NZ Oil & Gas (NZO)

[dsurf]

I am very against NZO publicly saying they will sell there stake in PRC. It adds a negative connotation that is unneccessary.
I
NZO is an energy company. It produces Oil, LPG, Gas and Coal.

I thinks a better strategy for NZO would be to keep PRC and re-invest the large dividends from PRC in exploration and / or acquisitions.

[LJB]

There should be no negative connotation since NZO has stated for some time that their PRC stake would be sold when the time was right. This intention was made public even when the PRC shareprice went ballistic immediately (or there abouts) after floating.

[shasta]

If they can pay a 5c divie when they make a loss, what will they pay when they make a big profit?
NZO, just take a year off from drilling to consolidate and carefully plan your next moves. The picture should be radically different in a years time, Pike and Kupe are 20 year life span projects, rake in the cash and stack it in the bank.

If you take away the NZO share of the Pike River loss, the ($3.3m) loss becomes an $8.2m profit (after FX losses & exploration costs being expensed)

[Beagle]

If they can pay a 5c divie when they make a loss, what will they pay when they make a big profit?
NZO, just take a year off from drilling to consolidate and carefully plan your next moves. The picture should be radically different in a years time, Pike and Kupe are 20 year life span projects, rake in the cash and stack it in the bank.

I agree, just rake it all in and pay a 10 cent divvy next year.

[digger]

If they can pay a 5c divie when they make a loss, what will they pay when they make a big profit?
NZO, just take a year off from drilling to consolidate and carefully plan your next moves. The picture should be radically different in a years time, Pike and Kupe are 20 year life span projects, rake in the cash and stack it in the bank.

Logen Ninefingers,two years ago they did make a hugh profit but wisely paid only two lots of 5 cents div. On results then it could have been about 40 cents.What we are now getting is not income from this loss year but a dividend from the past and from reasonable expected improvements in the future.With three incomes next year i would be happy if again only 5 cents is paid,the balance into growth by acquistion and drilling after the we work out what went sooooo wrong this year.Others will want a greater div but i want a long term stable income at 5 cents and then grow the company.

[Beagle]

Logen Ninefingers,two years ago they did make a hugh profit but wisely paid only two lots of 5 cents div. On results then it could have been about 40 cents.What we are now getting is not income from this loss year but a dividend from the past and from reasonable expected improvements in the future.With three incomes next year i would be happy if again only 5 cents is paid,the balance into growth by acquistion and drilling after the we work out what went sooooo wrong this year.Others will want a greater div but i want a long term stable income at 5 cents and then grow the company.

I'm sure i'm not alone in wanting to see a decent divvy, hey they've had these projects in the pipeline for absolutly ages, (Kupe over 20 years), so if they're not going to pay a decent divvy over the next few years when the heck are they ? I don't think its unreasonable for investors to expect more than 5 cents for a $1,20 outlay which is only just over 4%, allbeit fully imputed ?

What do other people think ? When we get a convergance of three major projects all striking paydirt at once, all of which have had extremly long lead times to production, isn't it reasonable for the company to pay out at least half the profit ?

[upside_umop]

isn't it reasonable for the company to pay out at least half the profit ?

In that case, I think you owe NZO some money for this latest result. It would have to work both ways, right?

[Unicorn]

I'm sure i'm not alone in wanting to see a decent divvy, hey they've had these projects in the pipeline for absolutly ages, (Kupe over 20 years), so if they're not going to pay a decent divvy over the next few years when the heck are they ? I don't think its unreasonable for investors to expect more than 5 cents for a $1,20 outlay which is only just over 4%, allbeit fully imputed ?

What do other people think ? When we get a convergance of three major projects all striking paydirt at once, all of which have had extremly long lead times to production, isn't it reasonable for the company to pay out at least half the profit ?

I don't see dividends as being particularly relevant. The idea is for the company to increase in value. Whether it retains that value (which should increase share price) or passes it on as dividends (which should equally decrease share price) does not make a lot of difference in the end. If you want income you can either take a dividend or sell a few shares - either way reduces your investment in the company.

[fish]

I don't see dividends as being particularly relevant. The idea is for the company to increase in value. Whether it retains that value (which should increase share price) or passes it on as dividends (which should equally decrease share price) does not make a lot of difference in the end. If you want income you can either take a dividend or sell a few shares - either way reduces your investment in the company.

Whilst accepting that lots of shareholders hold your view personally I have a very different viewpoint .
Dividends are importantas -
1 Enables tax credits to be used
2 Is money in the hand-to spend or invest and stimulate economies
3 If you rely on selling shares for income you will be shortchanged at times like this -the market does not reflect fair value-I remember you making a very good argument in your TTP submission .
4 Many investors invest for dividends-if you dont the interest
on any loan to buy shares is not tax deductible-I have a large margin loan which is tax deductible as i buy shares for the dividend .

The proof of my belief is that I started buying nzo again this morning -at 119-less 5 cent dividend= net cost 114cents .

[Bilo]

I am right with you Fish. Without dividends the bar for companies is lowered as past investments or capital raisings keep managers in the manner they expect despite performance - did anyone mention ponzi schemes? Without dividends traders take all the profits and buy and hold is even more dead as a paying share market option. Well, not even all traders because you have to trade well and beat your banker's dabbling, Goldman Sachs and their ilks manipulations - not many do without their command of derivatives, off market instruments, and liquidity. With out adequate dividends the share market as a source of investor funds is likely to die.
Great in theory Uni but "no dividend" hasn't worked in NZ.