Sat, Dec 27, 2014, 9:14 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed


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

Linn Energy, LLC (LINE) Message Board

lexpress56 13 posts  |  Last Activity: Dec 22, 2014 3:31 PM Member since: May 9, 2007
  • lexpress56 lexpress56 Dec 22, 2014 3:31 PM Flag

    Meant to say "need to hold acreage by production"....

  • lexpress56 lexpress56 Dec 22, 2014 3:29 PM Flag

    Ben: Don't mean to be overly critical, but your comment about hedged companies will pump as much as possible doesn't make sense if the inference is only hedged companies will do this. Hedged companies will certainly make sure they pump enough to satisfy their hedge volumes, but after that hedging is a non factor in the decision to produce so your comment seems out of place.

    That said, I agree that supply will drop after companies start pulling back capex, which will come as soon as wells already drilled or committed to are drilled. My guess is only those with bullet proof liquidity and/or a NEED to drill to hold production are the only ones that will be pumping as much as possible next year, period.

  • Reply to

    Eureka 8K

    by cuda68300 Dec 22, 2014 9:38 AM
    lexpress56 lexpress56 Dec 22, 2014 2:45 PM Flag

    "over 50%" is what I meant to say: 48.6 + 1.56 = 50.16%

  • Reply to

    Eureka 8K

    by cuda68300 Dec 22, 2014 9:38 AM
    lexpress56 lexpress56 Dec 22, 2014 2:44 PM Flag

    Cuda: Can you remind me what entity owns the rest of EH Holdings LLC? it appears that MS now owns slightly more of the pipeline than MHR, but there is 1.56% ownership not stated in this release, which I trust still gives GE and MHR 50% control of decision making. What MHR affiliate owns that interest, if any?
    TIA Lex

  • Reply to

    Jim Denny Spoke this morning

    by cuda68300 Dec 18, 2014 10:47 AM
    lexpress56 lexpress56 Dec 19, 2014 3:54 PM Flag

    JMS: I hope you are right, but the Ohio regulatory rep has said there will be a "full investigation" and who knows how long that will take.

    That said, am I correct in thinking the reason they were bringing this well back on to production is they are done with the other three wells and all four will be brought on soon?

  • Reply to

    Free E & P Oil Company!

    by mikeinwestsac Nov 12, 2014 9:12 PM
    lexpress56 lexpress56 Nov 13, 2014 3:04 PM Flag

    I would like to think you are right, but the estimates of Rockpile and Calber value were based on day rates and transportation charges folks were willing to pay with higher price oil. Now the demand for both service company offerings -- particularly the fourth and fifth Rockpile spreads -- has fallen and the former projected values will need to be adjusted downward (and I am afraid the adjustment might be significant). That said, TPLM has two big things going for it -- low debt and the ability to use nearly all of Rockpile and Caliber to reduce its own drilling costs. Lex

  • Reply to

    Watching MHR

    by lwbd2014 Oct 24, 2014 11:34 AM
    lexpress56 lexpress56 Oct 26, 2014 3:19 PM Flag

    HT: what do you mean by your statement that GE just pledged 2 million of his own shares for that very purpose? What is the purpose an\d how did he pledge his shares? Thanks for explaining......

  • lexpress56 lexpress56 Oct 22, 2014 12:16 PM Flag

    Foolfinder: Is it really a stupid post when the $9 figure is thrown out there without referencing a time frame? IMO Mhr WILL be taken out for more than $9 -- and then some -- but it wont happen for another year or two because current deficit spending is too high and take outs typically don't happen for E&P companies until ebitdax nears capex. But MHRs assets are worth more than $9 and growing in value, so it will happen eventually making the prior post not so stupid as you suggest. Lex

  • Reply to

    How bout those wells?

    by gary_evans_is_here Oct 22, 2014 7:34 AM
    lexpress56 lexpress56 Oct 22, 2014 9:04 AM Flag

    Awesome well results, particularly since all three of the Marcellus wells are 45%+ liquids, which greatly enhances associated sales revenues from the production! Plus, production on the pipeline goes up and, hopefully, EHP doesnt have issues moving the liquids because of the giant dry gas flow from the Utica well.

    Now, if we can just get some air permits and get all the high test rate wells into ongoing production mode. Very good news......

  • lexpress56 lexpress56 Oct 21, 2014 11:59 AM Flag

    I do not claim to be one who is "in the know;" however, to address your inquiry, GE's slide 56 in the October presentation puts the value between $3.195B and $3.874B. The average of those figures is just shy of $3.4B.

    On one hand, GE has historically failed to realize even his low side estimates on liquidations, so your $3b estimate may be spot on. On the other hand, the midpoint of GE's Utica acreage values is not far off from the CHK $13,000 an acre price, so maybe his low end value of about $3.2B is a fair number. Assuming the $3.2B figure to be correct, slide 56 puts the NAV per share net of debt at $9.38.

    Just a few observations based on the presentation, and here's hoping GE is right with his values and our share price gets back up above $9 in the coming year. Lex

  • Reply to

    CHK confirming value to low for MHR

    by jdberwanger Oct 16, 2014 7:20 AM
    lexpress56 lexpress56 Oct 17, 2014 10:30 AM Flag

    JMS: Good point about adding the Bakken to my pipeline variance remark as it appears the metric comparison may well have been premised on Marcellus/Utica acreage alone. Thanks, Lex

  • Reply to

    CHK confirming value to low for MHR

    by jdberwanger Oct 16, 2014 7:20 AM
    lexpress56 lexpress56 Oct 16, 2014 9:11 PM Flag

    How does the author of this note reconcile his numbers? If the shares have 40% upside from $4.70 at time of issue, that takes the share price to $6.40. Then in the next sentence he has a has a target price of $10. I like the $10 more, but taking his asset sale metrics at face value in light of the current PPS, the target appears 50% higher than his implied upside calculation. I trust the difference is explained by the pipeline since the implied upside is premised only on production and acreage.

  • Reply to

    Takeover talk in the oil patch is going to start

    by millstonec Oct 15, 2014 3:58 PM
    lexpress56 lexpress56 Oct 16, 2014 8:58 PM Flag

    A takeover is more likely when Ebitdax gets close to equaling or exceeding capex. That is the litmus test because it is at that point that the acquirer doesnt have to issue a bunch of equity or take on debt to fund further expansion -- they just pay a fair price and take on the benefits of self-funded upside. See BEXP and KOG for examples.

10.85-0.080(-0.73%)Dec 26 4:00 PMEST

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.