Member Info for theoryman

Solarfire, there are four components in the move to 55k, has the other one of ESP work overs been completed?

Using figures from the HYR presentation, looks like they are assuming an average of below 50k for Sep to Dec, even to reach a top average for the year of 44k in the Guidance.

IMO that looks to me like the boost to production from SH 13 & 14 will be offset by losses due to the work overs - otherwise the figures don’t stack up, but this is GKP :)

Kurdistan was known to be corrupt when the company drilled there and holders bought shares. If someone doesn’t like what it takes to get things through in situations like this then there are Ethical based funds available :)

Someone last year did an analysis of the possible bonuses that could be paid out to management - from memory brace yourself for at least one more.

When it comes to flat lining, suppose it depends on your time scale. For the YTD the Price has risen from 125p to over 200p with 34p of dividends as well. If that is flat lining then bring on a steady rise.

Progress is being made, some of it obvious in terms of production but there are other areas as well in terms of how the PSC is actually operating and the consequences of these changes wrt to side effects on the workings of the CRP and payments etc.

Nobull, since the last RNS said the connection was imminent. IMO it would only need an update if it hadn’t happened.

The removal of a whole chunk of posts is a very frustrating side effect of the beneficial removal of PDC. What surprised me is how long Admin took to do it compared to previous occasions.

I hope the guy who pointed out a pattern on RSI on the unadjusted chart, saw my post about the potential divergence and swing point failure from above 80 on the adjusted one.

What does surprise me is how many posters say their opinions will never be changed by what they read on here - are they just seeking confirmation?

@titan posted an alternative to my Fib extensions, now built into my model.

The guy who posted about his RSI pattern made me look at what it would look like on my charts - for some reason I hadn’t looked, glad I did.

Wow, suddenly imagined MA riding around the Forest of Bowland on his motorcycle monitoring people shaking trees.

Next thing was an idea for analysing phrases used by LTH when a share is tanking and they opt to take no action.

Here are a few I can remember from the old iii site, anyone remember any others used there or anywhere else on GKP discussion boards?

It’s only a tree shake…

They are after your shares/golden tickets…

They are driving the price down so that they can accumulate…

It’s the weak (and/or thick) over leveraged traders selling…

Let’s go for clarity :)

For the set up on the weekly dividend adjusted chart, what is the % success rate?

Where is the support level at which you would exit at if it goes wrong?

From the chart, and nothing else, what is the minimum target if it works?

So in conclusion does this opportunity offer value?

Slight problem with crosses, both golden and death, on energy related stocks - there is no correlation between one happening and subsequent price action.

What matters more are PoO and other industry related metrics.

Fascinating to see from the cognitive bias perspective, that TA gets rubbished when it points downwards but is good news when it points upwards.

Some antonyms of obsfucation are clear up, clarify and illuminate.

If the Instis had re-invested their dividends on ex-div date, the compounding effect would have raised their holdings by over 30%.

If their timing had been awful, then over 20% as a minimum.

Since no increase which is remotely close to the lower figure has been reported, there is only one logical conclusion that can be reached wrt SS’s assertion.

Straycat, thought I was excluded because I like to keep it complex :)

Actually it does play an important role in the What if alternatives.

55kbopd steady production without further development and it probably soon kicks in - no idea how soooooon.

I don’t like possible implications of GKP being deemed incapable of delivering next stage if there is one or the one after that etc.. What leverage does it give the management in getting a good deal for themselves and for us a side effect?

Throw in possible Oil & Gas Law, the long suspended Supreme Court Ruling, PSC versus TSC and anything else you can think of; who else could possibly interested and at what price?

Someone somewhere is possibly doing some risked calculations as we exchange posts and good luck to them - what an environment to have to work in!

Still didn’t work, some of the features or lack of same on this BB, are based in the dark ages.

Calculate the outcome of the present production and PoO with the CO much much smaller than the CRP.

Then repeat when there is unused CO, say 50/50, so the excess gets rerouted as PO and the R factor is 1.5.

For some reason, didn’t post as written.

Calculate the outcome of the present production and PoO with the CO<
Then repeat when there is unused CO, say 50/50, so the excess gets rerouted as PO and the R factor is 1.5.

Straycat, there are two distinct issues wrt revenue versus profit - the monthly CO versus CRP and the R factor.

Independently they need keeping an eye on because when they both have an effect, it’s when they combine that it gets really interesting.

Calculate the outcome of the present production and PoO with the CO<
Then repeat when there is unused CO, say 50/50, so the excess gets rerouted as PO and the R factor is 1.5.

Having done that build a two way table covering every stepped combination - takes about 10 mins.

That way you can see how the interrelationship would reveal itself in the monthly data.

As mentioned previously, the situation might never arise, it might not get even close but this is one area where being ahead of the game could pay off.

@ValueS, probably won’t surprise you that I disagree with your viewpoint :)

Take the high revenue & low cost, keeping to 55kbopd option, that keeps getting a mention.

The proposers see cash distribution to shareholders, at a high % rate compared to elsewhere, for several years into the future.

There is no reason why it could not start off like that but for years? If it’s not years, then how many months before R=1.2, then 1.4 etc and the internal workings of the PSC start making significant differences to the monthly revenue.

Before anyone can do any of that, we need to know the exact value of the R factor ASAP.

You could well turn out to be right in the end but this is one area where I think being ahead of the game will prove beneficial.

Maybe an idea to run two models in parallel, one where the (total production * OPEX) goes into the CRP and one where just it’s the (Contractors’ Share * OPEX) that does.

The latter is roughly, give or take a few %, 50% of the former. This would result in the R factor hitting 1 sooner because the denominator in the equation is rising more slowly.

Better to find out that’s not what’s happening than being surprised when it does.

@Straycat, given all the individual uncertainties included in annualising the revenue and the way the individual % errors would add together, then I wouldn’t even try to model it - I breathe a sigh of relief when my monthly calcs match the numbers in the RNS.

Revenue for the 12 months from now, would be so imprecise as to make it borderline useless.

Revenue for the 12 months from the unknown date 55kbopd is reached, IMO that would cross the borderline :)

My reference to the invoice I.e, one month was deliberate. The first reason was the arrears should not be annualised because they get paid back sooner and the second is assuming that the workings of the PSC remains the same as now for a 12 month period. Short term cash cow but how long before the R factor kicks in?

Better add, don’t make the rookie mistake of extrapolating these figures way into the future without considering the dreaded R factor - as if anyone would after all the posts about it ;)

Invoice $38 million, arrears $8.3 million, both net to GKP based on 30.5 days.

Usual caveats, got to get to 55kbopd first AND stay there, plus PoO stays there as well.

@putup, what is needed to model the R factor is probably not as simple as it looks but I would go about it in the following way.

Identify everything can be reclaimed as agreed costs through the Cost Pool.

For instance, I believe that the lifting costs for the Contractors’ share of production is but those for the Government share isn’t. The latter being reclaimed directly through the invoice for that month.

So the monthly revenue IMO is not simply PO + CO, it’s PO+CO+immediately recoverable costs.

Without a complete list of what is allowed and a full understanding of the detail, any model could get the wrong answer very quickly.

There are other minor points that might trip up the unwary, such as the way some costs are reported net to GKP but others are gross to the Contractors.

What is then needed is to find the latest official value of the Cost Pool, work out the effect of all the verified components since that date; and add in a bit on the end for the months where there has been production but no revenue.

@damofarl, why bother with the above? The R factor in a PSC plays a vital role in determining the % of the total production that goes down each of the PO and CO routes, and hence the revenue received per month and also profit derived per barrel lifted.

@titan, Mid September you proposed an alternative way of looking at the move up from sub 50p to what I have been using.

I took the idea on board, had a good look at it, saw it had merits but put in on the back burner without discounting it - split 90%:10%.

The version I preferred had delivered everything I could have expected and more, plus all the pieces fitted together so well - not wedded to it, just respectful of the profit it has delivered.

Since then the price action we have had is most unusual for where I think we are in the bigger pattern in my preferred version - THREE unclosed runaway gaps for example, plus a lot more!

Just to let you know I have gone from the original 90:10 to 67:33 this morning and 60:40 this evening.

Don’t know if you took on board my alternative suggestions but if you did I hope you can see how those Fib extensions might be indicating enough is enough, don’t get greedy - that is why some investors from much lower down might be considering selling.

For some LTH, where we are now is nowhere near enough to recoup their loses. Some more recent investors are already looking at three or four baggers.

Interesting if or when the shift from dividends to buyback or a mix takes place.

The big individual holders have not been re-investing the dividends since they started, otherwise the number of shares they hold would have increased significantly over time - compounding leads to at least 25%.

So they are extracting the cash to reduce the amount of the initial capital they put at risk during the DFE, whilst maintaining the significant profit at risk they have ended up with.

Once that residual initial capital at risk is down to zero or near as makes no difference, then I think we will get the buybacks restarted.

Think of it then as a free bet where the buyback concentrates the payoff.