Oil is not hedged through 2017. Your dates are wrong. Also they show .95 coverage at $50 wti. Wti has averaged well under $50 for the quarter. When all those hedges run out, what kind of condition will the company be in? What does cash flow look like beyond 2016? They will not be able to hedge oil so lucratively as they've done in the past.
Also, partnering with private equity is not good news. It means that the days of funding expansion on their own are over for Linn, not by choice but because there is no possibility of levering this balance sheet any more -- they've maxed out the credit cards.
Also, maybe some of you longs should ask management about all of the "growth" capital expenditure over the last few quarters, because it seems production will decline this year. Where was all that "growth" capital invested? Or maybe it should be categorized as "maintenance" capital, but they want to trick unitholders into thinking they've been covering the dist with cash flow instead of debt? What do you guys think?
Why are gross margins so awful? They boasted that they got it up to 9%????
I would consider a speculative buy here but i just can't get around that gross margin problem.
"Since November, I’ve noticed every time there is good news..."
That's interesting. I haven't noticed any good news in that time frame. But plenty of "substantively bad news."
And I sold my shares today at 8.20. It may go higher if earnings are better than expected but I'm sitting on a gain from the 6.20s and I hate risk. JCP is not going bk and they should not be priced to go bk.
I don't know if I'd call it "leaked." If you have a S&P subscription you could have gotten it right away. It's not the job of S&P to make sure sites like Streetinsider report their ratings in a timely manner. But anyway, you're probably right that the ratings news was the reason for the sell off. The outlook is still negative so more downgrades are likely.
What changed between 2012 and today? She has made billions in acquisitions, increased spending and shown no revenue growth. She also wasted tens of millions on a COO. She hasn't been good at all. So yeah, you can change your opinion in a couple of years when the results speak for themselves.
Thanks for the commiseration. I liquidated GNW for a small loss today, but the frustrating thing was that I had a big gain last year over $18 and didn't sell. I am convinced LTC is a terrible business and I don't want to invest in it. The liabilities are too long lived and too unpredictable. In fact, they are always underestimated. I'm also convinced that management is terrible. I have other insurance stocks that have done very well -- TRV and PRU and AIG. No longer will I ever be impressed by book value comparisons though. I'd rather own the best companies from now on. TRV is the best of breed.
I completely disagree. The "real problem" is that the "real info" is always bad. Retail always gets info last -- that's true for all stocks. But if the company is good and the info is good, it doesn't matter when you get it.
The head of ltc got canned last year. They said he left for personal reasons but please, who believes that?
She shouldn't be any different but let's face it -- everybody loves her because she's a pretty lady. Personally I like an ugly CEO who makes money. This was a bad hire but the only thing for the board to do is forbid her from making any acquisitions and wait for the spin off and let her go. Then don't hire a new CEO, just put the company up for sale with an interim CEO.
The stock could really perform. But she's been there 2 and a half years, made a million acquisitions and revenue keeps falling. I would say she should get another two quarters to show results and then get the boot, after which the board should put the company up for sale. Done and done.
Peak oil is very real. Just because prices are falling right now doesn't mean worldwide production won't peak someday and begin an unstoppable decline. Matt Simmons just had the dates wrong -- he was too soon. At times, production leads consumption and you get falling prices Then the reverse happens. It's a short term phenomenon and has to do more with economics and logistics than with the future supply of crude. It's nearly impossible to get production and consumption to equal out for very long. We've had an increase in production over the last few years -- unanticipated by Simmons and others -- all of which has come from non-Opec sources. But those are sources that hold a tiny fraction of worldwide reserves. Those reserves will exhaust themselves quickly if they keep producing at the current rate and peak oil will likely have been passed.
Shale oil production in the US will peak in only 4-5 years and then drop off precipitously. So world oil production has reached its peak or is very near it. Ghawar in SA has already reached its peak production in Hubbert terms. So has Burgan in Kuwait. They pump sea water into the reservoirs in order to maintain pressure and therefore production, but that only means they are borrowing production from the future. When this process is no longer effective, the decline rate will accelerate and those two fields alone account for nearly 8% of all crude production in the world. Ghawar alone accounts for more than half of Saudi production. When the decline starts, it will be a massive drag on world production and everybody will believe in peak oil because production will no longer be able to keep up with demand, which GROWS every year on average over the long term. Of course, it will be too late. If we haven't transitioned away from crude by then the world economy will be in big trouble. Ask any oil industry expert and they will tell you the same thing. Stop listening to the idiots on CNBC.
Disagree. That war is one of the reasons (of many reasons) why oil went to $140. Iraqi production was depressed for a few years afterward and the instability that it created in the ME added a premium on oil. But Iraq is producing now at greater and greater rates and is now one of the reasons oil is dropping. They will continue to increase production for several years until they achieve a rate that is commensurate with their reserves. But I do agree that war was one of the terrible blunders in history -- just for different reasons than you do. Oil has always been a boom and bust commodity, so I always take it with a grain of salt whenever someone has an opinion about where oil should trade.
Book value will take a hit with the drop in oil prices. Properties are not worth what they were three months ago. We will start seeing ceiling tests in the oil industry.
Not just one country, one family -- a family that promotes a pernicious intolerant extremism around the world. We always hear about iran but it is the Wahhabist saudi ideology that al Qaeda and Isis follow.
Your numbers are wrong. $60 oil is 1.18x, $50 oil is .95x according to LINE's own information. No guidance number is given for $40 oil as far as I can see. Sure, LINE will go up if oil goes up, but the inverse is also true. They gave no EBITDA guidance, which is important for their credit facilities. How does $40 oil affect their debt/EBITDA ratios?