Member Info for Genghis15

sheltie
if you register (no fee) it allows you to view one free article per day.

I have a subscription so can tell you that is about the Morgan Stanley note with " there is a realistic bull case for the shares to be around seven times higher on a two-year view,”

However there are a no of points in the article that posters here would likely disagree with, as in "“Hurricane carries high geological risk and has no near-term catalysts."
It advises a "buy", but hedges it around with much more risk than most here think exists, and finishes with "“with the wide range of valuation outcomes and uncertainty even in the base case, we think assigning a price target is not relevant at this time.”

Good article from pro active, some interesting observations on SP catalysts.

Richard Bernstein
‏


@CrystalAmberRB1
2h
2 hours ago

From Morgan Stanley this morning on Hurricane Energy: "assuming $80 oil prices, we see potential for a bull-case NAV of 381p."

What is going on with debate about HUR being late with the FPSO?

Yes, it is still within timelines as published. But yes it is later than we thought, partly thru a social media leak, with most here (me included) expecting an August sailaway.

But surely it after the Spirit deal there just have to have been a few late tweaks worked in to minimise the later downtime inherent in that deal?
Seems to me it would be very surprising if that were not the case.

I'm a tad disappointed to see it slip a little from my expectations (and with it FOIL) but the big picture must be that overall the monetisation of the resource is progressed.

Ht
Yes, Agreed.

But the longer you hold anything in the stock market, the risk of being caught out by a crash increases.

The world is more unpredictable now than in 2014, imo, so its fingers crossed we can get thru without anything like that.

HIT
Your methodology is OK but quicker to just divide net earnings £191M (your figures) into Mcap of £1.04Bn giving 5.25.

Where the OP got 23.5 I don't know.

Who btw is this Peter Stephens? I took it to be a journo, but is this just a poster on MF?

Just a clown, then.

WM, spot on.

To value HUR the same way as RDS is plain stupid, I can hardly believe a financial journo doing it.

Pe ratio is totally irrelevant to company at thjis stage of development. W can argue all night about the correct valuation, but the PE is not at all relevant to what s going on here.

haggis
Agree with all you say.
however after first buying in 2014 thinking the journey would be 18 months max, it's a long time coming ; the old maxim about the long run comes to mind.
Still, onwards and upwards!

It's certainly possible lookig at the supply/demand balance, but I think the Donald will be tweeting furiously soon blaming OPEC (tho its his sanctions causing it) and likely they will at least say they are raising output. I suspect he will also release as much as necessary from the SPR (which, to be fair, is looking increasingly unnecessary) in order to keep gas prices down as the mid terms approach.

So I doubt we'll see $100 a barrel anytime soon, tho you never know.

Further out, the danger is perhaps more to the downside as his trade sanctions bite on global growth, and even at current prices there is some demand softening in emerging markets.
But forecasting PoO is harder than keeping a cat to heel, so who knows.

I suspect by next year our crowd may have outgrown the Goat, twas a tad cramped at times this year..
Any way, a little early to be planning .

We do know, tho, that they usually sell into rises, so it is a perfectly reasonable assumption.

WW
"What has the Spirit deal given in relation to addressing the big fat elephant in the room? "

I have no idea what you are talking about. What elephant is this?

Not sure if posted b4...….unlike missdosh to miss something

http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/1569755/hurricane-farms-out-gwa-licences?utm_medium=email&utm_source=free_article_access&utm_content=223105265

"It is a bad deal. Except in the most severe of economic downturns they are giving up a quarter of the oil for $180m. With expenditure of around $100m other.options would have been available. Additionally, the absence of meaningful ratchets (commonplace in commercial transactions) it is very skewed to the benefit of Spirit."

I can understand your view, and on a purely finance based analysis you make sense. Three things, tho, make me rate it a good deal.

Firstly, there is no saying where PoO goes over the next few years, and this gets Linwick moving much quicker than HUR could have done. HUR still retain upside in the 50% stake they keep..
Secondly, it will sharpen the minds of others, majors included, regarding Lancaster and/or Halifax, for which much better terms should be obtained.
Thirdly, we must remember these fields do not belong to HUR, they are licensed to us by HM Govt ; the OGA may have had a hand here, both in pushing HUR to accelerate things and in pushing the WOSP operators to make room for us.

I too am a little surprised at the absence of ratchets ; I can only assume this was the best deal available. And by doing it, HUR may have broken the logjam on the "buyers' strike" referred to by dspp, particularly by the WOSP deal above.
all imho, of course.

shedful
I am no expert but HUR will not get that price at the wellhead, I don't know what level of discount would apply.

On top of that there will be a small commission to BP in the offtake agreement, and as you say incentives to contractors that we cannot quantify.
Hard to know how much this might slice off but at $76 my guess is that HUR might receive somewhere in the mid to high sixties.
Pure guess tho.

We were posting simultaneously......I seem to have answered you already on the CA RNS thread!

Is anybody watching the Faroe/DNO saga?

It is notable that in April DNO was buying a "long term strategic stake" to "support ..management's growth strategy"

Following Faroes's refusal to allow Bod representation to DNO, fearing a Trojan Horse scenario, DNO have now gone all hostile and appear to be preparing a bid .

Suddenly, DNO have "concerns and dismay about the wider governance culture and shareholder value strategies" of the management they were fully supportive of only 5 months ago.

Seem familiar?

Yes, no one can tell him he doesn't know $h** !

Wouldn't be surprised ; tho I reckon a CA holdings RNS can't be far off also.