Member Info for Soder

Yes he just said that.

On the basis that management and the board and legally obliged to act in the best interests of SHAREHOLDERS and not PERSONAL interest I demand the following.

- stop all R&D
- stop all capex spend
- get out of all leases on property
- fire all staff
- reduce the business to a shell with the only asset being the ash in the bank and the only liability shareholders equity

Then wind it up and repay us OUR ****ing money. The IRR on that and shareholder return will be much much much better than seeing it diminish/be stoke every quarter on the managements ridiculous salaries.

Novacyt is now just a cash cow for the remaining management to pay them selves. There is NO business there. They may have products but there is NO business.

Put it up for sale. Wind it up. Give us back our cash and **** off.

We won’t be debt free. We will be NET DEBT free. So will still have our bank facility but it will just be covered by cash. Hence the same terms and covenenants around hedging will remain.

I think the market is telling you they expect the company and it’s management to be cashflow negative for sometime. It’s not a great vote of confidence in David peanuts ability to create shareholder value and take this business forward.

A lot will depend on timing of tax payments. We know that capex is largely gonna be in q3, we know when dividends were paid.

Fwiw I think cash at end of h1 will be low 400s but will depend on timing of when they pod the dividend. Q3 is the big step up. Even with 75m of capex and 250m of tax they will make another 250m of cash by end of September based on their hedge book, production, and spot rates. Remember production has stepped up in q3 by 3k.

By year end I have $830m of cash post payment of windfall tax, another divi payment and all capex. With current share price at $4.26 that’s 70% covered at year end.

In reality the tax payments come next year so will have to see how they account for these as will show inflated cash balance until tax payments are made.

That’s a first. Never seen that before. Make the broker go buy it back in one go!!!

The fact of this matter is that Exxon want out and the government want them out. What benefit would either party have by not sanctioning the takeover. Exxon would not invest another penny there and chads revenues would decline. It’s suits everyone to get this deal over the line. Exxon. Savannah. Chad.

No worries Banbury. The main thesis for investment here at the highest level of thought….they will possibly be net debt free by year end and certainly my mid year 2023. Mkt cap is $4.7bn at the moment and if debt teee then the enterprise value will also be 4.7bn. I would suggest that ebitda for the year will be in this range. So has anyone ever seen a company gernerating such huge free cashflow, paying dividends, doing buybacks trade at 1-1.5x EV / EBITDA?! I certainly have not. I know it’s oil and we need to look at reserves but hopefully timpan can help there and I fully expect some large scale m&a over next quarters to really show some intent.

Banburyboy that is very lazy on your part. Go to the company website and all that infor is there. The entire hedge book profile over the next few years and production splits. This board is not hear to do your work for you.

There is not a single doubt in my mind that there will be AT LEAST one further tranche added to that but back. No doubt at all. And with the current share price not reacting to 1. The buybacks 2. Commodity prices 3. The fundamental performance of the company…. All these buy backs are a true gift for shareholders down the road. My message to HBR management is BUY AS MUCH AS YOU CAN AT CURRENT LEVELS PLEASE!!!!

Tornado. This business would not exist if it were not for that hedge book in 2019 and 2020. As it was we (PMO) had to restructure and completed a merger with chrysaor. But without the hedge book all equity would have been wiped out, PMO creditors would have taken the keys to the company and shareholders would have been toast. As part of that restructuring and merger the banks made it a requirement for the new business to hedge a minimum percentage of harbours output every year under the terms of its reserve based lending facility. Management had no choice but to do this. Either way, unless you are shell or bp…YOU HEDGE. You need certainty of earnings to an extent and unless management could have predicted putin would invade Ukraine that hedge book would look fine. Did you predict the war and the gas crisis? NO ONE DID! So don’t be such a petulant fool and just enjoy the fact the hedge exposure rolls down each year and given our balance sheet strength we can actually hedge at these levels for future production. You may not be getting a full jam sandwich today but you sure will tomorrow.

Bp and cited cos this is not even a rounding error for them. They have bigger fish to fry. Much much much much much bigger fish.

Re rns? Why would you rns a contract extension. That’s not going to impact financial results or share price.

What spooked the Dow? Only the most important data release of the week. CPI.

Upomega, I won’t lie to you, I think most of what you spout on here is absolute drivel. But INEOS (there is no U) is probably not a bad shout. They need gas supplies as feedstock for their much larger Chems biz and could eat up Serica with lose change. Their shale acerage and business is never gonna take off IMO and their existing North Sea gas biz perhaps lacks some scale at 26k boepd production, of which 96% is gas. They have are opeartor on Breagh and Clipper licences and a junior Peter with a total on Greater laggan.

As per above, it makes sense for them to increase upstream activities in order to make inter company sales for their downstream petro chemicals biz.

Would think Serica is a very good fit for them.

KIST can’t come back to the table for 6 months. Under U.K. takeover code once they announced they did not intend to make an offer they triggered a restriction on announcing an offer or possible offer for 6 months.

First I have heard or read re offsetting hedging losses. Not sure would work tbh as they are a mtm loss until crystallised although I guess you could offset crystallised losses but then what about gains? Do you take them off in future years?

IMO I think it makes more sense for the government to try strike long term supply agreements at a fair level which is probably well below the current spot rate but well above what we were getting last year….and for an extended time period.

In that regard I would agree with previous posts that if offered 200p a therm for 5 years you jump at it!!!

I’m not so sure tax levy in its current form will remain. Both truss and kwarteng have been making much noise that we need to prioritise long term supply over near term populist quick fixes.

You could argue the management have delivered nothing but benefitted from a huge rise in gas prices. If that had not happened where would we be? And now it has happened and they have huge optionality to grow they have still done absolutely **** all.

But….they still get huge salaries. So there is no motivation for them to rock the boat maybe?

Do you think the severity of the move last 2 days would happen if the mkt had something tangible to digest rather than just a slob management board hoarding cash? In the current inflationary environment has his cash will be worth 10-20% less in real terms this time next year!!!!!

This management team are actually overseeing a NEGATIVE return on equity by sitting in cash. I will repeat again….if they can’t be arsed to invest it, return it to shareholders (who’s cash it is) and we will invest it ourselves.

Kewjosh no one is bashing you for having a short view. People are bashing you on the fact your short view is what goes up “must come down” Tell me which school of financial know how and analysis did you perfect that well systematic trading technique from?

You have not once tried to discuss fundamentals of either the company or the industry. Why? Cos you can’t. Most likely because you are completely financially illiterate and just some dosser with a spread et account. You have also not sought to explain why it’s a short based on momentum or technical analysis or charts. Why? Most likely because you can’t even hold a pencil never mind read a chart.

Nope. Your short view on a company that is probably undervalued by 50-60%, who’s main product they sell (gas) has doubled in price over the last month, who will cover their market cap in free cashflow inside 24 months, who is buying back another $100m of stock, paying a dividend to people who own the share very shortly, who every single analyst has a buy recommendation on, who one of the largest banks on the planet just bought another huge chunk of…..your short view is based on mathematical and genius analysis of “what goes up must come down”

You are a dip****. And you know it.