Member Info for marve

lol, my intials are actually HP

obviously not read the post properly

the current production is 110 bopd of which 70% is to kea, at roughly £50 a barrel that is max £1.4m a year revenue now based on the past two years production, cost of sales has been extremely varied, the 31 may 2014 year was 84% of revenue, yet interim six months 30 nov 13 was 38% and 31 nov 12 was 52% to be honest plenty of the workover costs and related over the two years since strike will have been squeezed in as cost of sales where possible, as the long term view is they reduced profits for tax purposes, together with the big issues they had with the pumps because of wrong configuration and all that, lets say that a conservative level is 50% cost of sales, so gross profit is 50% also remember the revenue of approx £1.4m, ok now we got £700k of profit from that how about if admin expenses was £0, yes that is right £0, ok i know that cant happen because even an active company has some costs, but lets use £0 for now, because we have prudently estimated gross profit so £700k profit, now there are £21m of built up losses, so lets not worry about paying mr tax man yet, so £700k profit and 939m shares in issue, hmmm what to do with that profit oh wait, i know, pay the whole, or as much of the profits out as possible, if you bought 1m of these shares at 3p for £3,000, then you will get a yearly dividend of £745, after the proposed consolidation 3p turns to 30p, yet the share price will be 1-3p region oh and lets not forget mr gowrie smith, remember he owns 7.5% of kea, 7.5% of £700k is £52.5k, not a bad little earner for actually not having to make any decisions, let alone bad decisions there are options here, yearly revenue of £1.4m with profit of £700k there is a value to the puka field, (never mind the fixed assets that carry a value such as all the equipment they own), this is worth something to somebody that would be willing to buy the whole job lot in my opinon trying to carry on kea as an exploration company will be fatal, the board have options, but so do the shareholders

"Kea however have producing wells and an asset and an experienced bod" pete i agree completely with your above comment, however the only problem is the bod are experienced in not being able to manage money

as a former holder of kea who made a loss, and lets be honest in the months running up to puka 3 i was probably one of the most positive on here i want kea to come good for all involved whether i make any money or not, i just dont believe the current board have the ability to do this

Pi$$ up in a brewery comes to mind here

Personally see bhr as a completely different play, in the struggle against coal prices and getting a mine to production, which many mining companies are in same boat, kea has a producing asset, something many a company would be over the moon with, but the board here are just hopeless

A placing at 1.5p post consolidation would be 50% lower from here Horrendously sad state of affairs

i said earlier the best thing for kea was to suspend all operations bar production form puka for next 12 months, however that is not going to happen so instead why not focus on the puka field and boosting production, put another drill in close to puka 1 and 2, a horiztonal drill, a smart well, whatever is needed to suck every drop of the 1m contigent recoverable from puka, if you have to dilute massive, at least do so when less future risk which lets be honest, shannon is a wildcat get to at least break even, keep the future of the company safe, surely that is the most important thing now, i really dont get this managment at all, or maybe i make it sound too easy and in reality it is not

in fact that sounds a bit generous 100m at 1.5p

in my opinion the best LONG TERM solution for kea AND shareholders would be if all non puka production related operations and expenditure, even the christmas party, were suspended for 12 months in 12 months time, 70% of 110 bopd is £1.5m in revenue this would then give kea some sort of a base to move forward

Pete, i dont know much about hur, but personally i am not keen on offshore exploration that wont be brought to production for many years and needs plenty of money to bring it to production, i am only using rkh as an example yet obviously the Falkland islands infrastructure is not as good as the north sea

i think it may go south because people are even more wary of the possible dilution from fund raising so i would say the loss in value is something that can happen with consolidations if they are done for a certai reason

Maybe us sitting here makes it sound too easy But i know that if i had a solid demand for bananas down the local market i would not decide to try and sell apples

BUT Would anybody else agree that instead of focusing on a new wildcat drill, shouldn't they be more focused on putting a drill further drill into the already flowing puka 1 and 2 to boost production and income Surely this has been looked at by kea and meo, but if puka holds 1m barrels, for the sake or a few million quid, if production could be boosted to near 100 bopd, that is best part of an extra £2m in revenue a year before meo take their cut, two years of production and it will have already paid for itself The company said in the accounts, they are trying to balance risk, so why not do this for starters instead of drilling a pretty much wildcat at shannon

Theonion that is rubbish

da gee, firstly i am sorry for everyone still in here with the way things have been run (i have already crystalised my loss here), in particularly you who has been in kea for what must seem like forever but hold on, this is just a simple 1 for 10 share consolidation, 930m shares in issue becomes 93m, the share price at consolidation if 0.4p becomes 4p and your shareholding becomes a tenth of what it was, so in essence there is no dilution naturally what this lets kea do is raise money again because they are unable to do this with a share price below 1p this might sound too simple, but if nobody was to buy any further shares in kea for the time being then the company would not be able to go down the darwin route, because no buyer means no seller for darwin to get rid with the agm coming up, i would also note that it is my understanding that dependent on a certain percent i think you may be able to put forward a proposition to vote on, at least i know you only need 10% for an egm anyway i am not aware of the current holdings of the directors, however it only requires the board to vote for share options and then their own holding would not have the same effect of any dilution as private investors would, naturally share options work if the company is successful so make of that what you will

Shake, the one thing i will say is that if Darwin do come back and in a similar way to before, then every kea current or past long termer use it to your advantage and trade the highs and the lows, just look at how the price was up and down in the first six months of year

First called Shannon by meo, pages 12-14 http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20141030/pdf/42tb9g9c7k5k77.pdf . . Mentioned by kea with douglas http://www.lse.co.uk/share-regulatory-news.asp?shareprice=KEA&ArticleCode=lpyeqe1q&ArticleHeadline=Operational_Update

Reading the accounts from the start and i got this far "As to the future, we can't afford not to drill the new Shannon structure: it's too exciting and too prospective, and MEO and ourselves are finalising drill target and funding discussions. It's worth shareholders supporting because success here would lead to a whole new and different chapter for the Company." . Cant read any further, please please please shareholders please please please let me run your company for a little longer Too exciting that no doubt farm in partners are pitching a tent outside keas office so they are at front of the queue