NZ Oil & Gas (NZO)

[blackcap]

LOL, you're a gambler, I'm an investor. I bet on things that are highly likely to give me a reward...each to their own

I think it is more nuanced than that. I too hold a small amount of NZO. I consider myself an investor. There is a 90% chance that the SP will go from 60 cents to 40 cents if Ironbark is not successful. There is a 10% chance that the SP will go to $5.00 if Ironbark is successful.

My tradeoff is a 90% chance to lose 33% versus a 10% chance to make 833%. Simple probability tree and expected outcomes show that being in for the drill is the better investment.

.9 * -33% + .1 * 833% = +53.6.

The expectation of the project is very much in the positive. (the 90% and 10% figures are just made up but that is sort of what I feel chance of success might could be and useful for illustration purposes)

[Beagle]

Yes, things can go very well. The old associate company Mineral Resources was a 10 bagger for me back in the day.

[airedale]

Yes, things can go very well. The old associate company Mineral Resources was a 10 bagger for me back in the day.

Hi Beagle, if you were in Mineral Resources back in the Tony Radford days you enjoyed a punt like the the rest of us.

[Beagle]

Hi Beagle, if you were in Mineral Resources back in the Tony Radford days you enjoyed a punt like the the rest of us.

Yes I certainly did well extremely well from Mineral resources and made a bit from United resources too. NZO much less of a happy hunting ground.
Remember how they circled the wagon's with those three companies and had cross shareholders in each other to block a takeover ?
Tony Radford was as cunning as a hungry weasel.

Don't really feel the need to punt these days. I guess older dogs like more predictable things

[arjay]

Chart I have on MSN Money only goes back to 30 June 1986 when they were 79 cents. May have been lower earlier that year as you suggest.
My point is this has not been a successful company over the long run and from memory they didn't pay a dividend until Tui started flowing in circa 2007 and even then it was a very modest portion of net profit. No dividends for about 20 years. Then there was all the money they threw down other rat holes.

Fair comments- mind you, any investment choice can be countered in hindsight with examples of better gains made elsewhere. There are plenty of investors coming out of the 1988 crash who would have more money now if they’d invested in NZO at the time instead of other choices they made. BTW, NZO we’re giving divies before Tui - when they had a chunk of the Ngatoro field.

[airedale]

I am interested in other contributor's view on this matter.

From what I can gather (please correct me if I'm wrong) the board, and by extension OGOG, seem to be privy to the votes for, against, and abstained prior to the SoA voting closing date.

Based on this:
They can keep an eye on it.
Not raise their offer if it's looking like being accepted.
Take the moral high ground of generously increasing their offer before the closing time.
Use the information to help determine how much to increase the offer by, just enough to get it over the line.
Enabling OGOG not to suffer the loss of money and time (for making such a ridiculous offer) by conveniently raising the offer prior to the closing date and then extending the closing date.
Probably another dozen or so benefits in addition to the above.

If I'm right, I can't think of any other voting system that allows this.
If OGOG can in any way be made privy to this running-total information , then so should all shareholders. All shares rank equally don't they?

In my view, the running total needs to openly accessable to all shareholders or, like a normal voting or tender process, remain under lock and key until after closing... and I lean very heavily on the latter of these.

Thoughts or clarifications anyone?

Good question Vaygor, Is Computershare really independent or does NZO know more than the rest of the market?

[Sideshow Bob]

Good question Vaygor, Is Computershare really independent or does NZO know more than the rest of the market?

Well they have obviously kept a eye of this forum so would have picked up the mood of many holders. There also have been some quite confident exertions that it had failed based on the shareholding blocks posters know about voting against. This combined with some communication with some of the bigger holders would probably given them an answer regardless.

But I'm a natural cynic in these sort of things - a la, 62c was fair, but then they suddenly increase to 74c......why???

Personally I think they've shown contempt for minority shareholders, and from this, have got some solid pushback on there offer.

[freddagg]

I see that close to a million share have traded at around 72c since the offer was increased to 74c.
Since most of the buyers are likely to be trying to arbitrage the difference then I assume most of these shares are going to be voted in favour of the SOA

[blackcap]

I see that close to a million share have traded at around 72c since the offer was increased to 74c.
Since most of the buyers are likely to be trying to arbitrage the difference then I assume most of these shares are going to be voted in favour of the SOA

You would be correct with that assertion. I guess one of us needs to do a tally of how many shares trade between now and the voting date. Be careful though, some of the shares sold may be ones that have already voted Yes anyway or were going to vote Yes. So not necessarily a net win for the SOA.

[airedale]

I see that close to a million share have traded at around 72c since the offer was increased to 74c.
Since most of the buyers are likely to be trying to arbitrage the difference then I assume most of these shares are going to be voted in favour of the SOA

Not necessarily. I started buying at 61.5 cents when this episode began. I figured that there was little downside below the SoA offer. So not much risk. I might buy more at the 72 cent mark. I may be able to repeat the trick. I have also voted against the offer.