Seeking Alpha


Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View flashgordonovich's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • NQ Mobile: Extremely Overhyped Even When Ignoring All Signs Of Fraud [View article]
    Why anyone would touch NQ at this point is beyond me...not until the independent committee has finished its investigation. Meanwhile the company seems second-rate, throwing anything and everything against the wall so that they can tout a "platform strategy", and facing huge competition, while being quite prolific at issuing press releases and stock options. Pass.
    Nov 27, 2013. 07:38 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    I don't think Mr. Bonk is sloppy at all, as the exact quote from your article is this:

    "There are at least two supermajors bidding, according to CFO Colin Visaggio: "While there are at least two LNG-savvy supermajors involved, a consortium of Korea Gas Corporation, Japan Petroleum Exploration and InterOil's Japanese condensate stripping plant partner Mitsui is also in contention." We asked the company whether they still stand by that description and they confirmed."

    What precisely did the IOC official with whom you communicated say? What did you ask? Did you merely provide them Mr. Visaggio's quote, and asked them whether they "stand by that description", and they responded with a simple, "yes". Can you confirm this was the precise dialogue, or was there something more concrete? As Bonk points out, it is sort of vague because of the word "involved". He does not say that they have received two bids from supermajors. That seems to be your (and others) interpretation of what he said. It is ambiguous, like much of what IOC management says and has said over the years. Remember how Phil Mulacek's own words regarding bids and accretion and accretive bids kept changing from one call or SEC disclosure to the next.

    Anyhow, the heart of the matter here is whether IOC told you anything more than what I said above about the bids, and whether they actually said, explicitly said, that the company had "received two bids from supermajors". I am guessing...and betting...that the answer is "no"...
    Mar 5, 2013. 11:07 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    "We'll just have to wait and see. I have no way of knowing these things.."

    But, this is evading the true heart of the matter, isn't it? I mean, you have written numerous pieces about IOC over many years, one more bullish than the next, and yet, here we are, all those years later, and we wait. How can you possibly be so uber-bullish, so certain that the shorts and cynics have it wrong, and yet not even offer the most basic of opinions as to what this deal will look like? It seems like your entire position is that the deal terms themselves are irrelevant, which makes zero sense, when the reality is that the specific deal partner and the specific deal terms mean everything. Your unwillingness to offer any opinion, belief, or viewpoint on these core matters significantly, if not entirely, detracts from the worth and value of your lengthy article.
    Mar 5, 2013. 11:06 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    Shareholdersunite: you have written a very lengthy piece, which really seems to offer not one single new fact (or assertion, really) that has not been already made. You spend 99% of your article trying to dispel the short thesis, and I do not capture all of their arguments. However, it really makes no difference.

    At the end of the day, IOC is now a show-me stock. They claim to have received numerous bids. The Board is meeting in Hawaii in less than a week to review them. What happens after that is anyone's guess. However, one would think an announcement would come soon. Personally, I think there will be an announcement. The "winner" will not be a supermajor at all, and there will not be a lot of cash to IOC up front. It will contain numerous contingencies. IOC will then raise money via the recently filed shelf offering. And they will have bought themselves another two or three years of time to drill, and satisfy the contingencies of the offer. The stock will rally at first, as it does, and then stall out. My predictions.

    So, cutting to the very chase, why don't you actually tell us what you predict? What will the deal look like? Who will the partner be? How will it be structured? Why are you so sure that it will represent such a value proposition to shareholders, when the likelihood is that the nearest true cash flows from the asset will not be generated until 2017 or beyond?
    Mar 5, 2013. 06:33 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Weak Short Arguments Further Support The Long Case For InterOil [View article]
    Please. If you think Dr. Moors is a worthy reference for IOC, please let me know what Dr. Moors has published about IOC other than to say, in a blurb, that majors are drooling over their resource? Is this all it takes to convince you, the author of a promotional stock newsletter, whose track record appears to be dreadful, by the way, says in a single sentence that there are majors drooling over a resource in PNG? I would note that Interoil is not even mentioned explicitly by name. Oh, and I will mention Bonk again, just to make it 5 out of 8. Seems you are doing more d.d. about whom I reference in my posts than Dr. Moors and his track record. Oh, and can you cite any of Dr. Moor's research articles and their relevance? I mean, someone as accomplished as he is must be widely, widely published on O&G exploration in developing nations, yes? Seems I am having trouble with that.
    Mar 4, 2013. 07:36 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Weak Short Arguments Further Support The Long Case For InterOil [View article]
    Well don, Feeltheheat. That is a very, very thorough list, and would likely give one some pause as to what IOC will accomplish. What is strange is that many longs like Sam Tibbs, Treasure Hunter, Resourcearb, Shareholders' Unite, and others are so willing to sweep under the rug the numerous misleading and/or inaccurate promises and statements by IOC management in the past....absolutely convinced that this time is different, that a super-major is going to eagerly partner up with tiny IOC or even swallow it whole. IOC is a company who has less than $50 million in unrestricted cash at December 31st, likely significantly less right now, who has future drilling obligations of a billion dollars or more (keep in mind that they have spent $600 million in the last four years, and drilled four wells), and yet, a super-major is going to just write them a big check for a gazillion dollars and partner with them. I doubt with every fiber of my being that this is going to come to pass that way. The fact that IOC just registered for a $1 billion shelf offering, including equity, is the ultimate tell to me. We shall see!
    Mar 4, 2013. 07:33 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Weak Short Arguments Further Support The Long Case For InterOil [View article]
    Oh, and one other question/point. The author questions other's industry (oil and gas) experience. Hmmm. From what I can tell, this author has no such experience either. Are we missing something? Perhaps the author can outline his extensive O&G exploration experience?
    Feb 22, 2013. 04:11 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil Is Finally Ready For The Prom [View article]
    I would just say that Treasure Hunter is drawing conclusions re: facts not in evidence. That is, the company itself has not confirmed who the bidders are specifically, and in fact, been very ambiguous about the disclosures they have made. They have talked about "bids", "indications of bids", " we believe are accretive", and so forth...a lot of ambiguity. So, it is unknowm who the bidders are, whether they are firm bids, mere letters of potential interest or what. Moreover, as anyone who has been involved in project finance understands, there are tremendous variables that might render what appears to be a terrific bid to be much less so. They may include numerous contingencies (additional wells, extended flow tests), subordination of potential returns, required capital contributions by IOC (who has very little available capital, if any), project control, and on and on. The longs, including the author, likely expects a sizeable upfront and non-contingent cash payment to IOC. Again, this remains to be seen.

    What is unequivocal is that IOC has missed one deadline after another (we are talking years), has hired some five different investment banks over a five year period, and here we are. MS and Macquarie have been marketing an interest in the E/A field since September of 2011, nearly 18 months by my estimation. The longs will blame political instability in PNG, but there was lots of time before and after to get a deal done, and here we stand.

    Finally, the stock price has been underperforming every passive index for over three years now, and here in the face of the imminent deal, the not-to-missed prom, the stock is stagnant, unable to scale beyond $60, while longs promise share prices of $100 and more. Seems to me that one should be careful here. IOC has an extremely checkered history, and almost every single promise (perhaps every one) has not come to fruition. They have burned through nearly $1 billion of capital over time, and continue to talk about what is to come around the proverbial corner. The key is to size and hedge this position appropriately, long or short. And March should be interesting. However, I have said this same thing a dozen times before...and it never is. We wait.
    Feb 7, 2013. 03:02 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil: The Final Chapter [View instapost]
    Right. What is unfortunate is the complete lack of independent, reasonably objective analyst reports on IOC. As you mention, not only has Pavel been completely wrong about the company for ears, but he used to work with Wayne Andrews, the now VP of Capital Markets for IOC. And their firm did underwrite a bond offering for IOC some time ago. It seems like the only banks that cover IOC and recommend it, are totally conflicted. It likely explains why they have so wrong about it.
    Jan 29, 2013. 01:49 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil: No Remaining Obstacles To An Imminent Blockbuster Deal [View article]
    Basically what Shareholders Unite is saying, quite simply, is that "the resource is too good not to be monetized", while Resource Arb is making a similarly simplistic argument that "no obstacles now exist" for IOC to consummate a deal. Can anybody make such patently absurd and one-dimensional arguments with a straight face? These are very risky, long-term, multi-billion dollar projects in one of the most corrupt and challenging places in the world to do business. IOC pumpers would rather you focus on the simplistic, macro story, like focusing on some thin veneer over plywood. Anyone seriously considering a position, long or short, should look deeply and closely below the thin veneer promoted by Resource Arb and Shareholders Unite.
    Dec 27, 2012. 01:39 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil: No Remaining Obstacles To An Imminent Blockbuster Deal [View article]
    What, Alan? Resourcearb is very ambitious, and therefore has only found IOC and CDE.
    Dec 26, 2012. 04:04 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil: No Remaining Obstacles To An Imminent Blockbuster Deal [View article]
    There is not going to be any buyout of IOC. Do you know how long the longs pumping this story stock have been talking about a supposed...hold your breath, imminent...buyout? Fact is that the market has known about this "resource" for an extended period, and if a buyout were to have come, it would have happened awhile back.

    Keep in mind that there is a very, very large short position in this stock, and for good reason, in my opinion. I would tread very carefully here. This is a speculative company doing O&G exploration in one of the most historically corrupt and economically disadvantaged nations on the planet, Papua New Guinea. Over an extended period, the company has made numerous claims of finds of oil, condensates (liquids), and gas...with a story that has changed and morphed at numerous times. The company has spent upwards of $80 million to $100 million for each well, which are on-shore records to the best of my knowledge. It is hard to fathom where all the money has gone, and how exactly it has been spent. Management has issued a number of misleading press releases, which has been well documented. The CEO was previously sued for fraud by a number of former investors in Texas. Insiders have not purchased a single share in years and have been net sellers of the stock. And on and on.

    Again, my advice is to do your d.d. and tread very carefully here. IOC may achieve all of its lofty goals. It just might. But I am extremely skeptical.
    Dec 26, 2012. 01:19 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil: No Remaining Obstacles To An Imminent Blockbuster Deal [View article]
    Talk about a broken record. Haven't we read this all before? How many times can the word "imminent" be used to describe when IOC will execute this mammoth sell down before it becomes cache? Haven't numerous sets of investment bankers been trying to sell an interest in the E/A fields for years and years now? Weren't bids due months ago? Didn't the CEO himself say that only an "act of God" would prevent FID being 2011? Didn't you predict an imminent RSD offer/deal/takeover months ago? And here we are, on the cusp of 2013, and this author is promoting another imminent deal? Amazing. This all reminds me of a cute fable involving a boy and a wolf. At this point, the company simply has to deliver. Nothing less will suffice, including well written SA articles.
    Dec 26, 2012. 07:26 AM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is Ackman's Hatchet Job On Herbalife Justified? [View article]
    At this point, the only thing that I cannot wrap my arms around is how they could have remained in business for this long...and this successfully, if they were really a pyramid scheme. Global expansion does not explain it satisfactorily (despite the chuckles Ackman got when mentioning Ghana), nor does "there is a sucker born every minute". That may be (and likely is) true, but I still don't see that explaining the long-term and consistent growth of the company. Ackman did a tremendous job on fine details (e.g., shipping and handling analysis, case law), and on really, really macro-themes (e.g., they sell a commodity), but I think there was this middle hole and extremely critical question I would have liked him to answer more clearly and specifically: how have they remained in business for this long and so successfully, if they churn and burn these distributors like wildfire. Ackman has lots and lots and lots of interesting smoke, but I just don't see the fire yet. I almost get the feeling he knows that, and so is using his analysis to get the FTC and SEC involved for two reasons. One is that alone will ensure profits on his short (or keep a lid on the price for some time), and the other is to have them help him (and us?) with the additional transparency he wants and needs. Either way, he comes out a winner here (and so will that charity). Meanwhile, one other question is when will he cover? Is it really at zero? I don't see that one either. OK, enough ramblings for now...
    Dec 23, 2012. 04:50 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil - Why NEC Approval Will Create Billions In Market Value And Could Spur Bidding War [View article]
    Actually, Feel, that is likely. I recall at least one sale by Mr. Mulacek being done because of a margin call. And other insiders have sold recently. In fact, has there been a single insider buy in years? Just another reason to wonder.
    Oct 19, 2012. 05:46 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment