Listen to our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode 'Uncovering opportunities with investment trusts' with The AIC's Richard Stone here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Net loss of $15 million inclusive of non-cash unsettled derivative fair value adjustments, and non-cash depreciation, depletion and amortization
How did they lose 15m when natural gas prices are low, this is when all hedges should be in the money?
Accountancy rules on derivatives and hedging there to clarify the accounts - or perhaps not!
We have this discussion every report - what is real income, expenditure and profit and what is imaginary non real loss or profit.
I think it's important to look at the accounts for what they are. Key point for me are:
- 0% on a continuation basis decline. Blimey, how?
- EBITDA and net cash generation in the period excellent. Cashb
is king, long live cash.
- Loss after non-cash valuation and derivative adjustments. Hardly surprising given continued spot price valuations, creates camouflage for the cash generation though.
- Forward hedging lower priced and less volume than I would have hoped for, but a lot better than spot or 24-25 futures. Bit of a hmm this one, needs thinking about.
All in decent results, nothing to set the world on fire which is the best outcome for all of you ask me.
The the Black Bear announcement comes from left field and looks to be an additional source of revenue generation. Interesting no one here seems to have mentioned or thought about it much. Who is not in favour of increased margin? No? Oh well.
It wasn’t 0% decline year on year - look at my earlier post comparing Q123 and Q124 - decline in production more than 10% - they only reported Q423 against Q124 which was flat.
Now there may be a reason for reduced output over the 13 months but why not tell us?
Net loss of USD15.1 million in the quarter, swinging from profit of USD392.8 million a year prior.
Adjusted earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation declined by a third on-year to USD102.1 million from USD151.4 million.
Total revenue declined 35% to USD193.6 million from USD295.9 million.
Spin it however you want, anyone who bought into this company when the share price was double what it is now, and the dividend was 3 times what it is now, is never going to recoup their investment.
Jim800 - they did tell you. There was a disposal and acquisitions in year, you are just comparing figures 12 months apart without taking account of all the announcements in between.
No need to spin George, you're doing just fine on that front. Like Jim you're not taking account of any disposals or acquisitions are you? Raw figures are not like for like and you know that, why message it that way?
Here is one disposal announcement :
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/DEC/diversified-closes-value-enhancing-asset-sale-qgg9dbcx9ilfl40.html
And here is an acquisition :
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/DEC/results-acquisition-and-capital-allocation-update-o5dt70v0k5r095l.html
It's free cash flow that needs to be compared. FY2022:$219m, FY2023:$219m (odd that), Q12024:$74m.
Accounting losses and practices have been discussed on here many times and still remain a mystery so it really is only FCF that can be compared with any degree of relevance.
PP - I’m aware they buy and sell stuff but your links talk prices not production - why not just say production down x% partly due to Y% decline and z% disposals.
One can only assume they are opaque on purpose - and given repeated “disinformation” they should be taking every opportunity to be open, clear and honest - but they keep failing to do that.
Where did you get the revenue figure from ??
'The Company recorded exit rate production in March 2024 of 742 MMcfepd (124 Mboepd) and delivered 1Q24 average net daily production of 723 MMcfepd (121 Mboepd). Diversified's average production for the quarter reflects the exceptionally shallow decline profile of its assets, with average production for the period representing an effectively 0% change in volumes(a) compared to the 4Q23 average of 725 MMcfepd (121 Mboepd), adjusted for the recent divestiture of assets associated with the previously announced ABSVII Asset Sale transaction.'
What exactly are you wanting them to say more than that about production?
Why oh why can’t Peel Hunt when they have green light to buy when 5 day average allows, why cannot they buy at least 50,000 and do something dynamic and start eliminating shorters, or is there not the money there to buy this amount?
They chose the simple quarter on quarter comparison (adjusted for divestiture) rather than the more telling year on year one.
They tell us they have a shallow decline rate of about 10% but then use flat figures!
All I want is them to give the information in a clear way which assists potential buyers make an informed choice. Not to pick and chose different metrics to muddy the picture.
You’re obviously happy with the report - seems the rest of the market aren’t.
I’m content to hold but I’m not seeing clear info to make me add more and it seems others aren’t either. No shorts closing following trading statement!
Sentiment is all here and they could go more to help.
'Notrex, let's play your pathetic little game then...' Oh dear GG - I do occupy a significant portion of your mind - seems I own you - you just can't cope without me eh? LoL
P.S. Hope the remedial maths lessons are going well? Wahahahaha
Pickedpeck, I haven't spun anything. The figures I quoted were taken direct from Alliance News published on 9th May 2024 at 13.01. Maybe lodge your spin allegation at them ? Get them to issue a retraction and apology if it's spin, or fake news, or whatever flavour your conspiracy theory infected mind wishes to label it as.
Nobrain aka Mr vile you never answered my question, did your parents treat you badly and has that turned you into the vile person you are?
I think you will find that the loss is due to the latest IFRS handling of DEC's hedging practices & can be regarded as an accounting loss rather than an "actual" loss.
Seems GG is still very, very upset with you PP - he really hates being made to look stupid (but you'd think he'd be getting used to it by now eh?). LoL
Nobrain aka Mr vile
"Seems GG is still very, very upset with you PP - he really hates being made to look stupid (but you'd think he'd be getting used to it by now eh?). LoL" You love to prove just how vile you are. Fairdos you are consistent!!
Oh dear, seems like the little lad is throwing his toys out of the pram eh? LoL
#snowflake
.