OTCPK:OEXFF - Post by User
Comment by
ditchdigger251on Aug 21, 2018 11:08pm
![](https://assets.stockhouse.com/kentico-cms/0341-00/images/Sprite.svg#id_Post_Views_Icon)
173 Views
Post# 28497003
RE:RE:Hey Velvet
RE:RE:Hey VelvetTrue enough Casperwy. I played around with the numbers to estimate value metrics and here's one example of how to get to NuVista's $625MM (I have no idea - only a general gut feel based on my past experience with Montney) using PURCHASE $ = LAND + PROD'N + INFRASTRUCTURE - NET DEBT (assumed to be zero): Land Value of $5000/acre, Prod'n (which by def'n includes reserves PV) Value of $35M/boed for Montney & $30M/boed for non-Montney and Infrastructure value of $130MM (I'm guessing with most of the land in Twp71/72 Rge's 9/10W6M that Montney can be pretty sour stuff in excess of 3%).
If we assume IBR will be able to currently maintain 3000 boed and use the same $35M/boed value (maybe not as liquids rich but big netback uptick for being sweet) + Land Value of $3500/acre (IBR's Apr/18 Corporate Presentation gives large block Montney valuations between $3000 to $12000/acre) + Infrastructure (sweet) value of $30MM for 2-23 battery/disposal system, 1-23 compressor & gathering/shipping - $1.8MM in debt (Q2/18 avg) I get a per share value of $1.98.
My personal feeling is if $1 or so would have gotten a White Knight deal done this would have been over in June. The big share holders like Josh are probably looking for something they deem much more closer to what fair is in their mind. I think my back of the envelope shot from the hip is conservative enough but as always everyone please take what I say with a grain of salt. I'm wrong every day about things no matter how right I may feel.