Prospera Energy Inc. V.PEI

Sept Production

[traderguy5000]

There are PEI boards on X and CEO.ca. There's a lot of bashing on CEO.ca. But there is some good info on these sites. Apparently Sep production was 632 bpd, with 576 coming fron SK and 56 coming from AB. This is down slightly from August. However the Cuthbert wells are still being held back and the new wells are probably not producing yet. It will be a very long time before production reaches the 5000 bpd projection, and PEI may never become dollar stock. But if PEI can continue to pay down the AP at existing production levels, PEI is going to be OK. Over the last four quarters PEI generated $16M in revenue, even with these suppresed production levels. Nevertheless, it would be nice to hear from the company. Q3 will be reported on Nov 29, and will give financials to Sep 30. But the company has already announced the Sep 30 AP, so there may not be much more useful info in the Q3, other than revenue. I would like to know why it is taking so long to get Cuthbert back online.

 Management may perhaps have a communication strategy. However, I am very disappointed with the lack of communication. Management continued to use the virtually unattainable projections as recently as late August at Enercom. That's obviosly not happening. So what is happening? There are many questions:

1. Will Cuthbert ever produce? If so when?
2. When is Brooks expected to produce?
3. Where did the $3.43M come from to pay off the GORR? Production? The $11M loan? Will this affect the 2024 drilling program?
4. How was the AP paid down from from $20.5 to $16M? Production? The $11M loan?
5. Management mentioned a rollback at Enercom. This is of some concern. Often a rollback takes place to boost the share price so an equity raise can take place. I really don't wan't to see significant dilution, nor do I want to see more debt. PEI has $16M in AP plus $11M in debt from a recent loan. I actually doubt if they can raise more debt. A rollback is often also management's admission that they really can't fix a broken company. The share price is down and is expected to stay there. Management claims the rollback is required because of the high share count. That's not the real reason. The reverse spilt is planned because PEI is a total dog. There would be no talk of a rollback if projections had been met and the stock was trading at 30 cents.
5. Does this company take shareholder communication seriously? Has anyone on this board ever contacted the company? Did they receive a reply? I contacted them a few months ago with some basic questions. Nothing! This is in stark contrast to some other companies where I have received prompt replies from senior management.

Yes, Q3 will be here soon, but I suspect it will still leave shareholder's questions and concerns unanswered.

[Galmozzi]

It's important not to misrepresent what was said in the enrcom presentation.   The potenrial rollback in total number of shares was never, ever attributed to pursuing a "reverse split".  Instead, he specifically stated their intent to initiate a share "buyback" program once production revenues and finances allow. Obviously a future buyback program would be

[traderguy5000]

I believe (and hope) you are correct. Sam stated "there are plans to roll back with a buyback program as well, as the production increases". That can be interpreted as there will be a rollback and a buyback. If only a buyback is intended, there was really no need for him to use the word rollback. I think Sam merely worded his intention poorly. Unless there is a plan to raise equity

[jleer42]

I also interpreted it as buybacks. I didn't pay much attention to it, as it they don't have any free money at the moment to spend on buybacks. Consolidations are always a negative and doubt they would consider it. I expect they will carry on for now and if the stars align with the huge cash flows projected coming in they can start a buy back. I don't see it in the foreseeable future

[traderguy5000]

It remains an unusual statement. We are assuming there will be no rollback, but we also know there can be no buyback for a considerable time. So why did Sam even mention it? A rollback would be stupid and harmful to shareholders. Yet I've frequently seen managements do stupid things that are harmful to shareholders. I do not think Sam is stupid, and have always considered him to be a man of