RE:RE:RE:oil's going to 65 Couple years ago they all had large tax losses. You get them from losing money. ATH had, and still has, the mother of all tax losses. Some posters here like NTB and his pal have enjoyed stupendous losses in things like Qmet and "swing trading" gxe. Whatever that means. Sounds like just another flipper. The ones that bash when they are in cash waiting to buy. Then pump when they're looking for the quick exit. Aah, those ones. They always end up with tax losses and have to create a new username to keep the gumflapping going.
Me I love paying taxes, the more the better. It happens when you're making money. But back to gxe. Yes, its better to buy a cash flow machine with historical losses than without. If they are free or close to it AND if the problem that created those losses is gone. Like high cost production, crooked inept management, a commodity price that crashed so hard it actually, technically, traded below 0, or other contributors. Gxe, like Ath, is not a low cost producer so it's vulnerable to commodity collapse. As is the vast majority of non opec+ producers. You decide what the risk is of creating more tax losses versus making money and using up those accumulated losses.
As per the last audited financials, gxe has about 40 million in deferred tax credits, and another about 60 million they report as unrecognized because they don't expect to use them before they expire. An acquisitor might very well be able to use the entire $100 million but in any case, it's not that huge a number to get anyone excited. But a nice bonus. Ath, on the other hand has about $3 Billion in tax losses. Most of theirs are also "unrecognized". Even taking into account shares o/s, market cap, and total enterprise value, the gxe pools might be a nice little addition, but not a deal maker like ath would be to the right buyer. Kinda like finding out the art in the boardroom and main lobby are all original pieces rather than cheap prints.