Registered Members Login:
   
Forgotten Your Details? Click Here To Recover +
Welcome To The ShareCafe Community - Talk Shares And Take Stock With Smart Investors - New Here? Click To Register >


finicky
Posted on: Feb 4 2011, 10:32 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

yeah, I forgot BUR's net revenue interest is only about 30% in these wells so the rough guess of revenue to BUR when the two new wells are connected would only be in the area of only $1,700/day. That's based on the Dec readings released, and before any refraccing, and not counting any condensate sales.

That is: 1.3 mmcf/day is worth about 1,300 mmBtu x $4.35 = $5,655/day gross revenue x 0.3 = $1,697/day net revenue to BUR at this early stage.

Would be right roughly?
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Feb 3 2011, 11:02 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

So where's the enthusiastic commentary from LCZEL and tcisboss?

How much is 1.3 mmcf/d gas going to sell for, if it gets no better? Plus 20 or so barrels of condensate/day, haha. Sounds like chickenfeed.The NYMEX spot price closed at $4.35, but I am bewildered as to how to convert the results into revenue terms; the more so when when I believe payment is actually based on some Henry Hub spot price denominated in $/million Btu. My guess is their results would look pathetic against the preceding hype if expressed in terms of $revenue, net of costs.

Best guess is that:

1.3 mmcf = 1.3 x 1,000 = 1,300 mmBtu [link (2)]

NYMEX NatGas contract is in $ per million Btu (mmBtu)? [link (1)]

Price per NatGas contract is $4.35

So, 1.3 mmcf/day is worth about 1,300 mmBtu x $4.35 = $5,655/day gross revenue before remediation and not including the dribbles of condensate.

That's from 2 wells, but one they said was mainly put down as some sort of confirmatory or study well I think.
Anyway, I could be out by a negative factor of 10 for all i know. Might be $565/day, and I'm not sure about the Henry Hub aspect.

The strategy seems to be to drill 12-24 of these development wells in the best case scenario, but it might be as little as 4-8. Maybe they'll just sell the prospect on for a piddling royalty like they did for the Austin chalk leases, then talk through a megaphone about the next 'company maker' idea.

"Burleson historical drilling track record now 91% success rate (10 from 11, including 5 chalk wells)"


Well well, same old. Congratulations team. They're so consistently successful, but none of these wells have been anything to speak of. All they've done is fund just a fraction of further drilling costs, and pay the administration and operators, who are also the ones who formed the company. They've conducted multiple cap raisings to get this far, not to mention the shareholder destructive convertible note adventure. The operators are in for any successful outcome with their free 'performance' shares.

Links:

(1) http://www.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/ng_pri_fut_s1_d.htm

(2) http://www.natgas.info/html/natgasunitsconversion.html
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jan 26 2011, 08:42 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

That'll be worth a look. Meanwhile natgas itself still looking ok, price above the 50 dma, which itself is opening a tiny gap above the 200 dma. Seen worse situations in natgas, but how will industrial commodities generally go over the next few months? - not so great, if you listen to Marc Faber - http://www.zerohedge.com/article/marc-fabe...-long-treasurys
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jan 18 2011, 11:42 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Continued reading your posts on this board, and get some reassurance that some actually believe BUR is worth something. Haven't had anything to add, as have given up trying to assess these companies. By the way I went for double entitlements in the rights issue, hoping to average down and give myself an easier exit price.

However the chart of spot Natural Gas offers a bit of encouragement I believe. As an aside - how does a an abundant fuel in the States get belted down to such barely economic levels? It can be compressed and used to fuel cars and fleet vehicles; it can be liquefied for same. In a country with a trade deficit like USA, and a chunk of that is oil imports, what are they waiting for? Boone Pickens has been onto it for years. How does natgas languish and get to glut levels of inventory? Just rhetorical questions. Natgas is one of only two commodities in cal 2010 that ended the year lower. Could be a contrarian argument there.

Anyway, looking at this 2.5 year daily chart you can see that the price looks to be breaking above downtrend, and with a bit of imagination you could read the last year as a bullish falling wedge. Additionally the momentum indicators have been positively diverging from the price lows since Apr 2010, and 50 dma is crossing the 200 dma from under, suggesting more rally. A year long retracement of the rally that began in September 2009, finished Jan 2010, is not bad preparation for more upside.

Can't be bad for BUR if natgas sustains a rally while BUR is tying in gas and condensate production and establishing 2P reserves?



  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Dec 7 2010, 10:11 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

So let's see: instead of owning 25% of 4 Mile they would then own 100%? Isn't Alliance claiming that part of the 75% stake belonging to Quasar/Heathgate was acquired by them while withholding significant information from Alliance? So Quasar/Heathgate got part of their equity on cheap terms through deception, according to Alliance, because they withheld information due to Alliance . And you're saying Quasar/Heathgate might walk out of that advantageous deal and that's necessarily bad for Alliance?

Losing the plant, and a partner knowledgeable not just of the mining/processing of uranium, but knowledgeable of the processes in that precise location would be huge, but as compensation they would presumably get back 75% and own 100% of, in your own words," .. one of Australia's biggest and best uranium deposits ..."

What's Quasar/Heathgate going to do - sue Alliance for what Quasar/Heathgate have already spent on feasibility? What would Alliance's legal recourses be anyway if Quasar/Heathgate in some sense reneges?

For the uranium bull what are you looking at if such a situation was to occur and resolve simply? That is, a small cashed up junior appears with a top notch developed uranium resource. A neighbour has proved that such a resource can be mined and processed profitably at lower uranium prices than today let alone tomorrow. You're saying it follows that the junior is washed up and won't find funding or major to farm in?
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Dec 6 2010, 01:10 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Skiff, my intention is to hang in for the roughie long odds. I see no point in selling what was bought pre the hyper inflation of shares, since that historical holding has become chickenfeed, and this reflection must apply to anyone in that position.
The ones who bought at the lows pre NipponX , and who still holding, are looking at their profit daily eroding, I suspect there will be more of those to be shaken out with the break of 3c, but of course I don't know, just an opinion. Traders operate with stop-losses which will be getting progressively hit. Similarly I can't see many of the placements holding as they see their subscription moving into loss, although I suppose there's a chance there that most are out, don't know.
Personally I might add a few if the price gives a hint of stabilizing, but I now regard it as a full on gamble at a race track where I don't even know if the stewards are asleep.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Dec 6 2010, 12:47 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

My previous remark ........

"I suggested this approach on the Intec Dorothy Dixer forum before La Jolla appeared."


Post is here

Ok, I did a search over at Dorothy Dixers and found the post where I suggested a different way of fund raising, and my memory has obviously embellished. It was made 4 March 2010 when the SP was already about .8c pre consolidation.
La Jolla had already been resorted to. There' s no way that at the time I made the suggestion that the amount potentially raisable would have kept the salary funding going up to the NipponX deal. However I was thinking about it well before I bothered to futilely post it over there! lol. If I could think it, then why couldn't they have come up with some creative solutions before La Jolla? My view is still that La Jolla was no solution whatsoever since it virtually demolished the old shareholders' stake, the ones who had been funding the company for years.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Dec 6 2010, 12:05 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Yep, significant break I agree. The placement takers at 3c and the remaining speculators who were inspired to be buying around .005-.006 could panic. I've stepped back, was thinking of adding @ .028. Why didn't any directors follow P Wood's lead and buy some if prospect is good?
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Dec 6 2010, 11:40 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56


"I agree that the purchase of shares by the CEO did happen....but he didn't buy many. Just an exercise in giving you and other shareholders some confidence."


He bought about $39k worth, but I totally agree that explanations are possible other that he thought it was a good investment decision. Confidence of shareholders as you say, and also a placement had been made at 3c
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Dec 6 2010, 11:36 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

"Did you approach the directors with your offer of financial assistance finicky? Did they turn you away in favour of La Jolla?"

I suggested this approach on the Intec Dorothy Dixer forum before La Jolla appeared. An offer attractive enough would have got support from shareholders, and as things turned out would have been very good for shareholders and would have financed the company IMO. It was certainly worth a shot given their actual decision

"
You've had your say and I've had mine"

But I haven't "had my say".
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Dec 6 2010, 11:00 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Looks like no managers have bought other than P Wood. And none at all in the top twenty. Why not? They're on good salaries. Are they expecting a risk free stake?

"It never pays to wear your heart on your sleeve when it comes to money"

So you imply that it is just form, and their real sentiments to la Jolla are different, but there is no real evidence of that at all.

"In any case, La Jolla made finance available when nobody else would, so INL can have no complaint"

So you are implying that any behaviour towards a debtor is acceptable when the debtor is over a barrel. By extension no complaint can be made of predatory lending.

Anyway, how do you know that "nobody else would". I would have; most shareholders would have - if a massive cheap options offer was made early enough. An offer we couldn't refuse, such as a 1:1 entitlement offer of quoted options priced at 1/10 the share price, ex price at the then current share price, with +1 year term. All potential dilution would have ended in shareholders hands. How do you know there weren't other alternatives as well? The management's actions did not give any weight to actual, as opposed to future, shareholders at all. We were effectively dumped so they could carry on.

"Needs must ... under duress."

Duress isn't a license to do anything at all. Business doesn't operate in an ethical vacuum, as some would like.
It appears to operate in a very liberal regulatory space though.

By the way, for transparency, I have added to my stump of an investment in Intec since the NipponX surge. It is not really rational, but I want at least shot at retrieving some loss on my ridiculous investment in this company, the biggest financial stake I have ever made. However I have no conviction at all that I have not thrown good after bad and it implies no renewed confidence in the management.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Dec 4 2010, 08:14 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Australian Securities Exchange
3 December 2010

Convertible Note Facility Repaid

"Intec appreciates the professionalism with which the necessary working capital finance was provided by LCJI to enable INL to focus on strategic growth."

Does this sound like they would contemplate doing it again? Does to me.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Nov 22 2010, 12:58 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Yes I noticed that you have made no apology, although you probably should rather than beat your chest about it. You laid low a while, and have now come back to resume the ramping, apparently feeling vindicated by events. I don't see how, but you seem to live in a different universe. The real friends of speccie shareholders, actual and potential, tend to not be the self appointed band leaders of forum cheer squads but those who are willing to criticize their own companies

"As you say "What good would anyone have done by reading your posts anyway?" Are you referring to your own?"


No, that avatar must be a metaphor for your brain, but whereas my posts are arguably useless, yours have been a disservice and now you have the gall to tell others what they should be saying.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Nov 22 2010, 12:01 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

"but I accept that that is the risk one assumes when one invests in a company like Intec."

Unless you don't mind being bent over - a shareholder emotionally accepts real commercial risk not being treated with contempt by management and sacrificed for some greater good

"Get on with life"

If you don't mind mate this is a part of life for me and a few others, so for someone who has been a relentless apologist and PR enthusiast for this company, rather than sound an occasional critical note, I wouldn't be putting my hand up as adjudicator or referee. What good would anyone have done by reading your posts anyway?
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Nov 22 2010, 10:13 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

"La Jolla made some money, and INL stayed alive."

How do you think you're addressing the issues with statements like this? We all know Intec has stayed alive this far, and the deal with La Jolla was instrumental, but it is alive without the old investors, the people the company is supposed to be run for - that is the point, or at least the debate that the non toadyers are trying to have. The company is alive it seems, the management is alive, but the old investors were left as good as dead. The poster 'Enumerate' long ago made something like this distinction well - a listed company is borne supposedly to make investors money. Any diversion from that end is a violation of what it publicly offers. A listed company does not exist to keep its management and staff in well paid jobs, and profiting from free options and so forth - that is of value but secondary to its primary purpose in making investors money from their risked capital. They function in that role for us - not us for them. Nor does a listed company exist to get a project to completion. That is also secondary to making investors some profit on their risk - even if the project is a cure for kids' leukaemia, because a company is not presented as a noble charity.

This company should have been delisted, or put into administration. That way expenses would have been choked off, then possibly it could have been recapitalized as fresh prospects or resources emerged, such as the royalty stream from Bass Metals. Another option which was broached, without reply, on the PR Dorothy Dixer forum, was a massively dilutive ultra cheap options issue. This would have had no worse effect on dilution than La Jolla, and probably less, could have produced just as much working capital - more if the options exercised, and would have left participating shareholders with a meaningful stake in the company
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Nov 20 2010, 01:06 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

"It is La Jolla who should be priased for agreeing to yesterdays transactions"

Yes let us praise La Jolla - and Intec for finding these considerate benefactors. As already expressed, possibly to the tedium of others in this forum, I have been perplexed by the equanimity with which a few posters have watched their shareholders' equity ravaged by the La Jolla deal. This assumes they are shareholders of course. For all I know they could be anything. But how about a couple telling us here why they feel so ok about things given their long term ownership in the company was far worse than decimated? Would any here like to boast that they were, recently, in the last month say, seized with a conviction to buy a million or multiple million sub 1c shares? How did you gentlemen have the confidence to do that? Was it some inspired consciousness raising group? Was there any adventitious bolt of illumination? Can I join? I'm not a gentleman, but I could pretend. I don't mean you SilentPartnr - you couldn't be a LT holder and be so gracious in your comments re La Jolla. Just following on the thread.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Nov 17 2010, 07:13 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

The enthusiasm on this forum defies belief. What, are you all members of some masochist cult or something - slavishly worshipping your masters? You'd all make good cannon fodder for some WW1 general, or maybe you fancy being tossed off some leaky boat so the crew you're paying can safely hove to port. How about being jettisoned from a plane that's low on fuel? If you're an old shareholder there's nothing in this for you to speak of. This company would have to become the equivalent of Berkshire hathaway or Microsoft for you just to make your subscription back. What about those bordellos where the clients are put into floral aprons and sternly forced to clean the toilet with a toothbrush?
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Sep 15 2010, 01:59 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

"The glorious Directors might think a consolidation of shares, say 10 for 1 might be good for investors ..."

They might have said it, but that doesn't mean they thought it. Maybe they had to sell the proposition of a 1:10 consolidation because otherwise the short term lender with the big rates might not have been able to convert and unload all the current Note. If the price started off at .003 at the issue of the second convertible note (pre consolidation) maybe the La Jolla would not have been able to grind through the conversions at ever lower prices. But from .03 it will take a while to smash it down to where it can't be depressed any further, thus allowing La Jolla to achieve their goal of full conversion of the Note at lower than market prices and then sale of the shares on market at a guaranteed profit. Meanwhile management gets their life extended, the projects keep a heartbeat, but shareholders' equity in any mooted success down the track is shrunk to a pea. Also a board has the freedom to issue employee options later on.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Aug 30 2010, 09:50 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

I'm surprised to see anyone taking an interest in the technology now, here or elsewhere. Doesn't everyone get it yet? The fortunes of the technology do not affect shareholders any more.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 25 2010, 06:50 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Skepticism is a fair stance to this company, as it is for many gold specs. Just about all these companies spruik their shares and are dangerous to the financial health of retail investors. Dilution is a major problem as is management spin. Here is the M.D at Canary Events preso over a year ago, as found at brradio . Where's the high grade production? I'm a long term holder but have to say that about the only thing going for this one lately is apparent cheapness measured against the historical average share price.

14 May 2009

"The mineralisation is persistent, continuous, quite predictable, and quite coarse gold as well, and ah, lends itself not only to easy mining but easy processing as well.

"Mineralisation is extensive and within that you get high grade zones with in the order of, oh, 10 - 50 0zs to the tonne.. that sort of level

"We're opening it up incrementally and making money as we go"

Following this we got:
a placement announcement 24 June, large option conversion moneys 8 Oct, and now another 'book building'
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 6 2010, 01:14 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Get out of gaol card - that's exactly how it would feel if my remaining shares (300k) got back to their purchase price - 100k already sold as tax loss FY10, but I will attach no hope to the shares of this company.
Some of those questions were only rhetorical, I've already got a firm opinion. I agree that people get into these Oil/Gas specs without knowing what they're doing, certainly I am one, and I now conclude they designed to attract a little smart money and a lot of dumb money. Smarties never see them as more than opportunistic trades and know they are not investments.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 5 2010, 06:58 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

"All indications on Moeller were very positive"

Why can't they test for a quality as simple as water salinity before they interpret and comment on 'wireline logs'? What have they ever achieved really in BUR? Why was the company formed as an ASX listing? How many shares have any of the principals ever bought with their own money?
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 5 2010, 06:49 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Sorry tcisboss, I was mostly just irritable again with the operators of this company, and the SP losses today. I got an email every time you have made a comment, because I have subscribed to the topic of BUR. God knows why. Frankly I don't think this company is worthy of much comment. It was constructed I believe not for the benefit of ordinary shareholders. Don't take me seriously wacko.gif
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 5 2010, 12:36 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

What can you do?

1/ You can ignore any of the blandishments of this management. They've done this stuff before - i.e pump prospects to the market with positive scenarios that amount to nothing in actuality but a smashed SP for the non insiders

2/ You can try to be less inane yourself
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jun 15 2010, 04:05 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

"so do not put too much faith in my reasoning"

Oh, ok
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jun 9 2010, 12:50 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Why should I care? I'd need a 30X bagger just to get my investment back - and that's before the massive dilution that lies ahead. 30X baggers very rarely happen and certainly not these days. I have voted No to all three resolutions
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jun 9 2010, 12:22 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

It's a load of rubbish I think. I don't believe there's any better explanation than that it enables the financier to continue its plundering of shareholders' equity. Whatever it takes to deliver those hefty salaries for a few more months and get the thing a few more stumbling steps towards some blurry feeble goal - burn up the house to keep warm. Er, the house is us, lol.
To have delivered us into this position and request that we speedily give approval for more. We're stuffed whatever happens, so why not vote NO to resolution 3 and go down with a protest?
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: May 30 2010, 03:06 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

They spent almost $8m up to the end March and made only a paltry $591,000 from gold receipts and interest, leaving only $5.3m cash at end of March.

They shifted the focus to low tonnage high grade stope mining at Hill End in early April to generate some income but switched back again to drilling and mine development late May - see 28 May ann. So <2 mths of stronger revenue generation won't be great spread over whole Qtr and they'll still spend a lot on exploration drilling and mine development by end of this June Quarter.

Conclusion:
They're running out of cash and a capital raising can't be far away. The Hargraves project drilling results announcement could be seen as softening shareholders up for a raising (hole HGCD32 hit of bonanza gold in a metre of core, and hole HGD13 intersection of additional strong mineralisation with abundant visible gold over 50m from 173m down hole). More Hargraves drilling results pending.

Been purely speculating that with emphasis away from production and back on drilling they could be trying to make the Hargraves project more attractive to a jv partner?
8 April
"Given the very positive developments at the Hargraves Project, the Company is considering various avenues for obtaining capital necessary to accelerate the realisation of the outstanding potential of the Hargraves Project."
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: May 27 2010, 08:43 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

A somewhat BENt take, hyuk yuk

  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: May 26 2010, 12:06 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

I'm not feeling all that motivated to sell on market, but consider the scenario that CPB doesn't make a higher offer, the market falls further, CPB decides not to make the offer formal (it has only announced its intention to date). The appearance of a better offer from a third party being flushed out by the CPB initiative doesn't seem likely. So if that scenario happened the price of AEC would drop back considerably, since not only would the offer premium go but also the general market fall would be accounted for too. Without the CPB offer I'm sceptical that the price of Ammtec would have broken above $3.00 resistance that it had been probing, and might have been in a topping phase rather than a consolidation. Before the Campbell's offer I wasn't all that optimistic about the AEC chart action.
Just some offhand thoughts, I'm only toying with the idea of selling because of gloom about the general market, fair chance I'll just hold, as bought these for investment not trade. Would be good though to have the extra cash from AEC, sold on market, for the contingency that things continue to go badly for the general market and cheaper opportunities are presented.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: May 12 2010, 02:39 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

"This is one very very deep well."

Problem is not depth, it is locating a hydrocarbon source th
at keeps paying out and doesn't tail off with loss of pressure in time. I base that on the 5 consecutive wells drilled 'successfully' in terms of reaching payable gas at greater depth than Moeller #1 and with the added technical difficulty of then drilling a lateral. For example Marlin 2 drilled in 2008 was 7,500 feet further in extent than Moeller #1


8 October 2008

Marlin Unit #2 well


Gas development well with single horizontal lateral in fractured
Austin chalk reservoir.

The well (Marlin 2) was drilled to a total depth of 20,000 feet (6096 m)
including 5,229 feet (1594 m) of horizontal section in the fractured
Austin Chalk reservoir. Numerous fractures and gas shows
(increases in casing pressure and gas flare height) were
encountered while drilling the reservoir section. The well has
been completed for gas production and first sales gas was
delivered on 25 September 2008


10 May, 2010

Burleson Energy (BUR) advises that, as at 6am on 10 May, 2010 (Texas time), the Moeller #1 well was at a
depth of 8,086 feet (~2,465 metres). The Moeller #1 is the second of numerous large Wilcox prospects to be
drilled in 2010 and is being drilled as a vertical well to a total depth of approximately 12,500 feet (3,810 metres).

  Forum: Investment Discussion

finicky
Posted on: May 7 2010, 11:34 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Adding all the other costs of capital per oz and exploration, what would it be then?
There's the Gekko plant only designed to process ~80,000 Tonnes Per Annum at rate of 10TPH - well I suppose they'll have to run double shifts to put through 80,000 tonnes at that hourly rate, but whats the likelihood of running at 80k tonnes?
If you start to be conservative it might only be a 40,000 tonnes and 20,000 ozs of gold p.a operation, assuming they can generate enough ore to keep the Gekko plant spinning at that rate.
Let's assume $500/oz total costs, leaving say $700/oz ebt,
leaving say A$700/oz x 20,000 ozs x 0.7 after tax
= ~ A$10m p.a
= forward P/E of ~ 10
  Forum: Macro Factors

finicky
Posted on: May 3 2010, 02:50 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

"BUR has hit payload on every well drilled, but obviously can't expect that sort of track record to continue."

Yes lets hope that record doesn't continue because the 'payload' has not had the quality to produce a profitable Qtr for the company that I can remember, not significant or retained profit anyway. No pay in the load for shareholders. 5 successful wells no lasting profits -the operation was a success, unfortunately the patient died - as they say.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Apr 27 2010, 03:30 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

More open interest sellers than buyers. You say Buyers informed because of bid size?
Million barrels, not billion, and described as "potential". Seen what "potential" amounts to before from this co. Got fingers crossed though, might get my early stake back - only another 100% to go! Took a stake couple of years back because of "potential" that the company described at that time.

From today's blurb:

Rig preparing to move to next Wilcox prospect the Moeller #1
o Potential for 100bcf and 2.4 million barrels of recoverable hydrocarbons.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Mar 17 2010, 02:09 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

I see it as guaranteed profit now compared to highly speculative risky profit in the undefined future.

La Jolla know they can make profit now, and the ongoing erosion of the share price does not disadvantage them personally one bit. They just keep exercising at the discount and selling the shares quickly into any buoyancy.

I had exactly the same experience with another small company that I was in - an oil/gas junior explorer - the SP ended up at 1/8 the early price primarily because of the converting and selling note holders. A year later and it's just getting off the floor - maybe.

It's a rort of a system because the financier can wreck the capital raising strength of its debtor client for guaranteed profit and at no risk to itself. It's an invention of financial engineers, akin to the Goldman Sach's "vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money"
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Feb 18 2010, 02:28 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

You can find the P Wood interview on the business channel if you haven't alreday located it. Go to the below page and select the Switzer tab, then scroll down where you'll spot him

http://www.businesschannel.com.au/video/
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Feb 13 2010, 04:10 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Bill Greedy lol. Anyone can have my Intec shares for half what I paid for them, now I can't be fairer than that. Convertible Notes, what a drag. Holder guaranteed profits by continually converting at a discount to the prevailing SP then able to sell quickly onto the market. As if resorting to this form of funding wasn't desperate. The management and senior personnel could have alleviated the pressure long ago by taking significant pay cuts, not 15 %, more like 50%, till the company got on its feet. Operators of these borderline solvent share market created companies insist on being paid with some reference to what is being paid to directors and execs of companies that are making a profit. No real business could survive like that, it'd have the life span of a bug. A company like Intec can only exist because of the magic of the share market.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Nov 23 2009, 03:44 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Flower, the entitlement issue is non renounceable. There won't be any rights trading. I agree with your implied point that a 1 for 6 entitlement to Troy shareholders will probably not produce a flood of shares for sale. Seems to be the way it's shaping up so far. The chart for me is not an obvious read at the moment. The price seems to be jostling up for its weekly closes under the 2.60 level, so if I were looking for entry, convincing successive daily closes above 2.60 would be one idea. Watching the gold price another, as you say, esp the A$gold price which seems to have gone bullish after a 5-6 month rounding low. The weekly close above A$1,200 seems pretty suggestive there.

I made a logical error when making the rough calc of an estimated P/E for FY10 at the current market cap. After all there will soon be the dilution from the entitlement issue. Assuming full exercise of the rights, one way or another, that would make my projected P/E : 7/6 X 12 = P/E of 14 for FY10 at the soon to be market cap, and assuming current share price. We might well get a stronger A$ gold price though over FY10 which would lower the estimated P/E.

jbmurc, another 100k shares if the price dropped to $2, hey? Yes, the silver grades and credits at Casposo could make it a very cheap cash cost gold mine if things work out.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Nov 22 2009, 02:10 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Well I bought my first 10,000 shares in TRY @ a bit more than $3, so if I were looking at it afresh today with my current view of the company I would judge it as at an ok price to buy. However what I actually did was sell 10,000 shares @ 2.74 to fund my entitlement take up.

The price momentum appears to have been weakening before the actual announcement of the equity raising for Casposo development capital, but certainly there was a reaction to that announcement and the price has been net sideways since.

I still view it as at least fairly, and probably cheaply priced at current close if the buyer has a positive view of the A$ gold price going forward. My own rough calc at an A$ gold price of $1,200 is a P/e of 12 for FY2010 at the current market cap. This assumes 30k ozs coming from Sandstone and 40k ozs coming from Mamao underground at Andorinhas in Brazil for FY2010. Hardly overpriced taking into account the Casposo project in Argentina and the historical qualities of the company: the previous successful mines, low share issuance, payment of franked dividends, unhedged, and so far debt free. Might well be a bit of debt added for Casposo development.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Aug 11 2009, 04:39 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Over the hump of 25c for the ordinary shares. Strongest volume in 11 months.

The HEGOB options (ex 25c, exp Sept 09) responded with a close up 150%, volume strong.

I wonder if this'll have a sort of positive feedback effect? What I mean is: if HEG gains and stays well over 25c -> means HEGOBs will be exercised at end of Sept bringing $12m into company -> confidence in financial soundness of Hill End to buy more HEGs?
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 29 2009, 04:20 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Yes Banksia would rather have a gap year than bestow their award on old Intec.

"the judges commended the three finalists for their commitment and enthusiasm and encourage them to continue with their efforts."

That's the sort of thing judges say to contestants with disabilities so as not to hurt their feelings.

Translated it says," Do better". I concur. They should all take a 50% pay cut and clean their own offices and labs till they produce a profit . . .lol. But that's not the way listed companies work. A listed company is a device invented by its operators to take all the rewards of a business without any of the risks. The risk to profit and capital is for the mugs.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 28 2009, 01:49 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Sipa has got what looks to be a great joint venture agreement for two of its tenements, one of which is near the Sandfire Resources (SFR) hot item. Sipa (SRI) excels in deal-making. You hear nothing for half a year or more, then they come up with a winner like this. Note that Sipa will also be exploration manager, so like their deal with Newmont they're getting paid to do their normal job instead of drawing from cash reserves.

Deal for Sipa over the hot tenement , if it executes, will be:

-$0.9m repayment of already incurred expense,

-$10m for exploration leaving Sipa with 45%

-$10m further free carry exploration/development if the farmin continues.

So this is potentially a $30m funding deal for SRI while it retains 45% of the project. Pretty attractive, relative to SRIs $23m market capitalisation.

Also, an almost identically structured jv deal is proposed for an SRI copper tenement (Ilgarari) that would bring in $5.5m of operational funding, and as much as 10.5m, still leaving SRI with a 45% stake.

Now all they've got to do do is get the first money in the bank. Potential farminee is Malyasian, but sourcing funds more vaguely in asia. Heard that sort of thing before.

http://www.stocknessmonster.com/news-item?S=SRI&E=ASX&N=454173

  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 26 2009, 02:38 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Cant say I thought much of the announcement royboy. It was very obscure, but that's par for the course with this company. Just to reproduce a bit of the speculation I've discussed elsewhere over one item in the update.

Sounds like they give themselves a lotto chance of hitting bonanza grades up ahead as they develop the "Mica 1 vein set" drive. They say they've got 60 metres of strike so far along this vein set which they will begin producing from next week. Grades at about 1 oz/tonne at the diluting 1.1 metre stoping width that they'll mine.

If I'm reading it right, as they continue the Mica 1 drive another 50 metres or so from the 60 metres of current defined ore area they'll hit another structure called the Robert Emmett’s cross course, which was mined at a shallower level historically, and graded 20 ozs to the tonne. At that juncture they hold out a hope of finding bonanza mega specimens such as were found under similar confluences in the 1870s. A total of 110 metres of drive (1640N - 1750N, not accounting for dip) should not take all that long to find out. Very speculative notion at thsi point, but has got my interest anyway.

Have you noticed the volume in the HEGOB options last week, and on Friday in particular? Haven't sold like that since listing a year ago. Not a play I'd recommend though. Getting in the money at over 25c in the ordinaries within 2 months remains a long shot, HEGs a lot better.

The M.D made a backgpround video two months ago that has been posted at brr. If watching, you need to right click on the vid space and select 'full screen'. Doesn't show up otherwise.

M.D describes Hill End project
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 22 2009, 01:47 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Looking pretty good - well clear of the short term downtrend, and the longer uptrend since November '08 is looking safe.

  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 21 2009, 12:07 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

All very well, but one remark made in the 4 Corners program was that a major reason they want coal in that region is that it follows on from the Hunter Valley, and mines in that location would enjoy the rail and any other infrastructures that the Hunter Valley has.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 21 2009, 12:00 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Yes I'm waiting on an announcement too. Figuring it should be this week if the June 24th placement announcement is to make sense:

"The funds secured will be applied towards an aggressive drilling program at the Company's highly
prospective Hargraves BNH deposit and the extension of resources at the Reward Gold Mine at Hill
End. The first assay results from the underground drilling at Reward are expected in the next few
weeks
and the drilling program at Hargraves will commence in July."


To me, "a few weeks" means not more than three; otherwise you say a month or more.

I've been speculating with a couple of posters elsewhere that this drilling campaign might have been timed to bear results that would try to put the HEGOB options into the money (>25c) before end of Sept expiry. Just purely a theory however. The price of gold might help - the way it's shaping up.

I'm holding quite a few HEG by my standards and will offload some of the ones that I bought too early and too high if there's a market. Holding most with a long term view, as long as things look like they're working out.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 14 2009, 12:55 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56


"Is someone really accumulating or is someone manipulating this stock?"


It could be argued either way, if one is idle enough to bother, which I am. Intec is a good day traders stock after all the dilution - low price, good liquidity.

However, some of the gain remained at the end of each of those high volume days. The same thing shows up on the weekly chart. On the weekly chart the momentum was changing for the better well before the recent rash of spikes. You can see this on the MACD and RSI indicators. Also the kind of candles showing up over the last few months are not atypical of a bottoming stock I'd argue; such as the very small range candles with equal open and closes (dojis) mixed with the occasional bullish candles with long upper 'wicks' and small lower wicks. When you get the high volume associated with the bullish candles, all the more.

Also the interest is not really on no news. In late March INL got a spike on the waste treatment announcement. The recent spikes might be a shift in mood after the SPP raised enough for them to hobble along for another half a year or whatever.

It doesn't have to be strictly one or the other either. ST traders/manipulors can trigger action from those waiting to have their hand forced to buy. In my case I've been stimulated by the action to consider buying more. Not because I believe in Intec anymore, but because I was diluted by the SPP, where I sold enough to fund my take-up. Also because I will want to sell some if intec has a significant rally, but still hold enough to make maybe half my investment back if things improve..
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 13 2009, 05:44 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

At least a sturdy looking base has built on the longer term chart towie. Exceptional volume continues on these days with long wick and higher close to both the open and previous close. Don't know whether it'll amount to anything, but at least it's not negative. Cheers.






2 year weekly


  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 13 2009, 03:58 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Dave Sammut reply summary: There ain't nothing for Intec in what Ammtec are doin.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 7 2009, 05:49 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Ammtec announced a large fund raising today - any comments? Of interest to me is that this is to build a hydrometallurgical pilot plant. Ammtec has done business with Intec (INL) at Burnie Tasmania in the past - Intec being in the business of hydrometallurgical extraction of metals.

Announcement
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 7 2009, 05:34 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Remember how Ammtec (ASX code: AEC) was involved in the steady state feasibility assessments at Burnie? I invested in AEC shares after becoming aware of their company via Intec's association.

Well Ammtec today announced a substantial fund raising with a placement and SPP, and get this, it's to build "a state of the art hydrometallurgical pilot plant facility adjoining our existing facilities in Western Australia." The announcement goes on to say, "The purpose built laboratory will be used to conduct large scale hydromet pilot testing on Nickel, uranium and other base metals."

Today's Ammtec announcement
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Mar 27 2009, 10:29 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

Mabe they can auction off their water technology to some state enterprise in the Peoples Totalitarian Republic of China.
Like instantly, so the cash is in the bank this week, lol.

Jim Rogers comment here
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Nov 7 2008, 04:47 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

In reply to: Enumerate on Friday 07/11/08 02:09pm

I feel like one of those dogs on funniest home video who has been trained to stay still while a mouth watering treat is left upon his nose. The dog, usually a staffy, stays rock still, drooling great gobs of saliva, while his eyes are fixated on the delectable morsel atop his nose. Then a quiet word from his human and he snaps it up instantly. Some think its cruel, but the dog only waits a minute that seems an eternity. We've waited a week.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Nov 7 2008, 10:14 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

In reply to: mango63 on Friday 07/11/08 09:46am

Let's hope the deal isn't with a Chinese company. Might be just me, but I consider any regulatory hurdle arising there as more than just a formality. I hold some shares in Linc (LNC), and that company is waiting indefinitely on the Chinese government to approve a deal signed off by a Chinese company (Xinwen) for the critical purchase of a coking coal tenement.
People here would know that Intec has an office in China.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: Jul 14 2008, 03:23 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

In reply to: mango63 on Saturday 12/07/08 11:33am

Hi -
It has already been shown that silver can be extracted.
Silver was one of the three metals that was judged to have had excellent recovery results at the conclusion of the steady state assessment at the Burnie demo plant. They used Hellyer tailings and zinc arc furnace dust as feedstock.

Dave Sammut, in reply to a question on the Q&A forum said,
" Silver is typically leached relatively easily in the Intec Process . . " and
"In many cases, the silver and lead minerals will be the first to be broken down, and thus we often get the highest extraction rates (99% or greater) for silver and lead."
There should be ~29m ozs of silver remaining in the tailings dam after the current agreement with Polymetals concludes. One of my reasons for buying more INL was the punt that this silver might well be eventually extracted using the halide technology. If this happens it will be at a time of much higher prices for this metal.
I speculate that the ability to cheaply process silver out of ores or wastes might become a big deal for Intec. I have invested in companies that have silver ore but cannot get the metal out efficiently, viz: Macmin Mining and Kingsgate Consolidated.
I'm confident that silver metal will boom along with gold.
Stockwise, silver leverage is likely to excite the interest of speculators more than zinc or lead too.
  Forum: By Share Code

finicky
Posted on: May 19 2006, 03:27 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 56

In reply to: filament on Friday 19/05/06 12:00pm

LOOK closed down again (overnight) @ $4.07cps althought 5 of the previous 7 sales, (Inett), were at a higher level.

300 - 4.07 ... 13 - 4.11 ... 280 - 4.11 ... 400 - 4.11 ... 1220 - 4.10 ... 100 - 4.09 ...

But, who cares in terms of a "bigger" picture, that many feel will unfold shortly. The close (of $4.07c) equates to (@ a current exchange rate of $1.30981c) a shareprice value of $5.33cps for LOK today. I bought the 200 @ $5.18cps, because of this obvious "value". But nothing to stop it going lower, as you have so well predicted, Filament.

$4.50cps I'm not so sure?

The "bigger" picture?? And you talk of a "change in business direction" ??? I thought that Looksmart have clearly changed there business direction and I have been "yelling out to the rafter" (not Pat & family) about it, for some time now ...... But perhaps I'm one of a 'few' here on the ASX, who may understand what this new direction is?

And the lack of interest in the US clearly show that few understand over there, also. But it is happening. That's all I'm prepared to say now. My posting of information of what "could" be happening has had me banned from a number of sites, now. Only an opinion though, that's all. Yahoo (in fact) have removed all my 'pro-LOOK' posts ..... I really found that as being unusual ....

BUT, OF COURSE ...... Time will tell!!

Cheers !!

:-)
  Forum: By Share Code


Cant find what you are looking for? Show all active topics from the last 3 months


New Posts  New Replies
No New Posts  No New Replies
Hot topic  Hot Topic (New)
No new  Hot Topic (No New)



TERMS OF USE  -  CONTACT ADMIN  -  ADVERTISING