I think we may now be off the bottom.
14% gain for the day. And thats with a drop in PRC share price.
Printable View
I think we may now be off the bottom.
14% gain for the day. And thats with a drop in PRC share price.
I think you have misquoted me Digger. I would want any buyback to have stopped before the share price reached 140c - preferably somewhat before that.
The level to be buying back is down at the sub 125c level, and even more so at the sub 115c level where a few million have traded of late. The time to be buying is when the market is empty of buyers and the price is in free fall. It would not have cost very much to support the share price at 115c or 120c, and would have greatly helped shareholder confidence.
I would only support an on market buyback, to soak up any cheap shares - any compulsory buyback would not help, as there is no need to buy shares that are not for sale.
I don't see why the company should buy shares that I don't want to sell. I also see no reason why the company would pay more than current market price for shares.
The objective of any buyback must be to enhance the value for continuing shareholders, by buying assets cheaply and increasing earnings per share. Your proposal does neither of those.
I don't see the relevance of the 20% difference in the exchange rate.
Do those other companies hold over 60% of their market cap in cash?
Have those other companies released an additional 50% of their shares onto the market in that timeframe?
AUW were paying more than 12x earnings for their buyback, which would equate to NZO buying back at above 240c. Don't you understand the difference?
I would think a buy back in the open market is a great tdea. Sell at $1-50 buy back at anything under that from the brain dead. It would be a technical analysis versus old fundies who when times are right would pay another $!-50 for some more of the same medicine. Who needs oil when you can exploit the financial illiterates with wild promises and free options.
Macdunk
.
Wiremu, it seems we both have got big red crosses on our papers.
.
Digger, I don't think I have fudged any figures. Maybe I should have said "from about", but those numbers are pretty close from the chart I checked.
My point was that the buy back gave some? support for a period, but then the support ended and the price didn't increase.
Unicorn - PPP has around 100% market cap in cash - maybe more than 100%, and it hasn't stopped it from dropping to that. (Although it has got to a point where it seems no one would sell at silly values).
Unfortunately, I have to almost agree with McDunk. Fundamentals are not meaning a lot at the moment.
Further Unicorn- Wiremu's example shows that NZO (since may) has lost substantially less than the other companies in the example and so is showing what the 60% cash & assets has done for support I assume.
NZO have cash but investors/potential investors are concerned as to what they will do with it, according to the commonly voiced theme and that deters some.
I have been with NZO since 30c and steadily increased my position since, so don't get me wrong, I also believe in the potential. (Opening up for McDunk to comment about falling in love with a company..) I have sold when required, but bought when it seemed appropriate. And if I had been smarter/less stubborn I would have much more than I have at the moment.
I am not saying don't do a buy back, I simply comment that in cases I have seen, (yes different circumstances), it hasn't done much in the long term.
Hopefully it will be a moot point shortly, and the price will be back where it should be..
Assuming foreign markets and the oil price stabalise as they are appearing to do - there may be no time for NZO to action a buy back anyway.
BixBite, its not to do with 'red crosses,' its to do with increasing shareholder value.
If you want more cash handed out, reinvest in a dividend paying company.
Basically what you're saying is you want a special dividend, and the shareprice would react the same way it does when it goes ex-divendend - ie downwards by the amount paid out.
If it was $1.75 per share, expect a drop of $1.75/20 ~ 9 cents... what good does that do, it just gives confusing signals to shareholders.
Suppose however, a buy back is announced, it indicates that the directors believe the company is undervalued and the best place for some money is into itself. It sends 'positive' messages out to the investing public. Emperical evidence also shows investor returns outperform longterm when buybacks happen....Warren Buffet does buybacks..
Along with Unicorns reasons of keeping share stability, it makes good sense and in the future the stock wont be discounted by investors so much in the future.
Sure there is good bargins out there, TAP etc, but at the moment, NZO is offering cashbacking + pike to almost the shareprice. Then we get tui and kupe thrown in for free...nice. At least management know what is going on and this makes it a lot lower risk..
Sorry for the very simple 5 year old writing style...study is getting to me. Maybe i should go underground.
AWE still interested in offshore Taranaki block
(Tuesday, 21 October 2008)
OPERATOR Australian Worldwide Exploration has applied for a second five-year term for its offshore Taranaki, New Zealand licence PEP 38483 where, in August 2007, it drilled the unsuccessful Hector-1 wildcat well.
Full Story...
from energy review
Look i do not care if the s/p goes up,down or sidewise as a result of a b/b it is just absolute essential, that if the price goes below a Dollar it nessitates a b/b regime.
I do not now if the co. can hold the bought back shares, and slowly release them to the market at a later date say for $ 2.00 plus, as in Tresory stocks.Lets take sentiments out of this and there is certainly no room for whisful thinking, as much as i too whish things where different.
Also beware of fluctuations in the s/p at the moment as i am not so sure that the present turmoil has ended.In addition my records show the s/p rising before the AGM only to flop back down again in the weeks after.