Member Info for damofarl

Lse;

Thanks for the consolidation spot.

"...........However, these costs are ultimately expected to be non-recurring, and the Company acknowledges investor concerns that the project represents a drain on near-term free cash flow"

It's almost as if the Company is reading this thread. Pragmatic long term planning as ever, not jam today and bust tommorow.

PTAL - the long dollar, not the quick dollar.

Strictlybricks;

Good to see you here, I greatly appreciated your previous singular focus on housebuilders, which I found invaluable one enriching; I look forward to seeing the same focused reason, rational, and research in this sphere.

Personally I didn't think the offer from ENQ was generous or even fair value acknowledging, but not withstanding that, did feel SQZ would be greater for the sun of the parts. Feel the driver here was ENQ not SQZ and frankly, the reason, "EnQuest confirms that in light of current market volatility it has not been possible to reach an agreement on terms." is baloney. Market volatility is the day to day of oil/gas companies, and if a deal was valid, it's still valid through that cycle/volatility. Either ENQ wanted to low ball more opportunistically, or SQZ, stood fast. Which we will never know but I hope (and believe), it's the latter.

SQZ didn't need this deal, a deal at any price, and the relative reactions in SP's shows that. That it reiterates that it is looking for/will do a deal is a positive. That it won't do so at any price is a positive.

Stand alone, as is, SQZ is a positive. Let's keep those positives to ourselves

The increase in NAV here is really impressive, considering each healthy dividend, being NAV linked should reduce/hold the NAV.

Stocks like this, where well managed, thrive on volatility being able lo lock into better rates, and with the truity of the NAV constantly demonstrated, the SP NAV discount provides opportunity to lock in a great yield.

Still bullish on TORO after 10 years

With regard to the capex, I don't think will impact the dividend at all - they always managed studiously expenses, long been carrying gas plant costs etc; I believe there will be a small incremental increase, as the underlying pre MPNU business is performing. I see the capex as a great positive, in restoring MPNU output towards pre sale announcement levels, and as such negating the cost rapidly. I also think the optionality and efficiencies that the terminals offers SEPL in routes to markets, is an opportunity that has yet to be fully appreciated.

Been here a long time now, through large gyrations in SP; I focus on high yield and value stocks. This was a value stocks when I bought, which I thought I would turn with in a year for a nice margin profit. It didn't, but I have had good dividends along the way, and in profit.

But I never thought I would be buying a value stock that would become a high yielding stock and a growth stock.

Craziest of all, with absorption of MPNU, gas plant start up, demographics of Nigeria, transition to gas, this is more a value stock now than when I bought it. Guess I'll be here patiently, profitably for the next 10 years.

Really appreciate the comments/contributions /considerations here today. Thanks all.

Some excellent posts last couple of days. Much appreciated

Only another 216% required.......

The Trotsky; spot on with your reading of the RNS - the acquisition RNS makes it quite clear what the acquisition price is, and that there will be adjustments between the absorbed debt/cash consideration/share issuance. Today's RNS means more cash/debt issuance.

'The gross Acquisition value of $1,275 million.......Consideration is expected to be satisfied through the assumption of approximately $700 million of Maverick debt outstanding associated with its RBL, an ABS amortizing note and other outstanding credit, the issuance of approximately 21.2 million new U.S. dollar-denominated Diversified Ordinary Shares to the unitholders of Maverick valued at approximately $345 million at signing, and approximately $207 million in cash, with the mix of Ordinary Shares and cash subject to adjustment based on the outstanding amount of Maverick's RBL at Completion.

For context, in the 'safe' rail industry, there has been 8 deaths in the last 4 years....

The basher;

'what a load of tosh!' - thank you for perfectly describing the impatience for news flow, better than I ever could.

The basher; not short sighted at all. Just pragmatic.

Those having waited so long, another 6 months should be a breeze, surely? Modest display of frustration is totally understandable, but this constant hankering for news is less modest and more hysteria.

I stand by my comment. If one is so anxious for 'news' one shouldn't be invested here, irrespective of whether you've been here 5 minutes or 5 years.

Island girl: I've been here long enough to incur significant paper losses; been investing long enough in this, and stocks of it's ilk, to understand that you don't invest in any stock that preoccupies you, that will materially impact you. What don't I understand? It's singular importance to some investors here? Well that's not my poor understanding.

Personally I think the rationale of a combined entity is excellent, and yes, there is undoubtedly great synergies to be had.

What I can't get my head round is a company, AXL, with half the mkt cap taking over DWL. If one accepts the rationale/synergies of the combination, why aren't DWL taking out AXL?

That shouts lack of belief/confidence from the DWL mgmt. That AXL shareholders can't see what a bargain they are getting perplexes me too.

I can't fathom the impatience and constant hankering for updates prevalent here at the moment. 1) mining/establishing markets takes time and 2) you either believe in the prospect or you don't, and if you do, accept it will take time to come to fruition.

If people need a constant drip feed they shouldn't be invested in a £16m company, they should just invest in a unit/investment trust or an AV. type stock and watch the dividends flow.

The update expectations here are unrealistic. If you invested wisely, patience will be rewarded and enrichment forthcoming.

Full dividend

I see they have issued treasury shares at 55.5

Not bad bit of business considering the vast majority of them were bought back at 53.5

Ps Sturm; when i see people mentioning Pandas, in a financial forum, I kind of switch off.

I really appreciate contrary/differing views, and previously yours have contributed to such , in that I think they have value, in checking one's enthusiasm, making one reexamine one's investment. And I'm all for that diversity, difference of views and rarely censure such

But your recent posts lead me to making you a rarity. I can't elicit your stance in that your invested in a stock,in a market that you don't believe in, with a mgmt you don't believe in. I can't believe any longer in your contributions. Thank you. Goodbye to your contributions.

Sturm;

There is zilch wrong with my maths - that you can't compute that a halving of shares in issue doesn't double your shares, ergo doesn't doubles your dividend highlights your dogma , rather than my exactedness.

As does your weasling out of stating your not Interested in AIM stocks by saying it's dual listed, hence you ARE interested. It may be dual listed but it's still AIM listed.

As for highlighting a stock, it it was you, not I, demanding that someone highlight a stock that met your impossible criteria, to validate your hypothesis, and debunk any others.

You can't grasp maths, you can't grasp owning an AIM stock when you don't consider)are not interested in AIM stocks, castigate those that can't meet your impossible targets, that you can't meet yourself.

Why are you here? It IS an AIM stock.

Alivib; welcome. As a new contributor to this board, you have picked up the prescient points that so seem to alude so many.

Yes, there is a cost to shipping product, a dependence on water levels to get that product to market. Yes that and duresticition weigh on investors considerations.

And yes there has been, and will continue to be, opportunities to trade a buck here. But the best buckS in town are the long buck.

If you look at PTALs production guidance, it is always conservative, encompassing the water level etc, hence for many months it exceeds top end range guidance - but then comes in top end.

It all depends how you view things - for example, when the expense of restorative/preventive works to riverbanks was disclosed (too) many here questioned the cost, and to few the investment. The investment in being able to get product to customer, the investment in the people of the communities they work in, who to, are reliant on the ability to ship product (food etc). The investment in goodwill that would propagate.

Yes, there are times for a quick buck here, but for me, I can think of fewer investments, to hold, forget about, and reap a long dollar