Member Info for PUTUP

I understand the ITP/aka Kirkuk-Ceyhan Oil Pipeline runs from Kirkuk, through Khurmala to Fishkhabour and onward to Ceyhan. There are two spurs: one to Shaikan and the Tar Tar Khurmala pipeline. (At least as far as any images in either company disclosure or elsewhere.) Mosul is 'on the one from Erbil to Fishkharbour so didn't understand the geography stream ValueS was referencing. Maybe I'm missing something.

"Thus he was wants to revive the Kirkuk-Mosul-Fishkhabour bit of the pipeline, rather than just using the kirkuk-Erbil-Fishkhabpour bit."

Huh?

The announcement only matters if you had the unrealistic expectation of the KRG going it alone. Otherwise it's no news. We always new the contract was coming up for renewal (whether this year or next).

And now they have a clean slate and a national oil company to deal with. Couple that with ICG/SOMO assertiveness (supported by KRG acquiescence) to manage oil exports.

"Turkey wants 'new and vibrant' phase for Iraq-Turkey oil pipeline, official says"

And who do you think they will want to engage with in regards to a new pipeline agreement - the KRG or ICG/SOMO?

I don't believe the company has ever given a proper breakdown of the 'discount to Bent' into an itemised cost of transportation and other discounts. But, obviously, the prior 'independent exports' were subject to the current pipeline contract. This announcement simply flags that there's likely a lengthy process ahead to negotiate a new pipeline agreement. Hopefully terms can be agreed before expiry. We will have to see how much crude flows through it before then.

So much for the September independence crew...

https://youtu.be/pGhwBFYtn1s?si=9fV-HuvkVqD-pE7g

It would be strange indeed to insist on existing contract sanctity - a contract between IOC and the KRG - and, at the same time, expect to be paid directly by SOMO. The payer under your contract is the KRG. The requisite detail is, of course, in how the payment to the KRG is onward disbursed to the IOCs. Escrows, accounts, disbursement agents and mechanics, audits etc all matter greatly. And, of course, the $16 (between the ICG and the KRG) is only a provisional number and subject to adjustment back to the actual costs incurred. We can also only wonder what oversight SOMO will place on the KRG with respect to field development which, of course, is a huge component of the amounts paid to the IOCs. I'm sure every individual here understands how much capex GKP might be able to 'fit' within the provisional $16 per barrel alongside direct lifting costs, direct G&A expenses and the profit oil component...

Same as GKP doesn't get paid $28 a barrel when their oil is sold locally for $28. $28 (or $35 as the case may be) is the input into the PSC formula the company has articulated many many times including on pg 18 of their 2024 annual results presentation. (They even worked through an example for those that struggle with the graphic alone.)

Their oil is sold at $35. They don't get paid $35 !!

The KRG would pay the IOCs out of the provisional advance of $16 per barrel ($ not £). The Shaikan contractors (GKP being 80%) have been receiving about $10.60 a barrel (pre the CBC cost paid by GKP) for current production. 63% of this is just recovering the direct costs of that production. The balance (profit oil) must cover non-recoverable costs with any balance left over being free cash flow. GKP also pays a CBC. In addition to this, the Contractors are slowly recovering the arrears. In the case of GKP this is about $2.27 a barrel.

Under exports, the $10.60 goes up to around $12 (a lot depends on the price the oil is sold at obviously) with circa 56% being for the direct costs of production.

Another one with short arms and deep pockets

Has seed met extremely well so far = has served me extremely well so far

Rog, while in reply to your post I was talking generally at that point. I don't trade this stock very much. Once again, I bought a position between May '20 and Aug '21 (the latter part of which was mostly reinvesting dividends). Since then I have taken two modest round-trip trading positions and trimmed some of my stake. I probably should have traded it a lot more but tax inefficiencies mean doing so is almost pointless. For me. So far I have recouped a multiple of my investment in dividends plus more in sales proceeds and my remaining stake is still deep in the money. I missed the chance to dump the lot (I sold some but not much) in mid '22 when my model was screaming sell and oil prices were at unsustainable levels. Shame on me. Conversely, there were times in '23 and '24 when the stock registered cheap again in my view but I decided I had enough exposure and didn't want to add at levels above where I had accumulated my initial stake. (Had I exited in 22 I likely would have com back in.) Since then the stock has been IMO heavily overvalued in March and a little less so very recently. I sold in March as previously communicated. I also sold a very small amount more recently to fund a capital call in a PE fund I'm invested in. And, yes, I will reduce my risk if I think the stock significantly overvalued again (even if it can justify those absolute levels over a longer-term). I will decide when and how and I will of course update my personal views in line with new information as I have done since my first purchase.

Too many here purchase a (piddly) stake based on pure speculation, get on the ramping bandwagon and then sh*t on anyone with a sense of realism. They scream buy, buy, buy but don't have any change left to buy themselves. Nor do they possess the intelligence, analysis or insight to justify their claims. So, yeah, if you guys think I'm full of sh*t and totally wrong I challenge you all to put your money where your mouths are and bid it up. Put Up or shut up. We can happily trade well below the grandiose expectations you tout here. I will take my 4x money initially invested and move on to the opportunities.

How is my post pessimistic? It's a view on the current technical trading situation and a statement of my model's fair value which has seed met extremely well so far - both on the bid and one the offer. Currently things are zinging around in a somewhat wide band based purely on the next (of many) speculative press article with next to no concrete evidence. Trade the range if you want. When I was purchasing my stake investors here repeatedly underestimated the value to be created by GKP. (Hence choosing Putup as a moniker because I was suggesting whining investors here, complaining then about the down-trodden price, put up or shut up.) Now IMO they repeatedly overestimate it. That doesn't mean no value is being created, just less than what many here think. You are welcome to disagree but turn up with something other than waffle to back your opinions. If you think it's cheap then actually freakin' buy some (rather than hoping someone else will for you) and enough to make a difference (couch change isn't going to cut it). Bid it up and I will happily trim my stake further at my desired price levels and invest elsewhere.

I didn't get it all sold, no... I'm sure the giddiness will reawaken and create more opportunity. In the interim, at these levels it's a Hold.

And still has a gap to fill down to 154.67

🥱

Rough support at 151 (fractionally below my fair value assuming a September export restart), resistance in mid 180s, everything in between is ho-hum depending on retail giddiness.

Ouch. Tough day today. Someone working a sell order off-book without the volume to support it.

"I’m more interested now in losing the valuable Biscuits contract in the event that some sort of deal is reached tonight."

Unfortunately for you I feel that contract's days are numbered - the market certainly thinks so. Perhaps not tonight but in the reasonably near future. Best arrange a celebratory biscuit party for the IOCs!

And the cousin the relatives normally try to keep out of the public eye...

"the large holdings held by certain unnamed persons / groups"

This I think is total cr*p

That said, if you are going to sue for penalties/interest you have to believe you will achieve a better result than working with those that owe you to recover as much as you can. IMHO the board simply felt that recovering the amounts owed and not receiving any penalties/interest was the best they could achieve considering the future of the company. And, I suspect, the same view holds today. The "leverage" is simply the dependency on continued operations in the region.