The Company seemingly can't catch a break. Yet, they have 2, and eventually 3, FDA approved drugs. That is remarkable, and their success rate is unheard of for a biotech.
The PA approval will come, but it test investor patience big time.
Listening to the conference call from Wednesday allows one to see the complexity of the overall approval process, and the multi-tude of factors that lays beyond management abilities.
I actually took some comfort from the CEO's affirmation that the FDA is very anxious to see PA come to market, and that it values the ability of POZN to meet a major social need in Aspirin-based medicine.
I was also somewhat discomforted by the possibility that this manufacturing issue may not be resolved (low probability), and that there aren't many good options if that were to be the case (e.g., finding a new manufacturer).
Yet, swinging back and forth on my feelings, I was again comforted to learn that POZN has secured one of the worlds largest manufacturers....and so I would expect that compliance will be forthcoming.
And, a last point of comfort....this yet further delay in PA approval doesn't materially affect their product launch date. IN fact, it will allow them to defer the clock start for their 3-yr exclusively by 6-months or so. The fact is, even had FDA approved, a partner would not be in position to launch till 2H2015.
So we wait....
Yet, puzzling to me, the shares of DHT are not responsive to a these positive market conditions on supply, demand, and costs.
It's perhaps in part the downdraft winds tied to oil stocks overall, and ETF that carry a broad basket of producers, drillers, and tankers.
With the fairly low trade volume of a small cap,its very hard to overcome these ETF sales in the oil patch.
Or maybe I'm just trying to rationalize something that has a different cause....
Since beginning Q4, VLCC spot has been consistently near or above $40,000/day. Bunker fuels have fallen more than 30%, so the spot trades for DHT (7 VLCC and 2 Suezmax) are getting a double benefit of strong rates and lower operating costs.
They have 7 VLCC on t/cs, 2 of which are indexed to the VLCC spot index.
They have 2 Aframaxs on t/cs.
By Q1, they will have 5 of the VLCC currently on t/c go to spot.....
Indeed, the safety aspects is driving developers of UDW reserves to secure only the
Highest safety equipment. This comes at a price, however, since such rigs are expensive to build, and expensive to hire. Majors are balking at those hire rates, and so we see the UDW rates for safe, modern equipment slipping....now for a year, even before the oil price collapse.
The modern UDW fleet is suitable for a particular customer, one having very long horizon view on development of reserves. These are often IOCs, and they have to answer to shareholders and boards, more so than NOC. Much of the UDW fleet of SDRL must compete fort he business of these IOC, and those customers are not in a spending mood. All the new UDW backlog will deliver, but with delays. All those rigs will find work, but not at $600,000/day. The return of equity investment for UDW is not nearly as positive now as many thought it would be 2 yrs ago, when most of this backlog was generated. So, yes, SDRL is top of class, but they will not return to prior levels of market equity any time soon.
Of course, at $12 per share, new investors today would do very well if over the next 7 yrs the share double, implying an annual rate of return of 10%. That is highly likely, but little solace to those who have a cost basis much above $24. That's why these share will continue to be sold in the near term, and that is creating a huge
The notion is that old equipment is uncompetitive and will be pushed out by newbuilds.
1. Wrong, especially for the shallow jack up market.
2. Wrong in the case of PGN whose shallow water equipment has been largely refurbished.
3. Wrong from the perspective of contractors who demand cost effect, standard equipment that
Is high reliability and safety profile.
The notion is the large backlog for #$%$ will be death keel for PGN.
1. Wrong, first because of the backlog of 140+ units, only about 20-30 will compete in PGN space.
2. Wrong because PGN has a relationship with NOC that is wants cost effective solutions, for
Which standard spec drilling is fit to suit.
3. Wrong because the new #$%$ cost structure is simply too high to compete with the standard
Spec equipment where cost control matters for the charterers.
The Street can't understand that a market in which cos control matters actually favors a company like
PGN that has the industries lowest cost profile, with long standing relationship at NOCs.
The notion is that their 4 floaters in Brazil will not be competitive and become cold stacked.
1. Wrong as 3 of those 4 work in Brazil in a demand space having little or no competition...these
Are not the preSalt basins where UDW equipment is required.
2. Wrong because the contract rates for the work needed are far too low for new UDW equipment.
3. Wrong because the more shallow Brazil locations where PGN floaters operate are unsuitable for
Performance of the new UDW equipment.
What is likely to occur is that one of the 4 floaters in Brazil coming off in mid 2015 will need to reposition.
What is likely to happen is that shallow water units that rehire in 2015 will be at rates not too much below recent rates. The shallow unit rates have not trended appreciably lower over the last 2 yrs....the downward trend
Has been severe in the UDW, and that is likely to continue.
The Prospector acquisition is an example of how this company is strategic and smart.
The North Sea is currently flooded with PSVs, in part related to the Russian turmoil and the termination of some joint EXXON-Rosneft projects, which is freeing numerous PSVs. NAO has a strong short term charter tactic, forced on the North Sea....and that lack of diversity and its exposure to a weak region at this time may be a problem.
TDW presentation today is very useful, as it shows the incremental rig count is stable, despite the news of extensive stacking. And, the TDW CEO foresees incremental growth in the rig count, despite the negative sentiment in the oil patch.
Good points, and I had wondered the same. The NAT culture has historically been to pay large dividends, even if that occurs via accrued debt. Currently, it appears that excess cash must be the source for the outsized NAO div. I suspect that they see this as a bridge to attract shareholders while awaiting the fleet expansion. Yet, the NAT CEO has indicated that, if rates permit, they will be able to increase the div as the 2015 newbuilds arrive.
Would you please buy all the shares, and then you will be wealthy, and this board can return to sane dialogue.
Others say that the low fuel costs are leading to reduction in "slow steaming", and so not really saving anything....in fact thereby increasing available tonnage!
Now that the Q4 surge in Cape rates is proving a no show, downward pressure on Cape vessel valuations is appearing. Compared to summer, just as VLCCF went on its acquisition binge, Cape valuations are now materially lower. Its a moving, falling target, but let's just say that Cape asset values are now $5M lower for NB/5-yr olds. For a fleet of 39 Capes, that wold imply a nearly $200M loss in net asset value, which is a major hit to a company that otherwise has no other assets, and very low market capitalization. The shareholder equity is all but vanishing. The drop in charter rates is far from the worst of the story here....
A sad irony for those that complained when CEO cut dividend last month....
.....the yield is quickly approaching its value of just a few months ago before the cut, when the shares were trading in the $10-$14/sh range.
First the batch let loose yesterday,chewing all the wiring of the company and professing to take the company bankrupt owing to the SNY breakup!
Second the new batch let loose today, tempted by sugary sweets of droppings related to unfounded rumor a new suitor awaits to place POZN on a $30-$40 pedestal offering by close of day!