Rohstoff-Explorer: Research oder Neuvorstellung (Seite 1671)
eröffnet am 13.03.08 13:14:32 von
neuester Beitrag 07.06.24 21:08:42 von
neuester Beitrag 07.06.24 21:08:42 von
Beiträge: 29.544
ID: 1.139.490
ID: 1.139.490
Aufrufe heute: 1
Gesamt: 2.702.865
Gesamt: 2.702.865
Aktive User: 0
Top-Diskussionen
| Titel | letzter Beitrag | Aufrufe |
|---|---|---|
| 28.05.24, 23:11 | 1194 | |
| 01.12.19, 11:44 | 152 | |
| heute 01:32 | 128 | |
| heute 00:09 | 120 | |
| heute 01:39 | 118 | |
| gestern 22:40 | 111 | |
| 30.07.15, 19:30 | 111 | |
| gestern 21:20 | 110 |
Meistdiskutierte Wertpapiere
| Platz | vorher | Wertpapier | Kurs | Perf. % | Anzahl | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | 1. | 18.525,00 | -0,08 | 72 | |||
| 2. | 2. | 0,1395 | 0,00 | 32 | |||
| 3. | 4. | 6,9920 | -0,09 | 28 | |||
| 4. | 3. | 26,25 | -38,68 | 27 | |||
| 5. | 5. | 177,48 | -0,26 | 26 | |||
| 6. | 7. | 2.298,93 | +0,24 | 19 | |||
| 7. | 6. | 10,300 | 0,00 | 17 | |||
| 8. | 10. | 18,170 | -7,08 | 12 |
Beitrag zu dieser Diskussion schreiben
Feedback
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 47.251.154 von Szween am 03.07.14 04:50:32
Das interessiert mich eigentlich grundsätzlich nicht sonderlich.
Wie ich es in der Vergangenheit mitbekommen habe covert 'dieser Brief' auch immer mal wieder Unternehmen die ich auch interessant fand(ich kann mich nur noch an Wildhorse Energy erinnern, die ich auch hatte, es waren aber mehrere).
Was ich dem aber auf jeeeden Fall zur Last werfen würde ist dass sie meiner Meinung nach die Firmen in einem toooootal verantwortungslosen Stil besprechen, und vermarkten.
Würden sie, wie die meisten BBs, das nicht immer in so einer, Marktschreier, Art tun, könnten sie sicherlich weitaus besser sein.
Das sehe ich als ein Grundproblem der Zunft.
Gruß
P.
Das interessiert mich eigentlich grundsätzlich nicht sonderlich.
Wie ich es in der Vergangenheit mitbekommen habe covert 'dieser Brief' auch immer mal wieder Unternehmen die ich auch interessant fand(ich kann mich nur noch an Wildhorse Energy erinnern, die ich auch hatte, es waren aber mehrere).
Was ich dem aber auf jeeeden Fall zur Last werfen würde ist dass sie meiner Meinung nach die Firmen in einem toooootal verantwortungslosen Stil besprechen, und vermarkten.
Würden sie, wie die meisten BBs, das nicht immer in so einer, Marktschreier, Art tun, könnten sie sicherlich weitaus besser sein.
Das sehe ich als ein Grundproblem der Zunft.
Gruß
P.
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 47.251.140 von Popeye82 am 03.07.14 04:06:49Praire Downs wird ja von einem deutschen Börsenbrief auch extrem "beworben" .
Das schreckt mich ein wenig ab , weil deren Track Rekord (also der des Briefes) ja nicht so dolle ist in letzter Zeit.
Mitlerweile heißt die Firma nebenbei PRAIRIE MINING LIMITED . Kürzel ist aber weiterhin PDZ in Australien.
Das schreckt mich ein wenig ab , weil deren Track Rekord (also der des Briefes) ja nicht so dolle ist in letzter Zeit.
Mitlerweile heißt die Firma nebenbei PRAIRIE MINING LIMITED . Kürzel ist aber weiterhin PDZ in Australien.
Aggressive Tactic on the Fracking Front - CT/PP - Jul 1, 2014
http://cleantechies.com/2014/07/02/aggressive-tactic-on-the-…
"For the last eight years, Pennsylvania has been riding the natural gas boom, with companies drilling and fracking thousands of wells across the state. And in a little corner of Washington County, some 20 miles outside of Pittsburgh, EQT Corporation has been busy – drilling close to a dozen new wells on one site.
It didn’t take long for the residents of Finleyville who lived near the fracking operations to complain – about the noise and air quality, and what they regarded as threats to their health and quality of life. Initially, EQT, one of the largest producers of natural gas in Pennsylvania, tried to allay concerns with promises of noise studies and offers of vouchers so residents could stay in hotels to avoid the noise and fumes.
But then, in what experts say was a rare tactic, the company got more aggressive: it offered all of the households along Cardox Road $50,000 in cash if they would agree to release the company from any legal liability, for current operations as well as those to be carried out in the future. It covered potential health problems and property damage, and gave the company blanket protection from any kind of claim over noise, dust, light, smoke, odors, fumes, soot, air pollution or vibrations.
The agreement also defined the company’s operations as not only including drilling activity but the construction of pipelines, power lines, roads, tanks, ponds, pits, compressor stations, houses and buildings.
“The release is so incredibly broad and such a laundry list,” said Doug Clark, a gas lease attorney in Pennsylvania who mainly represents landowners. “You’re releasing for everything including activity that hasn’t even occurred yet. It’s crazy.”
Linda Robertson, a spokeswoman for EQT, said in a statement that the company had worked hard and conscientiously to address the concerns of the residents. She said consultants had been hired, data collected on noise and health matters, and that independent analysis had shown the company was in compliance with noise and air quality requirements. She would not comment in detail on the financial offers.
“When landowner and leaseholder concerns arise, it is a standard practice for EQT personnel to work diligently to listen to and understand their concerns, particularly those related to the temporary inconveniences of living near a production site,” Robertson said. “Regarding the neighbors on Cardox Road, the majority of whom are leaseholders, we have been in regular and ongoing communications with residents and local officials to address and resolve questions as they arise.”
Hydraulic fracturing – or fracking – has provoked a litany of health and environmental concerns since it gained popularity within the last decade. Many environmentalists and public health experts contend that the practice can pollute groundwater aquifers, drastically reduce air quality and endanger the health of residents living near wells.
Over the years, the industry has vehemently denied that its work is a threat, and has often pointed to a lack of conclusive proof that gas drilling operations are to blame for any harmful health or safety issues. The industry has undertaken an array of efforts to quell these worries and preserve its business — lobbying state legislators, conducting its own scientific studies and occasionally settling quietly out of court with landowners who have threatened to sue.
The liability agreements EQT has used in Finleyville — they are often known as nuisance easements — have been used in other circumstances. Residents living close to airports, for instance, are often offered such easements as compensation for having to bear with the noise, vibrations and fumes from air traffic. Property owners close to landfills and wind farms may also sign similar agreements.
But experts say such easements are rare in the oil and gas industry.
“This is only the second time I’ve seen one,” said Clark, the Pennsylvania attorney. “They’re absolutely not common at all.”
Clark says it is unlikely that companies will start handing out such agreements en masse, saying doing so could decrease landowners’ confidence about the safety of the company’s operations and their personal health.
“People are going to say the gas companies must be concerned about air pollution because they’re offering these easements,” said Clark. “Everybody’s going to get suspicious.”
Earlier this year, a couple in Texas was awarded $3 million in a lawsuit against a gas drilling company. The couple alleged that the company’s operations had affected their health, decreased their property value and forced them to move away. The case was one of the first successful lawsuits alleging that air pollution from gas drilling activity caused health issues.
Experts say that verdict and others like it have emboldened landowners to take their claims to court. Nuisance easements may be one way to ensure that the company can easily block landowners from claiming damages.
Apart from drilling and fracking wells, EQT also builds and operates the infrastructure — pipelines and compressor stations — necessary to move natural gas to market. Its operations are headquartered in Pennsylvania but it also owns wells in Kentucky and West Virginia.
In 2008, landowners in Finleyville signed a gas lease for drilling with Chesapeake Energy. The company only drilled one well, but last year it sold its leases to EQT, which has since drilled 11 additional wells.
So far the company’s strategy to reduce its liabilities has worked with some landowners.
Muriel Spencer, whose house is about 500 feet from the drilling, took the money. She said she did not consult with a lawyer, but had asked the company to put a five-year time frame around the release. The initial contract released the company from liabilities indefinitely.
“I cannot complain about the drilling to this point,” Spencer said, adding that EQT “has been nothing but fair with me.”
The company’s spokeswoman would not comment on how many landowners EQT approached with the proposed agreements, but said that “approximately 85% of the residents” had signed them.
An initial version of the proposed standard agreement listed 30 Finleyville residents and required that they all sign the agreements in order to receive the $50,000. When the residents refused, EQT modified the agreement such that the compensation was not contingent on all landowners signing it.
ProPublica found that at least four of the 30 residents have agreed to some version of the initial agreement that EQT proposed and have received $50,000 in exchange. It is unclear what changes were made to the agreement during negotiations.
Robertson, the company spokeswoman, said in her statement that “any changes made to the agreements during negotiations were based on requests directly from the resident, and/or their attorney.”
But some of the residents have refused to negotiate with the company.
“I was insulted,” said Gary Baumgardner, who was approached by EQT with the offer in January. “We’re being pushed out of our home and they want to insult us with this offer.”
Baumgardner says his house is like an amphitheater, constantly vibrating from the drilling. At times the noise gets up to 75 decibels, equivalent to a running vacuum cleaner, he said. Earlier this year, EQT Corp. put up a sound barrier to limit the noise, but Baumgardner says it has made little difference to his quality of life.
“We took the pictures down in the bedroom because they still vibrate at night,” he said.
Baumgardner says he has had to leave his house at least three times so far because the gas fumes from the well site were too much to bear. A local health group has installed air quality monitors in his home and several of his neighbors. Last year when the one of the monitors began flashing red, his daughter, pregnant at the time, fled the house. She has since moved away after her doctor advised her not to live close to a drilling site.
“Our house is most often not livable,” said Baumgardner. EQT’s response to his complaints, he said, has been “constant dismissals, excuses, delays and broken promises.”
Robertson would not respond to Baumgardner’s specific assertions. She did point to several mitigation efforts she said the company had taken, including the sound wall, but also involving switching to quieter machinery and applying for permits to transport water via pipes instead of trucks.
Baumgardner believes the nuisance easement he was offered is a part of the industry’s tactic to silence landowners.
“Throughout the last several months, an EQT regional land manager, one of our community advisers, and our community relations manager have all been engaged in phone calls and personal meetings with residents, attended township meetings, and visited the production site on multiple occasions to identify and confirm the reported issues, if any,” Robertson’s statement said.
“The easements are part of our overall consistent and ongoing effort to address leaseholder concerns.”
If you’ve been approached by the oil and gas industry with an overly broad agreement, email naveena@propublica.org.
Article by by Naveena Sadasivam, appearing courtesy ProPublica. "
http://cleantechies.com/2014/07/02/aggressive-tactic-on-the-…
"For the last eight years, Pennsylvania has been riding the natural gas boom, with companies drilling and fracking thousands of wells across the state. And in a little corner of Washington County, some 20 miles outside of Pittsburgh, EQT Corporation has been busy – drilling close to a dozen new wells on one site.
It didn’t take long for the residents of Finleyville who lived near the fracking operations to complain – about the noise and air quality, and what they regarded as threats to their health and quality of life. Initially, EQT, one of the largest producers of natural gas in Pennsylvania, tried to allay concerns with promises of noise studies and offers of vouchers so residents could stay in hotels to avoid the noise and fumes.
But then, in what experts say was a rare tactic, the company got more aggressive: it offered all of the households along Cardox Road $50,000 in cash if they would agree to release the company from any legal liability, for current operations as well as those to be carried out in the future. It covered potential health problems and property damage, and gave the company blanket protection from any kind of claim over noise, dust, light, smoke, odors, fumes, soot, air pollution or vibrations.
The agreement also defined the company’s operations as not only including drilling activity but the construction of pipelines, power lines, roads, tanks, ponds, pits, compressor stations, houses and buildings.
“The release is so incredibly broad and such a laundry list,” said Doug Clark, a gas lease attorney in Pennsylvania who mainly represents landowners. “You’re releasing for everything including activity that hasn’t even occurred yet. It’s crazy.”
Linda Robertson, a spokeswoman for EQT, said in a statement that the company had worked hard and conscientiously to address the concerns of the residents. She said consultants had been hired, data collected on noise and health matters, and that independent analysis had shown the company was in compliance with noise and air quality requirements. She would not comment in detail on the financial offers.
“When landowner and leaseholder concerns arise, it is a standard practice for EQT personnel to work diligently to listen to and understand their concerns, particularly those related to the temporary inconveniences of living near a production site,” Robertson said. “Regarding the neighbors on Cardox Road, the majority of whom are leaseholders, we have been in regular and ongoing communications with residents and local officials to address and resolve questions as they arise.”
Hydraulic fracturing – or fracking – has provoked a litany of health and environmental concerns since it gained popularity within the last decade. Many environmentalists and public health experts contend that the practice can pollute groundwater aquifers, drastically reduce air quality and endanger the health of residents living near wells.
Over the years, the industry has vehemently denied that its work is a threat, and has often pointed to a lack of conclusive proof that gas drilling operations are to blame for any harmful health or safety issues. The industry has undertaken an array of efforts to quell these worries and preserve its business — lobbying state legislators, conducting its own scientific studies and occasionally settling quietly out of court with landowners who have threatened to sue.
The liability agreements EQT has used in Finleyville — they are often known as nuisance easements — have been used in other circumstances. Residents living close to airports, for instance, are often offered such easements as compensation for having to bear with the noise, vibrations and fumes from air traffic. Property owners close to landfills and wind farms may also sign similar agreements.
But experts say such easements are rare in the oil and gas industry.
“This is only the second time I’ve seen one,” said Clark, the Pennsylvania attorney. “They’re absolutely not common at all.”
Clark says it is unlikely that companies will start handing out such agreements en masse, saying doing so could decrease landowners’ confidence about the safety of the company’s operations and their personal health.
“People are going to say the gas companies must be concerned about air pollution because they’re offering these easements,” said Clark. “Everybody’s going to get suspicious.”
Earlier this year, a couple in Texas was awarded $3 million in a lawsuit against a gas drilling company. The couple alleged that the company’s operations had affected their health, decreased their property value and forced them to move away. The case was one of the first successful lawsuits alleging that air pollution from gas drilling activity caused health issues.
Experts say that verdict and others like it have emboldened landowners to take their claims to court. Nuisance easements may be one way to ensure that the company can easily block landowners from claiming damages.
Apart from drilling and fracking wells, EQT also builds and operates the infrastructure — pipelines and compressor stations — necessary to move natural gas to market. Its operations are headquartered in Pennsylvania but it also owns wells in Kentucky and West Virginia.
In 2008, landowners in Finleyville signed a gas lease for drilling with Chesapeake Energy. The company only drilled one well, but last year it sold its leases to EQT, which has since drilled 11 additional wells.
So far the company’s strategy to reduce its liabilities has worked with some landowners.
Muriel Spencer, whose house is about 500 feet from the drilling, took the money. She said she did not consult with a lawyer, but had asked the company to put a five-year time frame around the release. The initial contract released the company from liabilities indefinitely.
“I cannot complain about the drilling to this point,” Spencer said, adding that EQT “has been nothing but fair with me.”
The company’s spokeswoman would not comment on how many landowners EQT approached with the proposed agreements, but said that “approximately 85% of the residents” had signed them.
An initial version of the proposed standard agreement listed 30 Finleyville residents and required that they all sign the agreements in order to receive the $50,000. When the residents refused, EQT modified the agreement such that the compensation was not contingent on all landowners signing it.
ProPublica found that at least four of the 30 residents have agreed to some version of the initial agreement that EQT proposed and have received $50,000 in exchange. It is unclear what changes were made to the agreement during negotiations.
Robertson, the company spokeswoman, said in her statement that “any changes made to the agreements during negotiations were based on requests directly from the resident, and/or their attorney.”
But some of the residents have refused to negotiate with the company.
“I was insulted,” said Gary Baumgardner, who was approached by EQT with the offer in January. “We’re being pushed out of our home and they want to insult us with this offer.”
Baumgardner says his house is like an amphitheater, constantly vibrating from the drilling. At times the noise gets up to 75 decibels, equivalent to a running vacuum cleaner, he said. Earlier this year, EQT Corp. put up a sound barrier to limit the noise, but Baumgardner says it has made little difference to his quality of life.
“We took the pictures down in the bedroom because they still vibrate at night,” he said.
Baumgardner says he has had to leave his house at least three times so far because the gas fumes from the well site were too much to bear. A local health group has installed air quality monitors in his home and several of his neighbors. Last year when the one of the monitors began flashing red, his daughter, pregnant at the time, fled the house. She has since moved away after her doctor advised her not to live close to a drilling site.
“Our house is most often not livable,” said Baumgardner. EQT’s response to his complaints, he said, has been “constant dismissals, excuses, delays and broken promises.”
Robertson would not respond to Baumgardner’s specific assertions. She did point to several mitigation efforts she said the company had taken, including the sound wall, but also involving switching to quieter machinery and applying for permits to transport water via pipes instead of trucks.
Baumgardner believes the nuisance easement he was offered is a part of the industry’s tactic to silence landowners.
“Throughout the last several months, an EQT regional land manager, one of our community advisers, and our community relations manager have all been engaged in phone calls and personal meetings with residents, attended township meetings, and visited the production site on multiple occasions to identify and confirm the reported issues, if any,” Robertson’s statement said.
“The easements are part of our overall consistent and ongoing effort to address leaseholder concerns.”
If you’ve been approached by the oil and gas industry with an overly broad agreement, email naveena@propublica.org.
Article by by Naveena Sadasivam, appearing courtesy ProPublica. "
Kohlewerte sind ja gerade nicht the place to be, für wen sie trotzdem in Frage kommen, oder für die Beobachtungsliste für vielleicht bessere Zeiten, der kann sich die Unternehmen mal anschauen.
Das dürften soweit ich weiss -unter einigen Gesichtspunkten, zumindest- so gut wie alles überdurchschnittlich bis sehr überdurchschnittlich stark aufgestellte Entwickler sein.
"Six coal stocks to fire up your portfolio"
www.afrsmartinvestor.com.au/p/shares/six_coal_stocks_to_fire…
"The big sell-off in coal stocks of late has created buying opportunities, and now is the time to pounce before you miss out.
The value in the sector was clearly underlined late last week when Aurizon Holdings and Baosteel made a $1.4 billion, $3.40 per share cash takeover offer for Aquila Resources.
At the time, the offer represented an almost 40 per cent premium to Aquila’s previous closing price and on the day of the announcement the company’s shares spiked 36.3 per cent.
It is worth noting Aquila was trading broadly in line with its 12 month average at the time of the offer, something that can’t be said for most of its peers, many of which have been sold down heavily during that period.
Negative sentiment behind the selling is driven by the substantial slump in commodity prices, which has affected both coking and thermal coal.
However, these prices can bounce as quickly as they have fallen, and there are companies not yet in production with strong medium-term profiles not currently affected from an earnings perspective by depressed commodity prices.
So today, we’ve identified six coal stocks with strong production outlooks that don’t appear to be factored into their share prices.
The companies Smart Investor has identified vary widely in terms of recent performance, geographic locations, stages of development and the type of coal they produce. However taken as a whole, they represent a diversified exposure to a sector that is gathering steam once more.
Atrum Coal
Atrum Coal’s Groundhog project in British Columbia has many unique qualities, some of which will be extremely relevant in terms of product pricing and the valuation attributed to the company.
While it only listed in July 2012, Atrum was already being spruiked as something special by 2013. This was evident in its share price surge as it outperformed every company in the materials sector in the 12 months to December.
The first major catalyst was the establishment of a 1.56 billion tonne anthracite resource in British Columbia at the company’s Groundhog project.
Anthracite is a story in itself, being one of the rarest coals in the world, particularly at Groundhog grades.
At a time when coking coal prices are in the order of $US120 ($128) per tonne, anthracite is selling at approximately $US190.
Bell Potter said recently that worldwide usage of anthracite is about 600 million tonnes per annum and of that, about 80 million tonnes is for the metallurgical market.
Only about 12 per cent of what is used in the steel industry has grades that are as high as those which can be supplied by Atrum.
Bell Potter have been of the view for some time now that Atrum’s market capitalisation could double as milestones are met, implying a share price of up to $2.88, representing a premium of about 60 per cent to its current trading range.
Attila Resources
Completion of a pre-feasibility study (PFS) in August confirmed the technical and economic merits of Attila Resources’ Kodiak coking coal project in Alabama, USA, based solely on the Gurnee section of the tenement.
The PFS demonstrated the capacity to produce about 2 million tonnes per annum of high-quality coking coal, and analysts at Hartleys expect the project to produce 700,000 tonnes of it in 2014-15, ramping up to 2.9 million tonnes in 2015-16.
Based on these metrics, the company would achieve a small maiden profit of $3.7 million in 2014-15, increasing to $36.4 million in 2015-16.
This represents fully diluted earnings per share of 24.4 cents, implying a price-earnings multiple of 7.6 relative to Hartleys 12 month price target of $1.85.
This also takes into account the maiden JORC resource estimate of 48.3 million tonnes for the 4400-acre Seymour property which forms part of the Kodiak project.
The Seymour inclusion exceeded exploration expectations and increased Attila’s global resource by 62 per cent, creating immediate share price upside, but has been since lost in the wave of selling that has hit the sector.
Attila is trading well short of the price target, hovering in the vicinity of 40 cents since March when prices began to tumble. Based on Hartleys’ forecasts, this represents a price-earnings multiple of about 1.6, to a large extent explaining why the company is one of the broker’s top picks in that space.
Resources analyst Mike Millikan told Smart Investor he was impressed with the quality of Attila’s premium hard coking coal product, and of particular importance are the anticipated low operating costs, existing infrastructure and relatively moderate capital costs in bringing the project into production.
Paringa Resources
It was only on Monday that Paringa Resources received its permit to begin construction of surface mine facilities at its Buck Creek project located in the Western Kentucky region of the Illinois Coal Basin.
This provided the green light for Paringa to complete remaining technical studies as it targets commencement of construction of the high margin, low capex project in 2015.
The Illinois Coal Basin is one of the most prolific coal-producing regions in the US and Paringa controls more than 10,500 hectares of leases within an area of interest of approximately 28,000 hectares.
The Buck Creek project has a JORC coal resource estimate of 140 million tonnes of high-quality thermal coal with more than 88 per cent in the measured and indicated categories.
Coal quality results at the site indicate a high heat content, comparing favourably with the larger producing mines in the Illinois Basin. Since thermal coal mines are ultimately selling energy, this factor makes the Buck Creek project quality very attractive.
The scoping study released by Paringa in March demonstrates the potential for Buck Creek to be developed as a high margin, low-cost mine with average annual steady-state production of 3.4 million tonnes of saleable clean coal over a minimum mine life of 16 years.
Operating cash costs at the site are estimated to be $US28 per tonne, with the potential to achieve average annual operating cash flows during steady-state production of $US88 million per annum. Hence, the project’s economic viability is extremely robust.
These figures stack up well, suggesting a relatively short payback period for Paringa. The next milestone is the completion of a prefeasibility study, which is expected by the end of 2014.
Prairie Downs Metals
Prairie Downs Metals released the results of a scoping study on its Lublin coal project in Poland just over a week ago, and since then its share price has rallied some 25 per cent.
The company is one of the hottest stories in the coal space, with recent interest promising washability results at Lublin that point to exceptionally high yield.
However, if you haven’t bought into the stock at this stage you haven’t missed the boat. This company appears to have plenty of legs, if Hartleys’ take on the stock following the release of the Lublin study is anything to go by.
The broker has upgraded its recommendation on Prairie from a hold to buy and increased its share price target on the stock from $2.00 to $2.14, representing share price upside of about 270 per cent.
The stock was buoyed in early April on the release of a study confirming underutilised domestic and European Union infrastructure capabilities available at Lublin.
From a transport perspective, Prairie has ample port infrastructure which will allow it to take advantage of seaborne markets.
These developments have seen Prairie’s shares more than double from about 27 cents at the end of February to an intraday high of 60 cents on Monday.
The Lublin scoping study was a real kicker for Prairie as it confirms the group’s potential to develop a large-scale, long-life mine with attractive fundamentals and the ability to produce both semi-soft coking and premium thermal coal.
Lublin is a huge deposit with a JORC resource of 1.6 billion tonnes, but this scoping study demonstrates it has more than size on its side.
Prospective production metrics indicate Lublin’s commercial viability is extremely impressive.
Tigers Realm
When Smart Investor spoke with Tigers Realm managing director Craig Parry recently, he spoke positively about the company’s bid to bring a major coking coal project in Russia onstream.
This degree of confidence needs to rub off on investors as Tigers strives to progress a US$1.3 billion project in a jurisdiction fast growing a reputation as aggressive and unstable.
However, this is far from Parry’s experience, who claims the group has received significant support at government level.
There is no doubting the quality of Tigers’ assets located in the Bering Basin in eastern Russia. This has been backed up by financial investment at a government and private equity level.
A $62.5 million capital raising conducted by Tigers in December included $16.5 million from the Russian Direct Investment Fund.
Prominent Russian private equity firm Baring Vostok Capital Partners also took $52.5 million of the placement.
Providing further confidence in Tigers’ ability to bring what could potentially be a 10 million tonnes per annum project on stream is the fact that it has consistently met milestones and achieved outstanding resource upgrades as exploration progressed.
The company has two projects: Amaam North and Amaam, with the former expected to initially come into production at a rate of 1 million tonnes per annum, scaling up to 6.5 million tonnes per annum over the coming years.
Universal Coal
Shares in Universal Coal spiked about 20 per cent in early March after the company announced first thermal coal production from its Kangala mine in South Africa’s Witbank coalfields.
From an overall perspective, shareholders in Universal should be relatively pleased with the company’s share price performance over the last 12 months, given it has doubled since June last year.
However, a 25 per cent slide in less than two months, despite the release of further promising news, is disappointing.
Analysts at Patersons Securities have a 12 month price target on Universal of 27 cents, implying a share price upside of about 150 per cent relative to the company’s recent trading range.
The first thermal coal sales from Kangala were delivered to South African power utility, Eskom, in April.
Under the terms of the deal, Universal will supply Eskom for the next eight years, with an extension in place for 16 years.
Remaining production from Kangala will target the more lucrative export markets via a 100,000 tonnes per annum offtake agreement with leading South African coal producer Exarro Resources.
First export sales are on track to commence by July 2014 and Universal has already secured export allocation through the Richards Bay Coal Terminal.
Universal recently highlighted Kangala is now ramping up towards its nameplate capacity and is expected to be producing at full tilt by the third quarter of 2014.
The project is expected to generate steady and strong cash flow for the group for at least 10 years, which will go towards funding the development of other projects.
Analysts at Patersons said Universal’s offtake agreement with Eskom should generate EBITDA of about $15 million per annum with both costs and profit margins locked in for eight years. The broker said Universal has enough measured resource for more than 30 years of production.
Universal has three other thermal coal assets and has completed earn-in agreements over two metallurgical coal projects, which could potentially add significant value to the group in the medium-to-long term.
However, based on earnings estimates for 2015 and 2016 alone, the company’s fundamentals are attractive.
Patersons is forecasting net profits of $8.7 million and $9.6 million in 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively. This represents earnings per share of 2.7 cents and 3.0 cents, indicating Universal is trading on forward price-earnings multiples of 3.8 and 3.5 relative to Thursday’s closing price of 10 cents. "
Das dürften soweit ich weiss -unter einigen Gesichtspunkten, zumindest- so gut wie alles überdurchschnittlich bis sehr überdurchschnittlich stark aufgestellte Entwickler sein.
"Six coal stocks to fire up your portfolio"
www.afrsmartinvestor.com.au/p/shares/six_coal_stocks_to_fire…
"The big sell-off in coal stocks of late has created buying opportunities, and now is the time to pounce before you miss out.
The value in the sector was clearly underlined late last week when Aurizon Holdings and Baosteel made a $1.4 billion, $3.40 per share cash takeover offer for Aquila Resources.
At the time, the offer represented an almost 40 per cent premium to Aquila’s previous closing price and on the day of the announcement the company’s shares spiked 36.3 per cent.
It is worth noting Aquila was trading broadly in line with its 12 month average at the time of the offer, something that can’t be said for most of its peers, many of which have been sold down heavily during that period.
Negative sentiment behind the selling is driven by the substantial slump in commodity prices, which has affected both coking and thermal coal.
However, these prices can bounce as quickly as they have fallen, and there are companies not yet in production with strong medium-term profiles not currently affected from an earnings perspective by depressed commodity prices.
So today, we’ve identified six coal stocks with strong production outlooks that don’t appear to be factored into their share prices.
The companies Smart Investor has identified vary widely in terms of recent performance, geographic locations, stages of development and the type of coal they produce. However taken as a whole, they represent a diversified exposure to a sector that is gathering steam once more.
Atrum Coal
Atrum Coal’s Groundhog project in British Columbia has many unique qualities, some of which will be extremely relevant in terms of product pricing and the valuation attributed to the company.
While it only listed in July 2012, Atrum was already being spruiked as something special by 2013. This was evident in its share price surge as it outperformed every company in the materials sector in the 12 months to December.
The first major catalyst was the establishment of a 1.56 billion tonne anthracite resource in British Columbia at the company’s Groundhog project.
Anthracite is a story in itself, being one of the rarest coals in the world, particularly at Groundhog grades.
At a time when coking coal prices are in the order of $US120 ($128) per tonne, anthracite is selling at approximately $US190.
Bell Potter said recently that worldwide usage of anthracite is about 600 million tonnes per annum and of that, about 80 million tonnes is for the metallurgical market.
Only about 12 per cent of what is used in the steel industry has grades that are as high as those which can be supplied by Atrum.
Bell Potter have been of the view for some time now that Atrum’s market capitalisation could double as milestones are met, implying a share price of up to $2.88, representing a premium of about 60 per cent to its current trading range.
Attila Resources
Completion of a pre-feasibility study (PFS) in August confirmed the technical and economic merits of Attila Resources’ Kodiak coking coal project in Alabama, USA, based solely on the Gurnee section of the tenement.
The PFS demonstrated the capacity to produce about 2 million tonnes per annum of high-quality coking coal, and analysts at Hartleys expect the project to produce 700,000 tonnes of it in 2014-15, ramping up to 2.9 million tonnes in 2015-16.
Based on these metrics, the company would achieve a small maiden profit of $3.7 million in 2014-15, increasing to $36.4 million in 2015-16.
This represents fully diluted earnings per share of 24.4 cents, implying a price-earnings multiple of 7.6 relative to Hartleys 12 month price target of $1.85.
This also takes into account the maiden JORC resource estimate of 48.3 million tonnes for the 4400-acre Seymour property which forms part of the Kodiak project.
The Seymour inclusion exceeded exploration expectations and increased Attila’s global resource by 62 per cent, creating immediate share price upside, but has been since lost in the wave of selling that has hit the sector.
Attila is trading well short of the price target, hovering in the vicinity of 40 cents since March when prices began to tumble. Based on Hartleys’ forecasts, this represents a price-earnings multiple of about 1.6, to a large extent explaining why the company is one of the broker’s top picks in that space.
Resources analyst Mike Millikan told Smart Investor he was impressed with the quality of Attila’s premium hard coking coal product, and of particular importance are the anticipated low operating costs, existing infrastructure and relatively moderate capital costs in bringing the project into production.
Paringa Resources
It was only on Monday that Paringa Resources received its permit to begin construction of surface mine facilities at its Buck Creek project located in the Western Kentucky region of the Illinois Coal Basin.
This provided the green light for Paringa to complete remaining technical studies as it targets commencement of construction of the high margin, low capex project in 2015.
The Illinois Coal Basin is one of the most prolific coal-producing regions in the US and Paringa controls more than 10,500 hectares of leases within an area of interest of approximately 28,000 hectares.
The Buck Creek project has a JORC coal resource estimate of 140 million tonnes of high-quality thermal coal with more than 88 per cent in the measured and indicated categories.
Coal quality results at the site indicate a high heat content, comparing favourably with the larger producing mines in the Illinois Basin. Since thermal coal mines are ultimately selling energy, this factor makes the Buck Creek project quality very attractive.
The scoping study released by Paringa in March demonstrates the potential for Buck Creek to be developed as a high margin, low-cost mine with average annual steady-state production of 3.4 million tonnes of saleable clean coal over a minimum mine life of 16 years.
Operating cash costs at the site are estimated to be $US28 per tonne, with the potential to achieve average annual operating cash flows during steady-state production of $US88 million per annum. Hence, the project’s economic viability is extremely robust.
These figures stack up well, suggesting a relatively short payback period for Paringa. The next milestone is the completion of a prefeasibility study, which is expected by the end of 2014.
Prairie Downs Metals
Prairie Downs Metals released the results of a scoping study on its Lublin coal project in Poland just over a week ago, and since then its share price has rallied some 25 per cent.
The company is one of the hottest stories in the coal space, with recent interest promising washability results at Lublin that point to exceptionally high yield.
However, if you haven’t bought into the stock at this stage you haven’t missed the boat. This company appears to have plenty of legs, if Hartleys’ take on the stock following the release of the Lublin study is anything to go by.
The broker has upgraded its recommendation on Prairie from a hold to buy and increased its share price target on the stock from $2.00 to $2.14, representing share price upside of about 270 per cent.
The stock was buoyed in early April on the release of a study confirming underutilised domestic and European Union infrastructure capabilities available at Lublin.
From a transport perspective, Prairie has ample port infrastructure which will allow it to take advantage of seaborne markets.
These developments have seen Prairie’s shares more than double from about 27 cents at the end of February to an intraday high of 60 cents on Monday.
The Lublin scoping study was a real kicker for Prairie as it confirms the group’s potential to develop a large-scale, long-life mine with attractive fundamentals and the ability to produce both semi-soft coking and premium thermal coal.
Lublin is a huge deposit with a JORC resource of 1.6 billion tonnes, but this scoping study demonstrates it has more than size on its side.
Prospective production metrics indicate Lublin’s commercial viability is extremely impressive.
Tigers Realm
When Smart Investor spoke with Tigers Realm managing director Craig Parry recently, he spoke positively about the company’s bid to bring a major coking coal project in Russia onstream.
This degree of confidence needs to rub off on investors as Tigers strives to progress a US$1.3 billion project in a jurisdiction fast growing a reputation as aggressive and unstable.
However, this is far from Parry’s experience, who claims the group has received significant support at government level.
There is no doubting the quality of Tigers’ assets located in the Bering Basin in eastern Russia. This has been backed up by financial investment at a government and private equity level.
A $62.5 million capital raising conducted by Tigers in December included $16.5 million from the Russian Direct Investment Fund.
Prominent Russian private equity firm Baring Vostok Capital Partners also took $52.5 million of the placement.
Providing further confidence in Tigers’ ability to bring what could potentially be a 10 million tonnes per annum project on stream is the fact that it has consistently met milestones and achieved outstanding resource upgrades as exploration progressed.
The company has two projects: Amaam North and Amaam, with the former expected to initially come into production at a rate of 1 million tonnes per annum, scaling up to 6.5 million tonnes per annum over the coming years.
Universal Coal
Shares in Universal Coal spiked about 20 per cent in early March after the company announced first thermal coal production from its Kangala mine in South Africa’s Witbank coalfields.
From an overall perspective, shareholders in Universal should be relatively pleased with the company’s share price performance over the last 12 months, given it has doubled since June last year.
However, a 25 per cent slide in less than two months, despite the release of further promising news, is disappointing.
Analysts at Patersons Securities have a 12 month price target on Universal of 27 cents, implying a share price upside of about 150 per cent relative to the company’s recent trading range.
The first thermal coal sales from Kangala were delivered to South African power utility, Eskom, in April.
Under the terms of the deal, Universal will supply Eskom for the next eight years, with an extension in place for 16 years.
Remaining production from Kangala will target the more lucrative export markets via a 100,000 tonnes per annum offtake agreement with leading South African coal producer Exarro Resources.
First export sales are on track to commence by July 2014 and Universal has already secured export allocation through the Richards Bay Coal Terminal.
Universal recently highlighted Kangala is now ramping up towards its nameplate capacity and is expected to be producing at full tilt by the third quarter of 2014.
The project is expected to generate steady and strong cash flow for the group for at least 10 years, which will go towards funding the development of other projects.
Analysts at Patersons said Universal’s offtake agreement with Eskom should generate EBITDA of about $15 million per annum with both costs and profit margins locked in for eight years. The broker said Universal has enough measured resource for more than 30 years of production.
Universal has three other thermal coal assets and has completed earn-in agreements over two metallurgical coal projects, which could potentially add significant value to the group in the medium-to-long term.
However, based on earnings estimates for 2015 and 2016 alone, the company’s fundamentals are attractive.
Patersons is forecasting net profits of $8.7 million and $9.6 million in 2014-15 and 2015-16 respectively. This represents earnings per share of 2.7 cents and 3.0 cents, indicating Universal is trading on forward price-earnings multiples of 3.8 and 3.5 relative to Thursday’s closing price of 10 cents. "
die Kristallkugel wird im Rohstoffbereich künftig meiner Meinung nach immer öfter zum Einsatz kommen.
Eine der wesentlichen ENtwicklungen, die ich prognostizieren würde.
Gold industry bust @$1.300/oz
, says Randgold’s Bristow - MW/CMR, JOHANNESBURG - Jul 2, 2014
- M. Creamer -
www.miningweekly.com/article/gold-industry-bust-at-1-300oz-s…
"The gold mining industry was fundamentally broke at a gold price of $1 300/oz, Randgold Resources CEO Dr Mark Bristow said on Wednesday.
Speaking to journalists at a media lunch, Bristow said the industry was unable to make returns at that low level of gold price range.
The consequences would be a reduction in the supply of gold, which would ultimately push the gold price higher, as physical demand was definitely present.
The crystal ball that needed to be studied was the extent of damage the industry would need to experience to reduce supply to drive up the gold price and rescue the rest of the industry.
“When you over supply the gold market, the gold price goes down. We saw that in Nineties with the gold hedging and we had multiple extra ounces being supplied into the gold industry. As soon as we tightened it up in 2001, the gold price just shot up,” he recalled.
But the industry had become renowned for investing in the peaks and being unable to support those investments during the troughs.
The average grade of the industry had dropped from 2.6 g/t to just over 1 g/t, which meant double the number of tons had to be mined to produce the same amount of gold, which was why costs had risen.
The London- and Nasdaq-listed Randgold was one of a rare breed of gold companies that had not impaired its assets, as a result of the company allocating its capital on the basis of long-term gold price of $1 000/oz.
The company was on track to produce at a rate of a million ounces of gold a year from this year.
“We don’t do all-in costs because it’s just jiggery-pockery,” Bristow said, denouncing all-in sustaining costs (AISC) of the World Gold Council as the refuge of companies that were not making any profit.
Non-mining public companies the world over published according to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) or General Accepted Recordkeeping Principles (GARP).
“Why does the gold industry have to be different? What’s the reason? It’s because we are not profitable so we try to make ourselves look profitable," he said, adding that the industry had gone bust when the gold price fell from $1 900/oz to $1 300/oz.
He said that the gold-mining company that had promoted the AISC concept adopted by the World Gold Council had since resigned from the World Gold Council.
There was not an auditor in the world that would audit the AISC number and IFRS and GARP remained the standards used.
The gold-mining industry had failed to make sufficient money to cover its capital, even when the gold price had risen by $1 000/oz and the collective gold output had remained constant.
All of the industry’s collective capital was thus sustaining. Some, like Randgold, made profit but many impaired billions of dollars worth of investment and produced less gold.
“We’ve got change the way we do business. We’ve got to be more transparent and more partnership driven,” said Bristow, who has led Randgold since its inception 19 years ago. "
Eine der wesentlichen ENtwicklungen, die ich prognostizieren würde.
Gold industry bust @$1.300/oz
, says Randgold’s Bristow - MW/CMR, JOHANNESBURG - Jul 2, 2014- M. Creamer -
www.miningweekly.com/article/gold-industry-bust-at-1-300oz-s…
"The gold mining industry was fundamentally broke at a gold price of $1 300/oz, Randgold Resources CEO Dr Mark Bristow said on Wednesday.
Speaking to journalists at a media lunch, Bristow said the industry was unable to make returns at that low level of gold price range.
The consequences would be a reduction in the supply of gold, which would ultimately push the gold price higher, as physical demand was definitely present.
The crystal ball that needed to be studied was the extent of damage the industry would need to experience to reduce supply to drive up the gold price and rescue the rest of the industry.
“When you over supply the gold market, the gold price goes down. We saw that in Nineties with the gold hedging and we had multiple extra ounces being supplied into the gold industry. As soon as we tightened it up in 2001, the gold price just shot up,” he recalled.
But the industry had become renowned for investing in the peaks and being unable to support those investments during the troughs.
The average grade of the industry had dropped from 2.6 g/t to just over 1 g/t, which meant double the number of tons had to be mined to produce the same amount of gold, which was why costs had risen.
The London- and Nasdaq-listed Randgold was one of a rare breed of gold companies that had not impaired its assets, as a result of the company allocating its capital on the basis of long-term gold price of $1 000/oz.
The company was on track to produce at a rate of a million ounces of gold a year from this year.
“We don’t do all-in costs because it’s just jiggery-pockery,” Bristow said, denouncing all-in sustaining costs (AISC) of the World Gold Council as the refuge of companies that were not making any profit.
Non-mining public companies the world over published according to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) or General Accepted Recordkeeping Principles (GARP).
“Why does the gold industry have to be different? What’s the reason? It’s because we are not profitable so we try to make ourselves look profitable," he said, adding that the industry had gone bust when the gold price fell from $1 900/oz to $1 300/oz.
He said that the gold-mining company that had promoted the AISC concept adopted by the World Gold Council had since resigned from the World Gold Council.
There was not an auditor in the world that would audit the AISC number and IFRS and GARP remained the standards used.
The gold-mining industry had failed to make sufficient money to cover its capital, even when the gold price had risen by $1 000/oz and the collective gold output had remained constant.
All of the industry’s collective capital was thus sustaining. Some, like Randgold, made profit but many impaired billions of dollars worth of investment and produced less gold.
“We’ve got change the way we do business. We’ve got to be more transparent and more partnership driven,” said Bristow, who has led Randgold since its inception 19 years ago. "
Trading Spotlight
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 47.250.698 von Fantomas96 am 02.07.14 22:36:26...und machst nicht wieder in 6 Monaten andere für Deine Verluste verantwortlich.
bei welchem wert tat ich das denn
kann mich an keinen einzigen erinnern.
bei welchem wert tat ich das denn
kann mich an keinen einzigen erinnern.
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 47.250.172 von sinsala1986 am 02.07.14 21:06:37Die Sache Lincoln hat einen kleinen Haken! Die durchschnittlichen M&I liegen bei 1g/t, für Kanada geht das nur open pit bei bester Metallurgie. Lange Mühlenzeit für hohen Aufschluß ist dafür zu teuer. Deswegen wahrscheinlich die 85% recovery?
Aber das ist gar nicht der Haken, der liegt vielmehr im geringen cut off von 0,21g/t und kleiner. So etwas geht in Südamerika, Afrika oder Asien, in Kanada sollte der cut off nahe dem Durchschnittsgrad von 1g/t liegen. Das fällt sofort auf, wenn man den Durchschnittsgrad einfach durch den cut off teilt. Dann erhält man einen Faktor, der ist bei der Lincoln Resource mit 5 ungewöhnlich hoch. Das bedeutet, das ein großer Teil der Resource weit geringere Grade haben kann als der Durchschnitt, wenn andere kleine Teile der Resource sehr hochgradig sind. Je höhergradig ein kleiner Teil ist, um so unwirtschaftlicher der niedergradige größere Teil. Mit den 0,21g/t ergibt sich ein GPV von 8,94$/t, in den betroffenen Teilen eines Blockmodels einer möglichen Mine ist das m.M.n. nicht mehr kostendeckend, da ein Minen internes Strip Ratio bzw. gerade bei Gold Resourcenverwässerung die Kosten weiter treiben dürfte?
http://www.lincolnmining.com/_resources/presentations/LMG_Pr…
In der Presentation ist nirgends eine Strip Ratio Angabe zu finden, alle Resourcen sind also in pit! Dann sollten es mindestens 4g/t - 6g/t Gold, bei aktuellem Preis von 1320$/oz, für die Wirtschaftlichkeit sein?
Aber das ist gar nicht der Haken, der liegt vielmehr im geringen cut off von 0,21g/t und kleiner. So etwas geht in Südamerika, Afrika oder Asien, in Kanada sollte der cut off nahe dem Durchschnittsgrad von 1g/t liegen. Das fällt sofort auf, wenn man den Durchschnittsgrad einfach durch den cut off teilt. Dann erhält man einen Faktor, der ist bei der Lincoln Resource mit 5 ungewöhnlich hoch. Das bedeutet, das ein großer Teil der Resource weit geringere Grade haben kann als der Durchschnitt, wenn andere kleine Teile der Resource sehr hochgradig sind. Je höhergradig ein kleiner Teil ist, um so unwirtschaftlicher der niedergradige größere Teil. Mit den 0,21g/t ergibt sich ein GPV von 8,94$/t, in den betroffenen Teilen eines Blockmodels einer möglichen Mine ist das m.M.n. nicht mehr kostendeckend, da ein Minen internes Strip Ratio bzw. gerade bei Gold Resourcenverwässerung die Kosten weiter treiben dürfte?
http://www.lincolnmining.com/_resources/presentations/LMG_Pr…
In der Presentation ist nirgends eine Strip Ratio Angabe zu finden, alle Resourcen sind also in pit! Dann sollten es mindestens 4g/t - 6g/t Gold, bei aktuellem Preis von 1320$/oz, für die Wirtschaftlichkeit sein?
Zitat von Boersiback: ich hab mir mal das loser-trio reingelegt heute.
GIX, IDM, NCG
ob das gutgeht...bitte nicht nachmachen...
mal die "gurken" antesten ob sie schon so weit sind
Ich hoffe, Du hast Dir die Gurken selber ausgesucht und machst nicht wieder in 6 Monaten andere für Deine Verluste verantwortlich.
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 47.250.486 von likeshares am 02.07.14 21:58:09Der Chart explodiert bald! Weiß nur nicht wohin. WL!
Was ich ganz cool finde sind die Schulden Was ich nicht so cool finde ist der geringe "Promi" Anteil der Shareholder, aber der kann ja dann kommen.
Den hast du aber in AU gekauft, oder? In D ja nicht handelbar mit dem Spread! Der is schon in Aussiland schlimm. Sieht interessant aus, aber ich bin australienallergisch. Mal beobachten.
Was ich ganz cool finde sind die Schulden
Was ich nicht so cool finde ist der geringe "Promi" Anteil der Shareholder, aber der kann ja dann kommen.Den hast du aber in AU gekauft, oder? In D ja nicht handelbar mit dem Spread! Der is schon in Aussiland schlimm. Sieht interessant aus, aber ich bin australienallergisch. Mal beobachten.
Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 47.247.452 von Sweetbull am 02.07.14 14:46:27
Infos Seite 13
http://www.redmm.com.au/files/nrteUploadFiles/202F062F201411…
Infos Seite 13
http://www.redmm.com.au/files/nrteUploadFiles/202F062F201411…
Durchsuchen
