RE: A compelling argument to fire Les.6 Feb 2021 17:03
Jubileey,
Why do you always bring me into this?
I am not for or against Les.
But just so you know, the hedges would have been Les' responsibility as the CFO.
I don't think Les is responsible whatsoever for the position Tullow is in. He has secured Tullow with good debt over the years and likely will continue doing so.
The reason for Tullow where it is currently is because of production and operational issues (including ridiculous production forecasting). The former COO and CEO were sacked, rightfully so.
Since you're clueless as ever i'll tell you - it's the oil production (including accurate production forecasting) and operational successes that keep liquidity and finances in check.
"Our hedges don't offset the sell of Uganda, at 1.45 billions (for our entire stake) -400 millions for taxes -575$ millions (compare to our sell price), is a 500$ million difference."
No, it's more like $100-200m (if you're looking at selling the entire stake). Do the maths again, there's one key element you're missing.
Although Tullow would have earned c. $1.5-2b profits (before tax) over the life of the field at $60/barrel had they kept and developed their 10% stake (which they would have held in the 2017 deal).