If you are referring to me as a "shorter" after my post . . . then it shows only how troubled you are. I present factual information that you can evaluate compared to a dozen other smaller E & P's like Swift. The facts are clear and concise to see . . . the speed of growth and opportunity at Swift has not been well done or fetching. Small E & P's can't sit still when the opportunities around them and the technologies have changed so greatly. 10 years ago and today . . . Swift has grown very little in that 10 years in its impact or reach as a company. Compare it to Continental, Kodiak, Magnum Hunter and dozens of others. Reserve and revenue growth aren't there in comparison. It doesn't mean Swift goes out of business, but it does mean that investors are not about companies - they are about making money on investments. Swift today reminds me greatly of the way Petroleum Development was 12 years ago or so. It took a shake up in the corporate structure and suddenly there was dramatic benefit for investors after years of not, because investors finally shared in the benefit instead of just providing them.
spend a little effort studying instead of even less effort on unfounded comments.
At this juncture, I don't see a buyout coming. Why? Because the value of the stock to buyout - seems to not match the value that would be the motivation gain for the buyer/s. Take a look at some of the companies I previously mentioned as comparison. I'm not promoting any to you - I'm using factual valuations. Those I mentioned each have been aggressively acquiring while acquiring made sense and stock prices were low . . . . and then they have pushed up the reserve gains and exploration gains from it.
Ask yourself a simple question - if you are going to "buy" something - do you buy something that is depreciating or something that could be appreciating? In my estimation or viewpoint, SFY is a fine company - but not a compelling company. It hasn't repositioned itself for growth like others have. It hasn't operated with the same vision that others have. Again, this so much mirrors how Petroleum Development was in 1999 and 2000 and numerous other years - everything looked "fine" but it never came down the balance sheet to the public shareholders. It was always fine reports but the benefits would get "caught" somewhere "in the middle". Then after a dozen years like that, control of the company leadership changed and suddenly after a very long time, public shareholders started gaining.
My point is, I see the stock as very fairly valued under current circumstances. Only if those circumstances change, is there justification for price improvement of any substantial measure. The time to "be safe" in the O & G exploration process was when n gas was priced at $8 and $9 and properties were sold to then buy into more liquid based properties for NGL's and Oil. All those I mentioned prior - did those types of activities and leveraged those sales to buy cheaper oil and NGL properties in larger quantities.
My point is not to talk down SFY - but to separate the allegiance from "loyalty" compared to an investors purpose of profitability. People need to understand that shareholders don't control "who" gets the rewards and the security of steady revenues. What shareholders get is a never ending stream of risk. If that risk is not rewarded, then what is the purpose of investing in it?