QS Energy Inc (QSEP)

[moorea9]

Alkaline,

In order to use the P/E formula, the aim is to obtain a yearly earning that reflects the market expectations. So if 1 sale of 180 M equals 1 sale of 180 M every year in the mind of the market, you are right.

It's easier to reason on a yearly earning which is a share of profit made by the customer (which is also what I think the price of AOT will be based on). That's how I got 13$ pps below.

moorea9 Saturday, 09/27/14 10:10:48 PM
Re: Flubug post# 12189
Post # of 20029

Flubug,

The E in the P/E must be a recurrent earning, not a onetime earning; moreover the market prices not on this year's earning but 5 years forward.
It's easier to reason from TC point of view on a share of profits, and from STWA on recurrent leases.

TC : additional profit = additional flow 50,000 barrels/day x 4$ x 365 days = 73 MUSD/year
STWA : 15 skids at 60,000 $/month = 10,8 M$/year
for 30 skids it would be 21,6 M$/year
We don't know how many skids are needed for this pipeline but 15-30 seems a good range.

That gives STWA a revenue of 15% to 30% of TC's increased profit, on a RECURRENT basis.
Let's take a profit of 12 M$/year for STWA. P/E = 20, PPS= 1,3$
This is for ONE pipeline and "FOREVER".
So if the market prices on 10 pipelines in the short term (5 years), the P/E would be more like P/E= 200 for a while, and the PPS would shoot to 13$.
This is just for mid-stream.

If you consider that there are more than 10 pipelines in the world, then the sky is the limit, even with the very conservative numbers I took