty "
Northsun0 has cited it too in his post #4052.
I'm not talking about Nelson Tanure stealing anything. I referred to a conversation of You, Northsun and VanWilder. That is a fact.
Anyway, the point is that NT only can buy cheap, what is offered to sell cheap. Nobody was forced to buy HRT shares or GDS and nobody is forced to sell it cheap. But if selling at these depressed prices, sellers shouldn't blame other.
I'm very sorry, but reading all these posts irritates me.
1. Mr. Tanure may buy shares at low prices, but he can do this only of he finds enough sellers at these depressed prices. That's not robbing or stealing but just dealing.
2. The reverse split neither changes the proportional stake in the company nor the market capitalization or liquidity.
3. After paying the GDS fee the share price presumably will be 0.02 CAD higher. So selling and buying back one day later just causes transaction costs.
4. Brazilian shareholder protection is really underdeveloped, f. e. recently OIBR rights issue. We all knew this when buying our HRT shares/ GDS, right?
"They need to find or acquire more producing assets or they are finished.
This requires money, and this is why it is trading at a discount to cash."
Sorry, but this statement doesn't make sense. It implies that acquiring producing assets or developing reserves towards production has a negative IRR. If this were true they should finish and payout the cash to the shareholders, which at least would remove the discount to cash.
Obviously this is broken stock despite severe undervaluation because the management tries to keep the company running and thus paying salaries instead of rewarding shareholders.
- Solimoes shall be farmed out or down
- Namibia blocks shall be farmed out or down
Thus obligations/CapEx will be reduced and positive cash flow from desinvestment
HRT is debt free and has substantial excess cash
Polvo produces positive operating Cash Flow.
The one and only conclusion a honest and reasonable management can draw from this at this share price is to return money in the shareholders pockets by paying dividends or buying back shares.
There is no better investment than in buying back shares. We all know the price/NPV and price/NAV. No project can beat buying back HRT shares or better GDRs.
I proposed a buyback. The money in the pockets of the company is the shareholders' money. The best use of it is to buy back shares and by doing so increase boepd/2p/OCF/... per share.
Further a buyback creates some demand for the GDR's which may bring them closer to a reasonable relation between share price and intrinsic value.
You may offend this and those promoting it, but as far as I'm concerned I haven't detected reasonable argument among Your aggressive words.
What's dragging the share price down? The share price is way below, what well informed, institutional investors paid when they participated in the rights issue last year.
Would have assumed, that the rights issue price is a bottom for the share price.
Situation in Argentina isn't as bad as feared. The Argentinians need foreign investors and domestic production. Their has been a settlement between Repsol and Argentina concerning the YPF expropriation. So the picture should brighten for Madalena.
In my humble opinion this reverse split makes sense and the higher the better, because it reduces the fee per GDR which GDRholders have to pay to Deutsche Bank. Now we are paying 0.02 CAD per GDR which trades at 0.16 CAD. After the reverse split we will have to pay the 0.02 CAD just for 60 combined pre-split shares. Would prefer a 100:1 split.
Anyway a reverse split is something like cosmetics. I want the management to deliver, what has been promised:
farmout Solimoes
farmout Namibia
and further they should start a share buyback and prove their trust in their plans and predictions by insider buying.
So are You both loading up more of it, of You consider it as nearly risk free?
Are You betting the farm on HRT?
And even if so, why we don't see insiders buying? Where are the hedge funds with deep pockets?
I underestimated the slowing demand for offshore Drilling rigs as a consequence of cutting CapEx by the oil majors.
1. Anyway, the oil price is still high.
2. shallow water, which is HERO's buisiness, is cheaper for the exploration company than ultra-deepwater.
3. Saudi-Aramco, one main customer, is not driven by activist shareholders. They won't cut CapEx.
4. México will liberalize it's regulation. SDRL got the first strike, but HERO will get it's stake too.
5. HERO is a hated stock in a beaten down industry. Usually all weak hands are shaken out now.