<<As for ERF I bought in at the beginning. Added to frequently over the many years since....as low as near $12 a unit a few years back. With a unit price now of around $27. Yeah I guess that really is BAD !!!!!!.>>
Ah, the magic of dollar cost averaging, where would we be without it? Actually I can tell you exactly where - not very happy!!!
For all your bleating about <<the DATA the INFO…or near 20 years of data to look at>>, presumably found at your mysterious <<server and its contents>> that people wait in line to get at, and with your <<several tens of thousands of units>> in Enerplus alone, you obviously are a very rich fool who doesn’t need to count a lot.
For the record: Enerplus is by far the oldest Canadian O&G Trust. It was originally “incorporated as 334176 Alberta Ltd. on August 16, 1985, changed its name to Enerplus Resources Corporation on December 9, 1985” and went public at $10 in April 1986. Had you bought it then, could count and keep records – obviously big Ifs – you would know that:
1) The original Enerplus, through all its permutation, will be 17 years old next month as a public entity.
2) From inception through to next Thursday you will have received $11.74 in distribution for each original unit.
3) Each of your original $10 units is now worth $4.59 adjusted for reverse stock splits.
Given that at it’s all-time closing low of $12 per unit on Dec.14th, 1998, you would have been down 80% on your original investment, you ought to be congratulated on your courage to pick up more around that level, but don’t confuse your brilliant market timing with the subject vehicle’s good performance. Any long bond, including the safest, (US 30-year Treasuries, for example, paid over 9% in early ’86) would have soundly beaten the Enerplus distributions over the years and appreciated significantly in value rather than giving you a 54.1% loss on the original ’86 investment.
<<Quite simply looking at 4 years of data concerning the trusts and saying that that shows a complete picture of the trusts is nonsense. Further nonsense to that would be basing ones investing decisions on such a small sampling of all that is available.>>
I never suggested any such thing!!! In fact, as I tried to demonstrate above (since you failed to produce a single piece of that <<longer term data which shows things so much better>> other than your brilliant purchase near the lows), longer-term data can be very informative indeed. Anybody delving into it would see, for example, that the longer-term performance numbers cited in the ERF internalization NR are just as cherry-picked & promotional as your bunkum. They showed the 1 year return, which is fine, but based the 3-year return on the old Enerplus stock price (when everything else has been restated to reflect the Enermark reverse takeover – a little $4.43/unit gain there), skipped the 5-year period completely, but chose to show the 10-year period - because at the end of 1992 Enerplus was at $15, near its previous lows. Had they gone back to the end of1989, (when the predecessor four series of units merged into one, and the point that marks the starting point of the historical distributions dada presented at their site), the total 13-year return would be 452.3%. Still very respectable, and a fabulous comeback from the early disaster years (different management BTW) but not nearly as impressive as the touted ten-year total return of 749.1 %”.
Finally…
<<When it comes to the discussion at hand on RLI (reserve life). The evidence is quite clear (from past annual reports) for the longest trusts (going back to mid 80's) they show similar RLI.>>
… and on that basis, I suppose, you duck LLCF’s genuine reserves question with a simplistic…
<<For me its not that grave of an issue. An issue to be sure but no more or less than any other. And what it comes down to is ,am I going to keep getting that high monthly income each and every month or not. I am. And that is all that is of concern to me -------à>
That just shows what a true simpleton you are and why the OilpatchUpdates site with its simply presented data (5-years’ worth in the case of ERF, by the way, not 4 - ‘98 to ’02 = 5 years) can be of such value even to a pompous amateur analyst like you.
It’s not the fact that RLI can be maintained that is in question here – it is the cost at which it is done that should concern you. It is precisely this cost of replenishing reserves, mainly in the form of dilution, that affects YOUR share of the trust’s production on which your monthly distributions are based.
Here is a simple example: If you go to the dropdown menus at the top of the Profile Page stats and put in the years 2002 & 1998 side by side in the first 2 columns, you will see that at the end of 2002 ERF had 82.9 million units outstanding vs. the 18.5 million at the end of 1998. Being a clever fellow, you will no doubt be able to calculate from the other numbers there that even though the RLI (reserves life index) actually increased, on a per unit basis, proved reserves have decreased some 42 % over the same period. (From 6.023 to 3.477 barrels of oil equivalent, to be exact.) That is the cost of dilution.
Similarly, while the trust’s absolute production has gone up 129%, on a per unit (year-end O/S) basis, it has declined 49 %. Blinded by high commodity prices, which for a period of time can mask these declines, many people don’t pay much attention to this type of dilution either.
Since high income seems to be your chief interest, to put it all together and simplify it for you there’s a neat little item at the bottom of the left hand columns called Prod. Lev. - Boe/$1000. If you click on that term, it will take you to a definitions page where you will learn that the number that goes with it represents the number of Boe's of annual production a $1,000 investment buys you at the current share prices.
From that you could easily calculate what your income would be if…
Hell, the instructions are there below the definition and I am out of time.
Give it a try and you’ll see what a bit of thought and 5 years of data could tell you.
Check it out!!!
oilpatchupdates.com |
