NZ Oil & Gas (NZO)

[dsurf]

Sunk costs expensed prior periods - may be that 50%+ is profit - pe at 5.4x is not to shabby either

[digger]

Sunk costs expensed prior periods - may be that 50%+ is profit - pe at 5.4x is not to shabby either

Are you and On the money telling me after all these years that i do not understand PE.

Now i could be wrong and have long thrown away my early books ,but PE always meant the SP is divided by the companies earnings.It does not mean the SP is divided by profit. Profit is a somewhat changable thing and can for any year be whatever the company wishes with a few manipulations. Earnings on the other hand are countable and seen as fixed. So you good people that still have books handy please look up the definition as it needs sorting out. To me it means Sp divided by earnings and that would give NZo a PE of 2.7

[oldowl]

Here you are Digger :-)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from PE ratio)• Find out more about navigating Wikipedia and finding information •Jump to: navigation, search
The P/E ratio (price-to-earnings ratio) of a stock (also called its "earnings multiple", or simply "multiple", "P/E", or "PE") is a measure of the price paid for a share relative to the income or profit earned by the firm per share. A higher P/E ratio means that investors are paying more for each unit of income. It is a valuation ratio included in other financial ratios. The reciprocal of the P/E ratio is known as the earnings yield.


The price per share (numerator) is the market price of a single share of the stock. The earnings per share (denominator) is the net income of the company for the most recent 12 month period, divided by number of shares outstanding. The earnings per share (EPS) used can also be the "diluted EPS" or the "comprehensive EPS".

For example, if stock A is trading at $24 and the earnings per share for the most recent 12 month period is $3, then stock A has a P/E ratio of 24/3 or 8. Put another way, the purchaser of stock A is paying $8 for every dollar of earnings. Companies with losses (negative earnings) or no profit have an undefined P/E ratio (usually shown as Not applicable or "N/A"); sometimes, however, a negative P/E ratio may be shown.

By relating price and earnings per share for a company, one can analyze the market's stock valuation of a company and its shares relative to the income the company is actually generating. Investors can use the P/E ratio to compare the value of stocks: if one stock has a P/E twice that of another stock, all things being equal, it is a less attractive investment. Companies are rarely equal, however, and comparisons between industries, countries, and time periods may be misleading.

[upside_umop]

income is earnings, and pe is calculated from npat.

i think the company has already given guidance on income/earnings/profit of 70 million ebita.

revenue means poo, if u want revenue per share, get postie plus, or warehouse or something retailly if revenue is what spins ur wheel.

[Dr_Who]

I usually do my P/E based on NPAT and not revenue. Revenue doesnt mean crap if you cant produce a profit for the shareholders.

[neopole]

I usually do my P/E based on NPAT and not revenue. Revenue doesnt mean crap if you cant produce a profit for the shareholders.

exactly Dr Who, we know NZO is going to produce a profit, the question is.....
is the profit for the shareholders, or for TR's quest of an elephant.
as a producing explorer, the profits should be divided between the search for new wealth and sharing the current wealth, why else prop up a company that spends its entire profit on exploration?
before the discovery, this company was an explorer and had high risk attached to its shareprice..... re the sub 50cents.
the ceo cant ask option holder to convert at $1.50 if there is no return for there investment, except the hope of a big strike.
so, i believe there will be a steady flow of divi's, if not this year, then definately next year, with the ceo making strong comment regarding divi's.
otherwise, there are plently of other sub 50cent companies out there which are also producing..........

[duncan macgregor]

exactly Dr Who, we know NZO is going to produce a profit, the question is.....
is the profit for the shareholders, or for TR's quest of an elephant.
there are plently of other sub 50cent companies out there which are also producing..........

I think you will find bigger and better holes in the ground in the future, why give it back to you lot?. The company job security to the top dogs first and foremost, with huge salaries, and perks for as long as they can stretch it out. The options dont matter they have enough coming into the coffers from now on. Its pass the parcel time folks watch the option price slowly drop from now on. Macdunk

[tim23]

Get over yourself Duncan - bag another company for a change

[arjay]

I would like to see a freeze on increasing payouts to NZO staff and directors until they commit themselves to sharing the wealth with the shareholders. Hence, I will be voting against Resolution 4 until such a committment is given.

[manxman]

The options dont matter they have enough coming into the coffers from now on. Its pass the parcel time folks watch the option price slowly drop from now on. Macdunk

But if the directors can get the options converted at a cost of a 15cent dividend, then they have a company which will be pushing into the top 10.
The way the oil flows are coming in, the company will be paying tax by the end of the June 08 year and we should get at least some imputation. My pick is a tempting divvy announced before June 30, but with a record date after June 30, to drag the options into the money.

I see a big danger that the options will be exercised, but the share price will weaken markedly post June 08. Didn't this happen when the OCs were exercised? Didn't someone of Digger's aquaintance lose a farm on this sort of play?

The exercise of the ODs will suck in $300 million, and its hard to see the sharemarket having that big an appetite for NZO. Will the Cullen fund really buy in big against the advice of McDunk? Can TR stick enough lipstick on this pig?

I don't think the gradual decline scenario for the ODs will hold for long. There may be a collective moment of horrible realization, and they will go over a cliff, and any attempt to revive the situation after that will look awfully like manipulation. If the directors want to avoid this situation there needs to be an early announcement on the dividend outlook. If it doesn't happen at the AGM then the ODs are indeed in trouble.

Mx