Member Info for Jim800

“I'll give you a hint: it is a combination of high debt, inconsistent messaging, excessive dividends and of course, no clear plan on how to deal with $1.5 billion in AROs.”

Rrb - you’re struggling to differentiate between facts and your opinion again.

Of your reasons above I’d share your opinion over debt (share price seems to have declined as debt has risen and expense of that debt has also increased). I’d totally agree (as we all would) that DEC have been abysmal at PR and continually doing the opposite of what they said they would do so credibility is shot. However, I’m not sure I’d agree with excessive dividends! The amount is fair and only appears to have increased as a percentage as share price has fallen - that doesn’t mean it’s unaffordable!

Wouldn’t agree that no clear plan to exceed mandated AROs is a driver of share price at anywhere near the same magnitude as gas price. Ditto I don’t think putting 25 million a year into a rainy day fund would look anything other than a non-productive use of capital.

Stick to being an energy professional (selling solar panels perhaps) rather than mis representing your biased opinions as facts.

Total shorts (as per short tracker) will drop a bit over next few days as holders re calculate the percentages based on 30 Aug RNS on total voting rights (over 49 million shares) compared with last total voting rights RNS in July (47.25 ish million shares).

Numerical positions may stay the same but percentage will drop slightly.

It’s been chugging on a while.

DEC and EQT claim that they have done over and above what the State Environmental Protection organisation have requested.

The owners of the land think they should do more (though if they’re complaining about trespass I’m not sure how anyone is supposed to plug the wells).

Looks like a typical case of the landowners having had their money up front and now wanting more.

As per a previous post, if state or federal agencies want more well plugging change the law of the agreements.

Rrb - Rob - bl@@dy auto correct!

Rob,

I think you’re confusing facts and your opinions.

There are a large number of wells that DEC will need to retire at some point - fact.

The share price is a reflection of AROs - your opinion.

“They need to establish a sinking fund” - your opinion. Is it better to have that money Sat around earning 5% interest or paying down debt with 8% internet?

“The number of wells needing to be retired is on the thousands” - your opinion! If they can produce a little gas then they are active and don’t “need” to be retired.

The 2/3s cut to the dividend had nothing to do with AROs - it was to allow more acquisitions.

Have an opinion by all means but recognise the difference between facts and your opinion. One is unambiguously correct and one might be total rubbish - I’ll leave you to work out which is which.

Damo,

Why wouldn't you run wells on to avoid plugging costs this year? DEC have exceeded their legal obligation to retire wells every year for as long as I've been here.

Could you point to a business that deliberately incurs costs today that they can push back several years?

Not disputing the number of wells - but their retirement dates and hence costs are both guesses at present.

If I were running DEC I'd comply with the legal requirements - not exceed them at a cost to the business, especially when growth and coping with low gas prices look like a priority for now.

You’re right, looks more like an xd day today! US and UK markets pretty flat, so guess it’s a gas price driven fall today.

Given divi is about 2.5% a quarter (23p ish) at this price guess today’s decision for buyers and sellers is will price drop by more or less than 2.5% / 23p tomorrow?

PP your comment might be more relevant for a company where share price is more directly correlated with NAV (although whether NAV is a suitable metric for a resource company is debatable).

With DEC and limited (and reducing) investor confidence, the “discount” between NAV and share price is big and growing so each share is not worth more. Market capital is reducing and we have a smaller share of it post acquisition - I’d say that was dilution!

Despite all the above, I think if Rusty can pause, digest acquisitions, show that SAM and cost synergies and efficiencies are hitting the bottom line whilst gas prices increase things will improve - but it’s still an uncomfortable hold at present!

PP I think all the longer term holders get the model. But this year has been acquisitions to increase production, not to maintain it.

We get that timing might be optimal whilst gas prices are low but it is the magnitude of the acquisitions (and associated debt and dilution) that are concerning - to us and it seems to the rest of the market.

A slower rate of growth might keep sentiment more positive and share price higher.

Nice!

Because it was a lower SP than the buys for 5 minutes either side of it.

What makes you think it was a buy?

I wonder why that seller has suddenly decided to sell today after not selling during the slide of the last few weeks?

Fear of a further drop on xd day perhaps?

Mr G,

Hope he has got that message but it has taken a long time and a massive hit to share price to get it across!

By all means rent spare land for solar but o wouldn’t vote for another massive up front expenditure with pay back over the next 10 years. Debt reduction is boring but seems to be what the market wants at present.

I still don’t see any evidence that BBs are supporting the share price but of course we don’t know what it would be without them. If they can save more dividends than current interest costs then I get it - or if the price of BBs is less than the cost of equity used for acquisitions then even better.

Why, have you got free food?

Or have you got an improved cut and paste tool?

Doubt much else would interest him :-)

Some new DEC analysis from Wall St this morning.

It's poor, looks like it has been done by a bot or an intern and uses lots of old info out of context.

However, the headlines are:

Profits falling

Debt mounting

Dividend declining

Probable Inability to cover dividends

That's the headlines potential investors see.....

Rusty and team need to be doing a better PR job!

Having seen the share price fall post the Crescent acquisition I’d guess before agreeing to take equity as part of the deal, East Texas sellers might have asked for some assurances that DEC would support the SP up to completion of that deal Q4 2024.

The increased BB might be that, might just be a late realisation that SP needs some help or might be a cheap way of balancing out the issuance of almost 5 million shares as new equity.

Don’t disagree with him!

I’ve just been banned for pointing out that despite his in depth analysis he’s out of synch with shorters, the IIs who aren’t increasing holdings and the PIs who are selling into the price drop.

Seems it’s his opinions only!

Still hope he’s right - just the rest of the world don’t seem to think he is!

Repeated for the hard of thinking.

Genel contracts with KRG not Iraq.

Different governments and definitely not friends. No correlation (or extrapolation) between the actions of one and the other.

You’ll be saying that Iraq will be happy to pay arbitration costs next!

But they cut the dividend and then increased the size of the debt, increased the cost of the debt, increased the duration of the debt and issued 2.5 million extra shares!

I get that assets have increased but one of the 4 uses for capital (acquisitions) massively outweighs the other 3 (debt repayment, dividends and BuyBacks).

“29c per quarter dividend is sacred”…. And “set for the foreseeable future.”

Looks like share price growth the only option for above inflation profit then.