anyone got any ideas about the block trades that went through today?

website: http://www.sterlingenergyplc.com/



weather: www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at4+shtml/084938.shtml?50wind120

Ian, cheers for the comments. somehow i think a certain persons last post (2038) sums up her "value added" idea of posting.

SWW - i think the powers that be at moneyam would think this is the last thread things would get out of hand! it just takes one to rock the boat!

anyway as far as i am concerned it is back to newsflow, discussions and the frequent dinner recommendations.

SWW Thanks once again. I have these long term at 17.61 and have just been quoted 16.85 to buy. My finger is hovering on the button but I guess that when we do reach bottom there will be plenty of time to sense the moment. Also holding PCI, PRE and AFG. Thrills and spills stocks, all of them!

I refer back to this post:

StarFrog - 11 Nov'04 - 13:01 - 1621 of 2043 edit

I might be missing the point here but if SEY have had to issue new shares to raise the 97m (amounting to 41% of the new combined shares in issue) won't we then see a drop in the share price on the 19th to match this dilution of the market cap? Obviously I'm hoping not. But isn't this a fundamental matter?

Of course, if the sp does drop it will represent a new buying opportunity.

PS Hilary, I'm a muppet.

PPS I've always intended to be long, very long, on this one and am not at all bothered by todays drop. If shorties make some money of it, then good luck to them.

Well plenty of posts to catch up on here.

Ok,so we are down today and there seems to be some shorting or talk of shorting going around, big deal. Personally I couldn't care less if some are short. I guess the shorters feel they may make a quick buck, well that's up to them.

Me, I continue to look at where the company is going to be over the next few years, not where the sp will be in a few weeks or a month. I've taken a long term view of this and continue to do so. I'm in this until 2006 at least so short term sp movements don't really concern me.

So Hilary say's she is shorting this. Fair enough, that's her call. I'm not going to attack her for doing so, not my style.

Anyway, I hope this board will not descend into chaos because of talk of shorting.

Starfrog.

this is NOT a one for one rights issue where you would expect the price to halve when the issue size is doubled. This is a placement at almost the existing market price which implies that those who purchase in the placement are paying the same as a current holders shares are worth (or there abouts).

In a rights issue, if you chose not to take up your rights and didn't sell your nil paids then (in a 1:1) the share price would indeed halve on the dilution of new stock.

i know i am repeating myself but really want the point to be understood!

proptrade - thanks for that, you've explained that nicely. However, and I'm sure that I'm still wrong here (hoping!), the placing was to raise money to give to the Mauritanian government to secure the licensing deal. Therefore, the money raised is not in the company's coffers, per se. But, the number of shares in circulation has nearly doubled. Since the market cap of the company hasn't changed but the shares in issue have, surely the notional asset value (or SP) decreases?

I'm not saying this to be awkward or contrarian, but when proptrade says in 2048 that "the share price would indeed halve on the dilution of new stock", that is not strictly true. It discounts the money which would have been raised through the rights issue and the effect of that money on the balance sheet.

For instance, if you've got a company which has a BS nav of 100m and is capitalised on the market at 200m (ie twice nav) which carries out a 1 for 1 rights to raise a further 100m, then the share price will likely stay at or around the same level post-rights. This is because the nav of the company will have doubled, as will the number of shares in issue. Each share should therefore be worth the same amount. If however, the same company were to only raise 50m through the same 1 for 1 rights issue, then the new nav would be 1.5 times the original value but there would be 2 times as many shares in issue. It would then not be unreasonable for the shares to trade at a 25% discount because of the dilution. There are other factors such as the extent to which the rights have been taken up and the fundamental reason for the issue which will also affect supply and demand and therefore the price.

Hope that helps.

Now that's more like it H.

MS

StarFrog,

The money from the placing does come into the company's coffers. It will initially come in as cash and increase the nav of the balance sheet. Once it goes to the Mauritanian Govt, it will go from cash into an intangible asset and be amortised.

Hilary - thanks. But are intangible assets costed in the same sense that a quid in the bank would be when determining the value of a company?

Hils

very well put but surely the argument for longer than the short term is whether the earnings gained from this deal are worth more than paid for and hence a profitable, earnings enhamcing deal or whether sterling have effectively overpaid and then the deal will dilute the relative earnings. Only timw will tell on this front but i am comfortable that this deal will be earnings enhancing in the medium to long term and hence continue to hold.

Are we still ranting ,,steve are you in on sey i cant remember if you are or not .

No we've all calmed down now. Business as usual.

MS

DD

read my posts - yes i am holding long term

good luck for tonight

Cheers,2 many posts ,,so little time,,,,do you need a monitor 17",,back after the match,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,





come on the reds ,,away win.

It is again clear today that many seels are not!

People are buying at 16. soemthing and reporting doing it but they are showing sells.

As this is day 4 of this, whi is responsible for the recording of these as they are guilty of disinforming us?

Many seels are in fact walruses.

They completely different to look at and are also differeent in the extreme in weight.

Walruses havfe much longer tusks , for instance.

Seels have short stumpy teeth which are used to bite into there food.

Seels are related to dogs as are dog fish.

Oooo.........'eck, time to go.

Bye all!

That drop down dead gorgeous Andy Reilly has posted this to another player on a secret site somewhere in the ether!

Always worth a read that guy.

Starts

I am surprised that you seem so uncertain about SEY at present. I agreed with your comment, a couple of weeks ago, that the SP usually slips back to placing price. It has, and given the size of SEYs placing, not surprising, so I am a little confused by your uncertainty now.
Anyway, I cant see that what is going on is anything more than the usual process of consolidation, before we start to tick up again. See my previous coment this afternoon. I cant say more than that.
All the Best - Andy R

Ends

D'yer know, it's just like he's in the same room!

Well he's not so there.

By the way it's me Missus who thinks he is drop dead gorgeous, not me.

For those who do not want to read all of this it says the avarage price for crude oil in 2005 is expected to be $41 a barrel right at the bottom.

Who is selling now?

Hands up!


CERA sees Q4 global oil supplies exceeding demand

DALLAS (AFX) -- Cambridge Energy Research Associates said Tuesday it sees
crude-oil prices falling further because the world's oil supply is expected to
exceed demand in the fourth quarter.
The outlook came as January crude futures pressed at one point toward $50 a
barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange due to supply concerns, before the
contract turned lower. .
CERA, a Cambridge, Mass.-based advisory and consulting firm specializing in
energy issues, noted that West Texas Intermediate crude has declined to $45 to
$48 a barrel in mid-November from a record intraday high of $55.50 set on Oct.
22.
CERA said it expects global oil supplies to run ahead of demand by about 400,000
barrels per day during the fourth quarter -- what it called "an unusual
situation for this time of year when stocks typically decline.
"This raises the possibility that oil prices could continue to fall through the
end of the year if the global supply chain avoids a significant dislocation,"
the firm said in its report.
CERA stressed that an atypically cold winter and potential disruptions in
exports from Iraq, Nigeria, and Russia could lift prices past $50 a barrel.
Saying it expects events to support price strength, CERA estimated that West
Texas Intermediate would average $47 a barrel in December.
Other factors cited by CERA include the state of U.S. crude inventories, as well
as distillate supplies after having declined for the last nine weeks.
In addition, the role of speculators in the New York Mercantile Exchange crude
futures market, prospects for a slowdown in world oil demand, and the
Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries' concern about the disparity in
prices between light sweet and heavy sour crude must all be taken into
consideration, CERA said.
"Output could start to slip in coming weeks because producers find it
increasingly difficult to sell their heavy, sour crude oil output despite very
high discounts to light, sweet price benchmarks," CERA wrote. "The wide
differential between light and heavy crudes weighs on the OPEC basket, which
fell to $35.94 on Nov. 16."
That price represents a $10 spread compared to West Texas Intermediate crude.
"CERA expects light-heavy crude oil differentials to remain wider than
historical averages in 2005," the firm said.
CERA also estimates that West Texas Intermediate would average $41 a barrel in
2005.
This story was supplied by CBSMarketWatch. For further information see
www.cbsmarketwatch.com.

This is exactly what I predicted last night as follows:

MMs will, imo, on relatively little selling (commissioned by companies that take on CFDs and Spreadbets), drop the bid until margin calls close out big long positions on CFDs and Spreadbets, so that (a) all parties still make a profit from the punter and (b) the CFD and Spreadbet companies avoid big future payouts that they had not hedged because they were not expecting the news

Most of those subscribing to the placing will not have done so for a few pennies profit - so the idea that there is a massive overhang at this price level is, imo, mistaken - it is more likely, since over half the applications for the placing could not be met, that those who were disappointed would commission MMs to drop the bid on the basis of they would buy whatever can be shaken out - so far the sheeple are obliging them

I would lay you a to a penny that today's sells are margin calls on long positions, some of which are quite chunky because margined bets are the only way most punters can work in those quantities - all of the trade sizes are too small to be institutions cashing up - when will punters ever listen?