% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Touchstone Exploration Inc. Message Board

  • savage_planet savage_planet Jun 24, 2011 3:34 PM Flag

    why is petrobank down 30% since march

    Why are both Petrobakken and Petrobank 30% down since march?

    I'm not particularly bothered as I didn't invest too much in them and most of my money are in other stocks.

    But it would be interesting to know if a reason exists.

    I saw one Internet article saying it is something to do with Petrobakken paying a dividend that it can't afford. Should I take this with a pinch of salt?

    Anyway I did read the company presentations at the time and obviously liked what I read earlier this year. Petrobank has quite a bit of heavy oil and I thought that had to be worth something.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • planet, four points here, and I'll try not to get too analytical the way I tend to sometimes...

      1. When looking at dividend cash payouts, you can't just look at net earnings per share. Depletion, depreciation and intangible assets expensed should be added back in to the calculation to see if a company can afford to pay its dividend. In other words, Petrobakken earned 33 cents/share in the last four quarters and paid out 32 cents in dividends. But adding back in those intangible assets which are non-cash expenses implies that Petrobakken can in fact afford to make its dividend payments. So yes, you should take that article with a grain of salt.

      2. But cash should not simply be viewed as cash. For a company to operate successfully, it needs working capital, defined as current assets less current liabilities, but of course flat out cash in the bank helps. Take a look at Petrobakken's quarterly report here, specifically the balance sheet on page 29:
      You'll see the company in fact has no cash balance. This implies to me that the company is borrowing on its bank facility at prime to make dividend payments. Worse, if you subtract current assets from current liabilities, you'll see the company has a negative, or credit, working capital of $260 million. Accounts receivable are growing steadily quarter over quarter as are accounts payable. To me, this more than implies a failure at proper cash management. No doubt, investors have seen this deteriorating condition and sold shares.

      3. I read analyst112's post on the PBN.TO board. Because oil and gas revenues haven't fallen, I don't agree with his statement that production is falling. I don't understand his valuation of reserves either, although he does point out the increase in debt and his $8 NAV calculation is close to book value at $8.75.

      4. Petrobakken's first quarter net income was $53,375,000, with Petrobank owning 59% of it, or $31,491,250. In turn, Petrobank's first quarter net income was $20,585,000. If we remove Petrobakken and look at Petrobank as a stand-alone entity, we see a stand-alone net loss of $10,906,250. Again, there are no earnings for Petrobank's operations.

      Neither of these is a stock I would own in a down trending market that faces real risks of tightening credit conditions.

      • 1 Reply to nick_ftl
      • Thanks for your detailed reply.

        It is nice to get something like this as some message boards (I'm thinking of metals ones rather than this one) as full of spam and bashing.

        I really have a small number of Petrobank and Petrobakken shares. It is not worth me selling them.

        I bought Petrobank because they have a lot of heavy oil. I'll wait it out to see if this translates into good news.

        I bought Petrobakken because they are involved in oil areas getting a lot of news. If I go into a newsagents and see magazines about oil shales etc. I feel a bit tempted to buy share. Maybe this is wrong headed.

    • I'm in much the same boat as it's not a large position for me.

      PBG I think down with the sector more than anything specifically related to the company over that time frame.

0.1596+0.0096(+6.40%)Oct 6 2:12 PMEDT