Member Info for Slift

Ignorant.

Showsnowman,

"Selective calculations"?
Why don't you do the calculations yourself and see?

"redeploy the capex"
These assets produce enough cashflow to self-fund their CAPEX.

"future decommissioning liabilities they avoid & the fact they can redeploy the capex in their higher margin core assets in Ghana."
Future decomm is in like 9-13 years at the end of the life of these assets... By then FCF would be way beyond decomm liabilities, even at $50/barrel.
Only meaningful CAPEX they can redeploy anytime soon is the initial consideration ($89m for EG).

Thommie,

Forget the Gabon asset, I think that's an ok value, even at $60/barrel.
It's the EG assets i'm against.

If it's liquidity and balance sheet they are worried about, would shareholders inject the initial consideration $89m (£65m - 1 share for every 7) to both keep EG assets and use proceeds to fund CAPEX for this asset as necessary?
I would, as this would boost balance sheet MORE than sale of BOTH assets + allows us to keep this asset.

But I don't think we have a choice - 6-8k bopd production is a significant loss in long term growth potential for Tullow.

1. Taxes are only paid on profits
2. Taxes can be offset with losses

Panoro RNS: https://www.panoroenergy.com/wp-content/themes/Avada/cision/releasesingledetail.html?releaseIdentifier=AD560F5AE3E01C21

Someone give Jubileey a lesson on Taxes lol

No idea what kind of calculation you did, but it's wrong.

Decommission costs come @ end of life of assets. Panoro would have made a lot more money by that time lol.

I mean, according to their RNS, the placement to fund the sale was OVERSUBSCRIBED by existing and new investors (strong interest).
Moreover, they will be paying dividends in 2023 with these assets.

Uganda wasn't a developed asset lol, you HAD TO FUND to develop it, then wait like 10+ years for it to be payback.

Producing assets FUND themselves for CAPEX and provide CASHFLOW.

I think you should go back to basics and learn what 2P reserves are, and what 2C resources are.

Panoro said themselves that these assets would payback over 2.5 years. This is true at $55/barrel.

No, it really isn't. I can't tell if you're stupid or not.

These assets produce enough cashflow to self-fund their CAPEX and produce positive cashflow for the Group over the life of the assets.

These assets are only value accretive if you believe oil price will be $50-55 for the next 9-14 years.
At $62/barrel, the EG asset is value DILUTIVE.

CaptainSwag,

There is potential in HUR's assets. No doubt about it, they still have plenty of oil, just need to drill holes.

However, I don't trust this management at all.
I still believe that PI's will get sold out here, and only those that fund the FWP will benefit from HUR's potential and assets.

If PI's don't get sold out, then huge potential.
We'll know soon.

Do LTH really think this is a good deal?
I certainly do not.

Okay fine, the Gabon asset can go.
I don't believe this is a good deal for Equatorial Guinea.
This sale will reduce the long term potential of Tullow (by a lot, depending on what you believe oil price will be for the next 9-14 years).

Both assets are BARELY value accretive (at current oil price), and provides limited benefits to balance sheet.

Are you mjga786??

It wouldn't be very sensible wearing shorts in the winter!

It's no longer a closed period for directors, right?

Will Brian McMaster buy further shares here to average down his initial buy?
Any buys will provide some confidence and will re-iterate his very positive views from updates.

Oil price to the mooooooooooooon!

What are you saying Jubileey?

Did you miss a zero?
40p Monday

Had the board been competent and reactive, and used the rig they had contracted in 2020 to drill a sidetrack in 2020 for well 7, share price and company would be in a much healthier position.

But nope, incompetency.

Laurenti,

From a FULL YEAR basis, it will not affect profit at all. It's just an accounting tool to meet Quarter/Half Year performances. The holidays are costs that come out in the form of employee's salary every month. But the costs aren't really accounted for until that employee takes their holiday.

"Are capita paying staff for not taking any unused holidays or vice vers this year?"
No.

"From that calculation it seems more about which half of the year the holiday cost really belongs to."
Yes. You could say that H1 is made to look worse than it is, but H2 will equal things out.
So overall, Full Year = neutral from holiday costs.

Yes!
Stock print machine gonna go brrrrrrrrrrr!

Lol