Member Info for jollygoodya

I fully get the maths. Arrogance at its worst eh. Maths is based on present figures and will change with variables. So production growth which translates to cashlow which is king and amongst a cut in dividend and capital program you thing it's wise to buyback shares instead of utilising it for growth? Bonkers. No strategic vision at all. You need to look at a mirror and a giant one at that. Maybe get a sharper magnifying glass for number crunching too.

Https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/calculating-intrinsic-value-i3-energy-053605850.html

Setting up base camp numbers is irrelevant. Buybacks based on pure maths is nigh on stupid. 10% is a target of production which is achievable. Money is better spent on increasing production. The money is already there "einstein" as they took on debt. Rather than look for inorganic they should be focused on organic growth if what we have been led to believe about the acquistions is accurate. Number crunching the picture means you cant see the bigger picture. Grow production and then talk to me about buybacks. Otherwise waste of capital and becomes bordering on bonkers if production cannot be enhanced.

Dont bother Pete you cant talk to a brick wall.

Pete, as we all know most speadsheets are based on historical numbers, you can add variables and forecasts based on assumptions but does not mean they will be factual.

The market does not lie in the long run. Sp has been moving based buys and sells which are triggered by peoples circumstances, emotions and views of the stock. Market just reflects that. Yes a quite a lot is sentiment driven based on preception. Hence PR is very important too.

But running spreadsheets and raw numbers whilst being great is not the be all and end all. If I3e announced a boost in production by 10% will do far more than buybacks imo.

Absolute nonsense to consider buybacks to hold up a SP. Some of the key variables to a successfull buy backs prog is cashflow growth which is not happening unless commodity prices increase, costs are reduced and production enhanced. You can run as many ratios and investment analysis and super charged figures on spreadsheets as you like but 3% growth is miserly and I dont know how much contingency has been built in and nor does anyone on this BB for decline factors increasing. If that happens buy backs will be a waste. I get everthing you said. I picked the shell point as very pertinent unless I3E boost production. This is your point on shell:

"Someone here brought up Shell - but Shells Oil production has fallen the last four or five years on the trot and its reserves are also shrinking. Its going to be hard for Shell to grow its production and reserves going forward".

So somehow 3% growth for a minnow like I3E is sufficient? 3% for shell would be humungous.

All ratios will skewes too if bottom line is not grown and buybacks wont do that on their own and contribute nothing to growth.

If you dont increase in production and thereby revenue, cash and reserves. Shareholder value is automatically eroded. No amount of buybacks will help as you have pointed out in your shell example. 3% growth needs to be far higher. Especially if decline rates accelerate. It will be a zero sum game otherwise. Wasn't it production acquisition and growth of production which accelerated the sp from 5p? In the current scenario at I3E it's a big fat no to buybacks from me.

Imo, spend on growing production and building economies of scale. The company should rationalise operating costs as much as possible and upscale production. Production growth should add to the bottom line and cash reserves. We were old at the recent presentation above $72, we'll be coining it in. Buybacks no thanks.

@louis10, are you invested here? If not then why are you here? Tony certainly is invested like the rest of us. Therefore by default you come across as disingeniously clogging up this board. Surely you would have better things to do or maybe sadly not.

Appreciate the response Tony. I have registered albeit 3pm might be difficult for me to login to though for the investor meet. If I do I will ask. Really not good enough to not provide direct and substantive updates on wells at the time right time. It creates doubts about the assets otherwise. In addition I thought we will be looking at more balanced mix of wells depending to maximise commodity pricing mix. I would like a proper rationale case explanation for looking at new acquistions vs exploring existing acreage (have the acquistions not met internal expectations). Something is amiss imo. Hedging policy needs to be tweaked too I reckon. Inaddition why are there persistent reporting delays and missing time frames, it's ridiculous. UK office cannot even get reporting structure right?? Despite the heavy lifting being done in Canada! The deal with Eog was a joke and poor contribition to I3E from the UK. So Majid needs to reflect on this imo.

Have the new acquistions met their internal expectations.

Olde, a very pertinent question that management should address is, that we were led to believe in the quality of the assets acquired, so why not explore and grow organically and why look at further acquistions? I'm doubting the quality of those assets especially given the clandestine approach adopted in not updating the market transparently on results of drills in a more timely manner. So what has changed for growth and production to be in effect reduced. I dont fully buy the downturn in prices is the only aspect.. Majid needs to address this.

Good post Tony. I would prefer they do not cut the capital programme. We need to maintain (bearing in mind depletion factor) and try to enhance cost effective production. Looking forward to a value acreative purchase.

Cant really blame management on the last RNS. Hands were forced.

My top reason is slack. Need to evolve the financial reporting and management structure. Operations have outstripped internal structures. Happens quite often in my experience of growth companies.

Only 12m barrels after off loading over 100m. Could be a signal that this is the base point of oil prices and will likely add more imo.

Looks pretty good value, given mako gas deal on horizon..

Excellent, paves the way for dividends, coupled with stronger retained profits arising from trading. I like the way loose ends are being tied. Just need Majid to release updates on decent wells being brought online.

Https://www.ft.com/content/05d3a7b5-b9c9-43ec-ac53-f8b7b51cbbe2

Agree would have been done time a go. However auditor release are never instantaneous or next day. They will take time and have a final partner or more likely a secondery partner review and sign off. They will release their final draft report to I3E, who may want tweeks to wording or auditors may want tweeks etc. Protocols and procedures wont allow next day release imo.

100% agree Nomadic. Think BoD have got it spot on with plans to develop with respsol sinopec Tain development. Wouldn't mind if it was sold off to them. Govt strategy on NS is a big clanger for a lot of oilers.

Lol, dont take my typo wrong way too :)))))

Very shirty response Tony, was meant to be a dig at you at all. The whole of process of wording and rewording and review by partners in the audit firm will take place after what was released and I dont think they are just sitting around doing nothing. PKF is sizeable firm. Sometimes better not to take things personal :) auditors will always review and take material aspects with a fresh pair of eyes.

Doesn't happen next day Tony. Very plausible what Joe posted, however I ruled that out in my mind due to the fact that I3E are generating significant cashflow and from an Auditor perspective would have been covered for the ensuing 12 month period, unless the rationale was that there was some inherrent uncertainty. Of course the funding clears the pathway too at the same time, if one was to look at payment of impending loan liabilities and financial headroom. I was more thinking there could be a delay on obtaining independent expert view on aspects of reserves, which I think have been asessed by Majid. Hence an independent view and a change in cashflow forecasting basis too. Post balance sheet events have certainly been covered now and will be incorporated into notes to the accounts. But who knows. The delay is not good though irrespective of circumstances and I'm a bit miffed at how we dont stick to time frames. Reflects poorly on the company. Majid and the cfo need to get a grip on the management structure and reporting procedures. It's very amateur at the moment imo.