Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Westfort Energy Ltd. (WT-T) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bhg who wrote (634)	6/24/1998 11:23:00 PM
From: floj	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1288

Hi: bhg I've been tracking WT's trend since the beginning and was just trying to convey what the stock is currently doing and what it has to do next. These are the two required conditions to turn the stock back to a positive trend. In the past week the technicals have been suggesting that new buying has started coming in, now what we need is technical confirmation of this and I suspect we will get this sometime over the next several days. Flo J

To: bhg who wrote (634)	6/25/1998 12:15:00 AM
From: M. Merriam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1288

Here's the red flag in bhg's post: They see a company with 2 billion dollars in saleable assets, with only 35mm shares outstanding. That gives a per share value of over US$57. That's hype. Now, let's look at the company's own optimistic (some would say overly optimistic) projections: If successful, and I think that we will be, these wells will have a tremendous impact on the income to Westfort. While we do not expect to produce the wells at 2000 barrels per day, because we do not want to damage the formation, I believe that they will be produced at around 1000 barrels per day with over 1,000,000 cubic feet of gas per day. The income stream, even at today's prices will be in the neighborhood of $300,000 U.S. per month for each well, and we have the possibility of fourteen such wells on the drawing board. Income stream is not the same thing as bottom line, net income which results in earnings per share. Net income is after financing costs, administration costs, losses in other aspects of operations (like exploration), and taxes. But let's pretend that none of those will affect WT's bottom line. We have one well being drilled. US$300,000 profit/month is US$3.6 million over a year. That's about US$0.10/sh. (Irving Oil, step aside.) And remember, this is an optimistic projection. Now let's consider a real world where there are exploration costs to replace depletion, administration costs, financing costs, and yes, even taxes. And a world where (or so I've heard) reality sometimes falls short of a company's best projections. The result, lots of firms have operating profits but net losses. Any reason to think that WT won't be one of these? On their first well, maybe they'll make net 0.01/sh, maybe they'll lose net 0.01/sh, or maybe the hole will be dry and there'll be no first well, who knows? Before they can show what they can do with one well, isn't it a little premature to suggest that we have a US$2 billion company here? And here all along I thought it was only a speculative penny stock. Silly me. Mike

To: bhg who wrote (634)	6/26/1998 10:20:00 PM
From: Mr. Forthright	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1288

<<Thanks for the vote of confidence. From a technical standpoint, if WT goes over 2.38 it should go to 3 before it hits any resistance. But the technicals aren't what's running the show right now. The fact is, there are new buyers and more are on the way. These guys are players. They are not in it for a day trade. They see a company with 2 billion dollars in saleable assets, with only 35mm shares outstanding. That gives a per share value of over US$57. You now where it is today. The company is also being managed well; under budget and ahead of schedule while all overhead is being taken care of by pumping oil from a small shallow well. That's why these guys are buying...although there are other reasons as well. bhg >> 1) Who are the new buyers? 2) What makes you believe they are "players" not "in for a day trade"? 3) Where do you get the $2 billion of "saleable"(sic) assets or $57 per share? Thanks for your help.