Is it an APPL rule, or an industry rule, or SEC rule? Is there a citation to the rule or place someone could tell me I can read about it? TIA for any help. Lex
I agree with the notion of a relatively near-term buyout, particularly given INVN's collection of what I suspect are highly-valued patents. Accordingly, I doubt the PPS ever makes it to $50. In fact, IMO the buyers of January 2016 $35 strike price calls, paying $2.50 or more per contract, are likely at risk given the potential for a near-term buyout. I guess we will all get to sit back and see....
I understand that historically the PPS has dipped when negative earnings have been announced and we are likely to not hear a good earnings report this time around; however, I think playing that scenario this time around doesn't make much sense because the conference call the follows publication of earnings might include some BIG announcements re sensor placements in APPL and Xiaomi and other products that will render all earnings information almost irrelevant. At least that is my take and why I don't plan to sell before the announcement. Lex
Welbie, with all due respect, you are simply full of it. The all stock merger may well prove to be a good deal for KOG, but you dont have a bunch of experience with all stock mergers to know one way or another. For you, of all people, to NOT question whether KOG got a good deal is simply BS. Kog did not and yolu know that more than just about anyone else on this board, so dont call out the post-offer questioners/posters like that above as if they were/sre stupid, just because you have figured out the deal was not necessarily bad and, notwithstanding the fact that KOG did not get a giant premium, the PPs may nevertheless continue to go up and that is good for you.
But the offer wasnt good, and you know that, and you surely expected something like a 30
% premium because YOU have more pride in KOG and Peterson than anyone else.. But then you adopt an "i'm better than thou" approach to the falsely assumed position that you somehow "knowi it all" with respect to all stock mergers and otherwise understood this deal from the get go, and act like you knew it was a fantastic deal for loyal longs from the second it was annolunce --- and, well, that attitude you assumed in the foregoing message you authored is simply bullshix.
You may have invested early in KOG, but you are SO full of shix because of it, anyone with common sense just considers your notes as insignificant. So, write all your notes with all your +++++ separations, and call everyone names as you regularly do, and act like you know it all, but from this point on..... everyone will know, based on this post of yours, that you TRULY ARE full of it....
You are an idiot.
I love it. Three thumbs down on a post using GE's own numbers to prove a point on value? Does that mean the other posters don't like anyone relying on GE's representations? I cannot tell since no one offers a post indicating I am wrong about anything, or miscalculated any number.
It certainly appears that if you make any point that is not a straight forward rah rah statement, you get dinged by the more "perceptive" folk like Dantucker. whose "analysis" is that MHR "has a bright future." What a deep thinker he is..... Reasoned analysis from an owner of 20,000 shares? That post gets 3 thumbs down. A subsequent post slamming those offering reasoned analysis while calling them names? 4 thumbs up. Delicious!
I would bet $1000 that the three thumbs down posters on my note above (a) have never taken the time to perform any of these calculations,(b) had no idea what GE's average valuations for his own Utica and Marcellus acreage are, and/or (c) calculated what premium, if any, an acquirer would justifiably pay for MHR's shares. They just want unadulterated pumping. Go Dantucker Go!
Dantucker: You really know how to hurt a guy's feelings, lumping me in with JMS and Marvin -- two of the most balanced and perceptive posters on this board. OUCH Charlie!
Look at the last 10 or so posts from JMS and me and you will see facts and actual calculations that go with our balanced commentary, and you summarily call us fools and offer such insightful analysis as "MHR has a bright future." Man, that observation is so very rich in irony; perhaps the only thing more ironical is the 4 thumbs up your post got from the other sheeple on the board. I love it. Keep up the good work! Lex
Marvin: The problem is, I am not sure there is a tremendous amount of upside to be acquired right now pending some major Utica development news. The company has $1.15b of debt and preferred stock and I think selling the pipeline for $600m and Williston for $400m doesn't quite cover the debt. Taking GE's own numbers from his NAV slide, the average of HIS values for Marcellus and Utica is $1.815B (and, so far, he has never sold acreage for close to the average value). But assume he gets his own stated average and knock down .115b for non covered debt and preferred and HIS value is $1.7B vs 191m shares or about $8.90 a share. Certainly higher than current PPS, but not a terribly exciting acquisition target either as an acquirer may pay a current acquisition premium, but only get NAV for doing so. That is why GE really, really, really needs some strong Utica production to come on line -- to force the value of MHRs acreage above the 9,000 per acre value built into the foregoing analysis from GE. Lex
FWIW, I sold another 5k shares this morning and reinvested the money in TPLM. Now down to 20k shares in MHR and no option contracts. Hopefully 2015 will be our/MHR's year....
dcf ferg: You are absolutely right, which is why many of the long term MHR holders continue to hold on. As I have noted previously, MHR can monetize the pipeline and sell Bakken and pay off ALL debt leaving it with Marcellus Utica acreage and no debt. Not a bad position provided you can get your production to market, which impacts the timing of that move. Moreover, once you play that card, MHR is a definite acquisition target without justification for a significant premium absent more kick tail Utica well results. GE has now gone on record saying he will monetize the PL in 2015, so next year might be fun. UNLESS GE fails to follow through on his word AGAIN and postpones the sale and changes his mind again.....
Nosweat: I have been around the MLP sector since 2007 and agree with the thrust of your position. Since MLPs tend to acquire low decline production, the drilling of new wells typically does not create near term production revenues in excess of drilling costs, so they focus on acquiring new properties to make up for depletion and that proposition is getting more difficult to achieve over time with so many outfits competing for the same acquisition properties and the sellers having gradually fewer and fewer "non core assets" to divest themselves of. IMO, this additional factor competes with the "go slow" approach to expansion -- going slow makes a lot of sense until you realize the number of deals out there that are truly acretive to CF and earnings are declining and, thus, it makes sense to go after them aggressively when the opportunity presents itself. Thus, management is placed in a difficult position of going both too fast and too slow in terms of expansion, so it is hard to criticize one approach vs the other. Just my 2 cents. Lex
Marvin: Like JMS, you are right on point here and the fact you have four "thumbs down" on this post is laughable. MHR may well succeed over time (I certainly hope so based on my investment), but your comments on management appear 100% accurate from my perspective as well as a fellow investor in KOG and TPLM. And it is precisely because of that mismanagement that I have transferred a large part of my MHR investment into TPLM for at least the next year (and possibly beyond). Perhaps the Relational investment boys will help get matters back on track but, until then, it is impossible to simply be dismissive of everything DWT posts and hearing HT go on and on and on and on about DWT is getting old. I went on a 10 day vacation and unfortunately came back and about 5 of the first 10 posts were HT still hammering away on DWT. It would be nice if we could just move on.... Just my two cents. Lex
wm.craig: all fair points re various rationales behind delay situations and possible explanations for an occasional miss, or even for 50% of things not happening on schedule, but when GE misrepresents virtually every timing matter, and frequently does so within less than two weeks of a projection, he has gradually made himself a clown when it comes to the credibility of his word. I simply dont understand why he has chosen that path, but suspect it involves his low opinion of the retail investors and analysts who let him slide on all his misstatements. I mean, how many conference calls have we listened to and NOT ONE analyst simply asks the pointed question as to "how can you represent X, Y, and Z as events to happen within a couple of weeks, when you had to know none of them were true???" I am with JMS on this and share his frustration with GE. I believe in the underlying story behind MHR generally, but dont believe GE is a credible manager when it comes to his PR. Lex
JMS: I am 100% in your camp on everything you note. I am still a loyal long -- albeit with a significantly smaller share count -- but I cannot recall being as frustrated with any other company manager more than GE with his consistent propensity to blatantly misrepresent the anticipated timing of significant events. Eventually, many of the developments take place, but almost never in the time period represented. And when many of the representations he makes involve matters to happen "within the next few weeks" only to not happen for months, GE's "word" is simply not something you can rely on. If not for the pipeline and the one fantastic Stalder well flow rate, I think many on this board would be gone. GL and thanks for your balanced posts. Lex
Suffice it to say, I am a very happy camper -- like most on this board -- with a boatload of long shares (at least for me) trading at new highs. But what is really, really nice is the "merger effect" on the long call focused bull call spreads I have in play. As some of you (like my good buddy Welbie) know, I have touted these bull call spreads as suggested trades for others over the past year or so and the merger is really helping their potential much more than simply good KOG drilling results. My large 9 to 15 September bull call spread is now looking more and more like a max value near triple dunk shot, my middle sized 12 to 17 January 2015 spread is shaping up well as a 4 bagger with only $1 to go over 6 months, and my large 15 to 20 January 2016 spread is quickly moving in the same direction and will be yet another 4+ bagger if WLL gets to $115 in another 18 months, which appears quite likely with all the Whiting upgrades and new price targets coming out. The icing on the cake, and making matters even more enjoyable, is the fact that the premiums on the 20% of offsetting put contracts I sold are all diving at the same time, which will turn the 4 baggers into a 5 and 7 bagger respectively (as if the PPS was moving from the 14 merger price to 100) Kog-zilla is certainly roaring loudly now and I am absolutely loving it !!! Heck, I might even have a remote chance of catching a third to half way up with Symon and Welbie's investment results with their 38 cent shares. GLTALs Lex
given trade pricing at Fidelity and others (eg $7.95 a trade), it doesn't take thousands of shares to make it worth while at all (1000 shares of KOG with a .30 spread is $300 vs the $16 in commissions to sell KOG and buy WLL). So, the suggestion to swap shares on the arbitrage makes a lot of sense in an IRA.... but only in an IRA because, as jdlech2 hit the nail on the head, taxes will kill you on a taxable account set of trades.
Buffalo: Since you are a master at finding completion updates, would you mind posting any you come across for WLL going forward as well? Thanks in advance. Lex
All the lawyers show up after the announcement preparing the sue the directors for approving a merger value that was too low. Both the officers and directors' defense was obviously going to be that the price was a 5% premium over the last 30 days (and there is no absolute rule to consider 20 day history) AND the value of KOG will continue to rise based on affiliation with WLL and benefits it brings to the combined entity WHICH THE MARKET OBVIOUSLY AGREES WITH given WLL's run up and KOG's new 52 week high only days later. So much for the lawyers and their lawsuits!
Doublee: I agree with the sentiment of any acquisition being something no one should look for soon, if by soon you mean by the end of the year. But this field is changing at an incredibly rapid pace, with innovations occurring quarterly, and those who own significant patents have significantly greater potential than those who don't -- both as an independent manufacturer or a licensor of the technology. And a significant book of patents lends itself to a company being acquired if the patents have significant value, which has yet to be determined. GL, Lex
I agree with Dseigel's assessment that this acquisition should help solidify chances of INVN in the I watch, but I wonder about the timing. Seems like today's acquistions are fantastic, but INVN will need some time to digest and (my guess is) merge the technologies involved into new combined sensors. I wonder how fast that can be done and whether we are talking about Iwatch 1 or Iwatch 3 or whatever the name sequence is.
The PRelease says Movea is the owner of 100+ patents and I have to think patents are going to have monster value in this industry as companies consolidate and uses expand based on various combinations of patented technologies....
This move (IMO) really sets INVN up to be acquired itself as one of the big boys will surely be interested in "capturing" this technology and various patent rights for itself and to the exclusion of its competitors. I suspect several upgrades might be released based on just this rationale and, at the end of the day, INVN will not be around by the end of 2015 having been gobbled up by Apple, Samsung, Google or another player in the field.
Just my reaction: Lex
When you look at a chart for various indications of the type commented on here, what period of time are you typically looking at? 3 months? 6 mo or 1 yr?