Thanks for redoing your numbers, Bobwins.
My numbers look very similar to yours except that yours are a little higher. I find with resource companies, there is always a little leakage. If we look at third quarter actuals, multiplying the average BOEs by the average price by the number of days gives a higher number than their reported revenues. I make the adjustment by multiplying by 85 days rather than say 91 days. I then used the 85 day figure for my projections. The change effects not only revenues but also most costs which are largely based on revenues or on the volume of BOEs. So the net effect is to reduce your numbers by about 7 % (i.e. (91-85)/91). But in either case, the projections are compelling.
It is also time in energy analyst country to redo projections for 06 and start forecasting metrics for 07. There are a number of energy analysts (organizations) in Canada that do this for institutional clients (such as Joseph Schachter, I do not know if he covers Rival) but from what I understand such predictions are yielding even more compelling reasons for investing in energy stocks. With Rivals announced capital budget for 2006 of $12 to $15 million, I suspect (that unless a lot of this goes into land acquisition, some of it will of course) that production will continue to grow at impressive rates for 2006. I further note that from Rival's website (page 3 of their March 05 corporate presentation) the estimated value per share of the company was $1.15 as of Dec 04. With prices and findings going up appreciably and the ceiling test now allowing for the commercial exploitation of far more acreage that value could easily be $2.00+ per share by now. So the company is still selling at less than its true book value. Such companies can easily sell for much more than their net asset value.
