Why do you suppose that PR keeps losing every single court battle then? It was predictable that PR would lose in court based on the reality of what happened. Recent court decisions are the most objective evidence. Unlike you, the court is not easily swayed by left wing propaganda.
I checked the announcements in 2013. They had the Global Hunter Conference in late June 2013 (just like this year). Next announcement after that was the Q2 earnings report and operational update on Aug 8th. Perhaps the company will provide more frequent updates this year. I think they should. The drilling schedule is much more active than last year, so more frequent updates would be warranted. On the other hand, they might just wait for the Q2 report in August to give an update as they did last year.
I would suggest reading the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by the late Doug Adams (or finding the movie) to get a good feel for what the FDIC is like. The FDIC are bureaucratic Vogons. They could care less about what is logical or cost effective. They could care less about wasting money to shut down a bank that doesn't need to be shut down. The bureaucrats are probably looking forward to some extra weekend overtime and a tropical vacation to PR including meals and a nice hotel. No taxpayer money is involved. All banks pay a fee that goes into a fund to cover seizing banks. There are less troubled banks these days, so they have more money in that fund.
Doral management is well aware of the above. They will come up with a plan to raise capital levels and save their jobs. I don't think they will be seized even if the court case is still ongoing. The problem is that shareholders might not like the plan. Shareholders would be very happy if they sold mainland assets or sold the whole bank. Doubt that is their plan though. They can also raise some new capital if they clear the deck of the existing common, preferred and holding co debt.
The capital levels are not really all that low (even with recent setbacks). I think they are still around 5% tier 1. 3 years ago many banks operated at that level just fine for years. The FDIC would typically shut them down below 2%, then more recently below 4%. 5% used to mean that you had some time to get things resolved (as long as you were making progress). Many fewer banks are in trouble these days. The financial crisis is fading in the rearview mirror. Most troubled banks have long since raised capital, been acquired or been shut down.
Seizing a bank costs the FDIC money. With far fewer troubled banks to focus on, the regulators can afford to take a much harder line and expend more resources on the few troubled banks that are left. At first I was really surprised at how tough they were being with Doral. Much tougher than they would have been. The FDIC could care less about the court case, politics and the likelihood that DRL will eventually win in court. They need that capital back in Tier I and they need it now. Not appeal pending, not next month - now. So Doral needs to win completely (including appeals) in the next couple of weeks or they need PR to settle (so there are no appeals). It's a very challenging timeline, given that PR is using every dirty trick and delay tactic available to them. The problem for shareholders is that they might be forced to raise capital before they win in court.
Often people make mistakes in trading because they are in denial of the truth. They won't change their mind even when facts change. They won't accept obvious facts because they contradict their philosophy. Congratulations on having an open mind to see what is happening. Based on that you already have an edge on many.
Accepting that the issue is politicized, my guess is that it makes a near term settlement less likely. At the very least, PR is not going to settle without saving face. They keep trying to manufacture non-existent legal "evidence" to support a political position. Doral is almost certain to keep winning in court, but the timeframe is very troublesome to me. The regulators are much less lenient today than they were during the financial crisis when many banks were in trouble. The deadline later this month to submit a capital plan is a major concern. They need to settle this before then.
I notice a couple of posters here (shout out to frontlineinvestor) that I know have traded these issues for years. Those are people to pay attention to - not the day traders.
I have traded distressed microcap bank stocks and debt issues alot, so I do have some understanding of the situation - although never seen a situation quite like this one. Currently no position in DRL. Own a little bit of the preferred issues. You add capital if you sell something above the level that it's being carried at on the books. The distressed stuff in PR has been marked down quite a bit. Even so, I think it would sell at a loss which doesn't raise capital levels. Selling stuff break-even (recent sale they did of some loans) raises capital levels, since less capital is required by shrinking the balance sheet.
The US mainland operations are profitable. Selling them would generate a gain (which raises capital) and also shrink the balance sheet (less capital required). Unfortunately, there is not a snowball's chance in H_ll that management is going to sell profitable US mainland operations that they see as the future of the company.So basically the bank needs to settle the legal case quickly or they have "other options" to keep their jobs. Other options are not so good for current equity holders.
Let's be truthful about what is really happening here. Republicans like Issa believe in honoring contracts. Democrats like the Governor, his regulatory appointees and their allies in the press don't. For them this is all about class warfare, bashing "Wall St" and supposed "millionaires". If you are a Democratic small investor that owns a few DRL shares, how does it feel to be a "Wall St millionaire.". You are the "enemy" and you've supported the folks that are now targeting you. Hilarious. Better wise up.
You really can't find anything quite this cheap. Not only is Petroamerica super cheap, but they have also been growing revenues, are well managed and have a great balance sheet. Ent Value / operating cash flow is less than 1X for Petroamerica. Check out TAOIF (TAO.TO in Canada) which is a New Zealand oil play. Like Petroamerica it's very cheap on an enterprise value / year ahead cash flow basis at about 2X. They are also growing revenues, are well managed and have a great balance sheet. Not quite as cheap as Petroamerica, but very cheap and it's a great company with vast leases, many years of drilling inventory and great midstream assets.
The breakup fee is $4 mil if either side backs out of the deal. What happens if the Suroco Board endorses the deal (as continues to be the case), but the deal doesn't get the required 2/3 vote of Suroco shareholders? I'm not sure either side collects a breakup fee in that case.
What's really funny is that the 2 stocks this Avi short clown is bashing that I follow (NHLD and BPZ) don't even go down when the whole market sells off. Nothing hurts more than being short a stock that trades flat or higher when the whole market plummets. That takes real talent -LOL.
Avi, you know even less about the oil sector than you know about the broker / dealers. That's why your shorts are getting buried on both stocks. The best way to measure productivity of an oil company is the "netback". Netbacks for each barrel of oil are increasing every quarter. That's because Pacific Rubiales is sharing block Z operating costs and production is increasing as they drill more good wells. Higher production on the same platforms, means netbacks go up. That's going to keep happening as PRE drills more wells. You are the amateur. You know less than nothing about oil stocks as you've proven yet again. Enjoy your losses.
The whole market tanks and BPZ is only down a penny while NHLD closes flat. LMAO at you losers! Keep spewing nonsense while foreign investment pours into Peru and BPZ keeps hitting big wells.
Brean Capital likes BPZ so shorts attack it. S&P upgrades Peru's sovereign debt again, so shorts attack S&P. PetroChina invests billions in Perui, so shorts attack China. Seems to me like someone is in denial - LMFAO.
My number one rule of trading is "birds of a feather flock together". If the broker / dealer group was a flock of birds, they would be flying north for their seasonal bull market migration. NHLD would be flying in formation behind LTS.
There is a related corollary to the birds of a feather trading rule: "All stocks shorted by Avi's boss hit new 52 week highs together". Both BPZ and NHLD are near their highs. Better check what else these a$$es are shorting. Might find some good long ideas.
From the company's presentation:
Over the past five years, Peru has made great strides in its development. Its achievements include high growth rates, low inflation, macroeconomic stability, reduction of external debt and poverty and significant advances in social and development indicators.
Since the early 1990s, the country has embarked on a series of reforms of which fiscal consolidation, trade openness, exchange rate flexibility, financial liberalization, higher reliance on market signals and prudent monetary policy, including a strong buildup of reserves, have been key components. Fiscal prudence was further supported in recent years by high commodity prices.
Prudent macroeconomic policies and a favorable external environment enabled an avg GDP growth rate of 6.4% between 2002 and 2012. Growth was 5% in 2013. This solid economic performance drove an increase of more than 50% in Peru’s per capita income during this decade, after almost 30 years of stagnation.
The inflation rate in 2013 was 2.9%. In 2012, public debt as a share of GDP was 19.8%, including local government debt. The main rating agencies -Standard & Poor’s, Fitch, and Moody’s- rated Peruvian sovereign debt as investment grade level.
These policy advances and a stable macroeconomic framework are helping Peru face its development challenges. One of the most crucial is the equitable sharing of the benefits created by rapid growth. The effects of strong growth have yielded an important decline in poverty rates: the national poverty rate fell from 48.5% in 2004 to 23.9% in 2013.
You are a lying #$%$ Avi. Even after I take profits on this stock, I will continue posting the positive case just to help bury you short lying sleaze bags.
Actually it does have something to do with the RAS message board which is dominated by a certain poster. Do you think someone who argued repeatedly that there was no IRS scandal or targeting is an objective person? If Foulger can't see the IRS targeted certain groups, than do you really think he can judge a company he supports any more objectively.
Here's from a blog article on the change:
TD Securities energy analyst Jamie Somerville in Calgary raised his price target on Petroamerica Oil Corp to $0.60 this morning from $0.55, citing its relative valuation (particularly on EV/DACF), high netbacks, potential for free cash flow generation, and several high-impact exploration wells planned for the next 6–9 months