Proselenes
- 22 Oct 2009 11:14
.
HARRYCAT
- 21 Sep 2012 08:57
- 2922 of 3002
Very heavy trading again today. Do you think that it is just the day traders trading the chart, regardless of any fundamentals? If it breaks through the 200 DMA then 80p is on the cards, imo. I can't see any other reason for the drop except shorters and profit takers after a good run.
EDIT: Duly noted.
"mnamreh - 21 Sep 2012 08:56 - 2921 of 2922
Warrant issues I believe.
Global has until Oct 2nd to scare the bejeezus out of investors and sell the XEL they got under 80p to maximise their return and re-buy lower down again."
required field
- 21 Sep 2012 09:51
- 2923 of 3002
Due for a rebound...I should have waited till today before adding...
chuckles
- 21 Sep 2012 09:58
- 2924 of 3002
Issue of warrants makes sense, which goes to show you need to have an intimate knowledge of your investments to avoid getting caught out. Added at just above a quid, see how it works out.
grannyboy
- 21 Sep 2012 10:01
- 2925 of 3002
cynic "Hey chuckles, i hope you're not starting to stalk me like poodle-boy and msrsi :-)"
Feck me have you just noticed, he's been following you around for weeks, acting like your little lapdog, nozling your neck when you've felt lonely , and of course the obligatory arse licking......lmao
chuckles
- 21 Sep 2012 10:07
- 2927 of 3002
Granny the poodle adding his usual stellar contribution which as usual amounts to the square root of sweet FA, a troll without purpose, lol, let me know when you post something useful poodleboy, I won't hold my breath pmsl :)
chuckles
- 21 Sep 2012 10:10
- 2928 of 3002
Markymar, as admitted I'd either forgotten or didn't know about the warrants, so I'll take it on face value 02 Oct is correct. I'm not concerned about the current drop, it's a opportunity rather than a problem. If it turns into a problem I'll close and net off the loss against other xel profits.
required field
- 21 Sep 2012 10:35
- 2930 of 3002
About time to....I'll be losing my faith....
grannyboy
- 21 Sep 2012 10:48
- 2931 of 3002
chucky(aka cynics lapdog) its the first time i've posted on this thread where i'm NOT an holder(i don't make an habbit of it)... Unlike some tw** named "chuckles the lapdog" the persistent troll of threads he dos'nt hold shares in.....
chuckles
- 21 Sep 2012 10:53
- 2932 of 3002
As I said I'm not holding my breath for anything approaching useful from the poodle, just about choked myself laughing at the last contribution roflmao :)
Gerponville18
- 21 Sep 2012 13:06
- 2933 of 3002
Hi Guy's........Seriously thinking of buying into this share; well oversold I feel; profit takers,MM's and shorters doing what they are good at.
Anyways, I read the following post on another BB, which I feel is a very good summery for the share and moving forward, all IMO of course.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think your idea that a farm out could be 50% of the Bentley asset is way too pessimistic in my opinion. Let me explain…
A broker’s analyst report revealed back in April this year that Xcite needed to raise in the order to $310m to fund the next phase (1B) of the development. This was at the time Xcite revealed their development strategy.
In June Xcite announced they succeeded in securing an RBL facility from a consortium of banks and institutions to the tune of exactly half of what they need.
So the present funding gap for phase 1B is in the region of $155m.
Xcite have hinted via SK that they will put a Bentley farm-in out to tender around November time.
Let’s assume the farm-in partner agrees to the same development strategy revealed by Xcite earlier in the year. Roughly this would mean that whatever slice of the Bentley pie is retained by Xcite, only that portion has to be funded.
If the farm-in was 50% then Xcite would be required to fund 50% of the costs (about $155m) to develop Bentley to the stage where it reaches self-financing production.
Let’s be really, really pessimistic and assume no upgrade in the reserves is achieved.
The fully assessed core of the Bentley field currently has 116 million 2P reserves. The 50% farm-in partner would pay Xcite for 58 million barrels. Figures of $10 to $20 per barrel have been mentioned on here quite frequently but staying incredibly pessimistic and assuming only $8 per barrel was agreed that would equate to $464 million in cash to Xcite. It would mean Xcite would have more than $300m surplus cash after setting aside the $155m to fund their half of the next phase. The RBL wouldn’t even be required!
This must surely demonstrate that a 50% farm-in suggestion is complete nonsense.
Even on the same pessimistic figures used above a 15% farm out would do it:
15% of 116m 2P = 17.4m barrels at 8$/barrel = $139.2m cash raised
$139.2m cash + $155m RBL = $294.2m cash available to fund Bentley
Cost to fund 85% of Bentley = $310m x 85% = $263.5m…
It seems to me, that when you start plugging in numbers taking account of upgraded reserves and improved recovery via EOR plus a decent price per barrel of oil, Xcite could realistically farm out less than 15% of Bentley quite easily.
In fact if these improved reserves figures are really good, I don’t believe it would be an impossible feat to ask for double the current RBL facility and go it alone with 100% of the Bentley asset. It’s unlikely but not impossible.
I say the farm out option is highly likely and going to be somewhere between 10 and 15% of the Bentley asset.
In the long run this should mean Xcite when in full production should be able to raise their SP to something well in excess of £4 per share and rising… easily.
The farm-in partner is going to go to the highest bidder and I’m pretty damn sure they are going to be bidding way higher than $8/barrel… $15 would be more like it.
Thank you to Phil for the above script……….Good read and analysis, imho. My finger is on the button to buy into this share now!
cynic
- 21 Sep 2012 13:16
- 2934 of 3002
have scanned through the above, and it is rather MrP in content - all hypothesis and similar .....
nevertheless, it is indisputable that XEL have a commercial field on their hands, albeit that is unsexy heavy crude which is not only more expensive to extract, but also less efficient in terms of % recoverable (improving as technology improves), and also more expensive to refine and therefore sells at quite a discount to light crude (can't remember how much)
dreamcatcher
- 21 Sep 2012 16:07
- 2935 of 3002
Fine with me marky.
dreamcatcher
- 21 Sep 2012 16:09
- 2936 of 3002
I am quite happy to divorce this one in the near future with a takeover.
HARRYCAT
- 27 Sep 2012 09:02
- 2937 of 3002
Down again today, but good support at 100p. Presumably the weakness is tracking the downward trend of the price of crude?
dreamcatcher
- 01 Oct 2012 09:57
- 2938 of 3002
8% rise, nice to see it kept though ?
required field
- 01 Oct 2012 18:37
- 2940 of 3002
Hope it continues......so many small oilies are undervalued....
cynic
- 02 Oct 2012 08:43
- 2941 of 3002
XEL on the rumble again ..... perhaps worth watching the volume; i think it was heavy yesterday and looking that way today .... 3 month average is just over 6m