RE:RE:Share buybacks...interesting note from HFI research ztransforms173 wrote: - HFI Research is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT on the RATIONALE for ATH & MEG to AGRESSIVELY BUY BACK their STOCK with the 100% RETURN FRAMEWORK to shareholders while PAYING a MODEST DIVIDEND (MEG) or NO DIVIDEND (ATH)
- however, for Baytex Energy; they are OFF TRACK
1- BTE has a SEVERELY UNDERVALUED share price that does NOT REFLECT the FUTURE FREE CASH FLOWS of the company so BUYING BACK the BTE shares BENEFITS REMAINING shareholders & PROTECTS AGAINST UNWANTED PREDATORS who want to TAKE ADVANTAGE of the SITUATION
* for a HISTORY LESSION, go LOOK AT Greenfire Resources (GFR)
2- BTE have INVESTED HEAVILY in ADDING RESERVES:
* do Aurora Oil & Gas, Ranging River Exploration & Ranger Oil RING A BELL ?
3 - DEBT is VERY MANAGEABLE and is at a HISTORICALLY MUCH LOWER BURDEN than was TRUE in the RECENT PAST for the O&G INDUSTRY as a WHOLE
4- if you CAREFULLY 'LISTEN' to the CEO on CCs, you can READILY OBSERVE that he is FOCUSED on ELIMINATING the BTE SHARES that were USED as CURENCY in the Ranger Oil ACQUISITION
* so HE DEFINITELY WANTS to RESET & ROLLBACK the BTE SHARE COUNT BEFORE Ranger Oil while EXPLOITING the PETROLEUM RESERVES for MANY YEARS to COME
z173
what you are missing is BTE in relative terms compared to othe Canadian O & G companies.
Is the debt manageable? Compared to historical situations, yes. How do the debt ratios compare to current Canadian O & G companies? Not favourably. Not favourably at all.
I've listened to Eric. Every CC. every appearance on BNN. He sounds enthusiastic. Very convincing. But he's cost me and you and everyone else that had stock two years ago a $hit ton of money.
I am quoting an O & G Executive that sits on the board of anoterh Canadian O & G company that is stating why buy backs make sense in some instances and not others. Given how badly we are in hte penalty box, i think there is truth to it.