good morning.........one of your sentences reflects the whole problem here..... (I would hope even the most brainless of individuals grasped that truth) :-).........poor old rowman doesn't appear to see the wood for the trees
I'm not sure why you are so negative on XEL. I don't post on this board much but as I see it this company could easily be well over £1 this time next year if everything goes to plan (i.e. FDP approval is granted and financing arranged). I am no an expert on FDP approval but it sounds like they have a robust plan. However, I do know alot about financing, and as far as I am concerned this is a not a problem and will involve Rothschilds making a few phonecalls, and then having to fight off the investors with a large stick. As regards recognising an "asset" on XEL's balance sheet, you and Chappi seem to be saying the same thing. Obviously the value of XEL reflects the economics (I would hope even the most brainless of individuals grasped that truth), however bringing the asset onto XEL's balance sheet will clearly reflect a change in the economics of the asset, so Chappi is right that investors will value a company more highly if they have been allowed to book the assets
like taking candy from a baby :-)
every fortnight. Give or take a thousand or two...
have to bait the hook... ;-)
RE: operating costs
Even at estimates of peak rates, 8 years into production, it is impossible for sales of 800,000 barrels every fortnight. Keep in mind, estimates of water production increase exponentially with oil production. In fact, at peak production they estimate 380,000 barrels of water per day. You might think who cares ? It means that they would be handling 435,000 barrels per day, oil and water combined. Increased operating costs compared to operations without a high water cut. What do you say CHAPPI ? Should ugiebear promote 800,000 barrels every fortnight, or is he jumping the gun about 8 years, to say the least ? Seriously, the RAR shows less than 3,000 barrels of oil per day for the first year.
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.