its funny to watch this same sequence play out time and time again as I read many different stock boards here on Yahoo. Human behavior doesn't change.
This board was pretty one sided up until Tiger showed up. His comments have been almost universally attacked. Many of you appear to me to be in danger of committing some of the usual behavioral finance issues that cause people to lose money.
reading through his comments and those fighting him and to me it appears Tiger is the one being less emotional (well, not counting his responses to others emotions) -- making his case based mostly on numbers, while others respond with emotion and opinions (roughly paraphrased as "whatever dude, Peak is our man").
I admit this board is handling him much better than other boards I have witnessed -- some of you are making a concerted effort to understand his case and admit there could be another side to the story -- most stocks don't go straight up forever.
I AM NOT SAYING TIGER IS RIGHT, (personally, I have no idea what GOM assets sell for) I'm merely suggesting everyone take a step back, gain some perspective, remove the emotion that comes from making a lot of money in a stock (i.e. positive reinforcement) and think through both sides of the story in a detached analytical manner. What is the risk reward picture for the stock now in the high $60's? That is very difficult to do but if making money in stocks was easy, everyone would be wealthy beyond their dreams.
Gas man -- accusing Tiger of being condescending after calling him a racist? wow. that's one interesting world you live in.
So let me get this straight. Contango paid $5 for Dutch when only worth $3.50 or whatever you say it's worth. Peak overpaid because he was desperate for something to buy with the money received from the Fayetteville sale. He was so desperate, in fact, that he overpaid on purpose rather than buying another asset rather than Dutch at $3.50. He essentially threw away not just shareholder money, but his own money because he is the largest shareholder.
Is that what you're saying, Tiger?
You indicated: "Already answered, tax issues, sell of F Shale needed to re-invest in 90? days."
Yes, KP made a tax-deferred 1031 exchange, but so what? He could have gotten the same tax results by purchasing any other production from any other field.
And you continued: "Worth $5 to MCF, no on else unless they have a price deck 30% above consesnus."
Your note implies his purchase price of $5 per mcf for the additional Dutch interest was a "special pre-tax price" just because it was invested in Dutch MR, which would be worth only $3.70 post-tax to someone else, and that is nonsensical. Reserves are a commodity and as KP always says "Contango is in a commodities business."
Does MCF have a vested interest in seeing high purchase prices for reserves in the Dutch field? You bet, but it would be silly to overpay by a 35% tax rate (as you imply) for a commodity -- buy someone else's production.
As in my past notes to you, I am not criticizing you for having another opinion; I just ask for the rationale and the rationale you have given so far, on this point at least, is BS.
"Tiger, I ask you again: Tell us why Ken Peak paid $5/mcf recently to buy more Dutch assets. I know you will continue to ignore this request, but I just like to keep asking because it highlights your weakness, which is...you really don't know what you're talking about. "
Already answered, tax issues, sell of F Shale needed to re-invest in 90? days. Worth $5 to MCF, no on else unless they have a price deck 30% above consesnus.
If you will calm down and swallow your ego, when you sell O & G assets if you reinvest in a certain time frame, tax cosnequences effectively disappear. This has been explained before, believe me or not but please, don't lie and say I never responded or don't know what I am talking about.
You know what is hilarious, you start by telling everyone to ignore me but after winning on how irreleavant "Tiger" is , u then attack me and if I don't respond, you no doubt declare "victory". Gutless coward that you are.
'making his case based mostly on numbers'
To me, he did just the opposite. He never gave a calculation based on numbers tell how he reaches $70 the fair value. While others on this board, although opotimistic, did gave details on how they reach their result. The only number he stick with is $3.5mcf, yet he failed to give the calculation from that number to $70/share. That's what I am waiting to see.
"That's what I am waiting to see."
WELL KEEP WAITING.
I guess you lack ability to comprehend, as I have already stated several times, it is not worth my time to do a thorough analysis, I will wait for the K to come out. Others "analysis" came from regurgitation of the now famous "Sellers" report which, as I have pointed out with facts & numbers, has wildly erroneous numbers, including the $2.5 m probable and $5 proven.
Also I will said analysis if and when I want to, not on demands from some poster.
Why not do your own work, no copying from the erroneous Sellers report, and show how wrong my $70 guesstimate is? You wont will you?
Tigerisonsteroids says Tiger Woods is on steroids, thus blowing his credibility. Enough said.
CA_Man95, you have never posted on any message board before, in 2 years since you created your ID, EXCEPT on technology stock boards. You have never posted on a message board of any oil or natural gas company. Why now? Are you, perhaps, just Tigerisonsteroids in disguise? I suggest you get a life, dude.