RE:RE:RE:Share buybacksSo you are telling me NAV wouldn't increase with a significant increase product prices?
MyHoneyPot wrote:
You don't understand, what Terry is saying is that the premise for the buyback was the NAV of the company/stock in a period of Mid Cycle commodity prices. ($20 dollars)
So its exactly the same today, because there has been no meaningful production increase, so the $20 dollar NAV Terry talked about in January (Peters Video) would be the same today. However in January the stock traded at around 13 dollars so it was a compelling purchase when considering mid cycle commodity prices and a NAV of $20 dollars.
That is no longer the case the share traded at 19 dollars the other day, so if they buyback shares at this level, it is not the same premise as when they would buying back share in January, the stock is much higher.
In fact if commodity prices pulled back to the mid cycle range, there would be a share holder potential for loss of capital, where in January with a $20 dollar Nav that would not of been the case.
That's why when commodity prices are high, companies like POU and TOU pay special dividends, they do not want to expose shareholders to extra capital risk, they don't want to buy back their stock at inflated prices, do to a commodity blip.
I would also argue that the risk associated with Attachie and Sunrise ARX Prize assets alreadys are loaded up with first nations/treaty8 risks and should trade at a discounted and the company discounted along with them.
IMHO