doc75 Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 An investor takes all available information; then makes a decision. It either works, or it doesn't (binary). Whether we think the supporting information is questionable (trust), or even emperical (physics), speaks to our confidence in the probable outcome, not the outcome itself. We are not determing probability weighted expected value, we're simply recognizing that value is either 1 (the investment worked) or 0 (the investment did not work). Red came up six spins in a row; therefore the next spin will be red? Of course not, the next spin will be EITHER red OR black (50% probability) - no matter how much history you have. "Past performance is not a predictor of future performance" The only exception is where physical laws apply. Gravity always pulls things towards it, day follows night, etc. SD 100% chance this is 100% bullsh*t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharperDingaan Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 We just posted a voluntary disclosure notice. That's it. You're not obliged to act on it, & we're not obliged to comment. If this is a problem, we have a market for it. OBE is not a WEB type investment. Get over it. All we know is that there is no moat, tommorrows commodities price will be different from today's, and that you either have product to sell or you do not. Yesterdays coulda, shoulda, woulda decisions are spilt milk. An investor either comes to terms with this, or shouldn't be in this space. WEB posits that good results reflects good management. Yet there are currently a great many commodity companies with excellent managements, trading at lower market values than even a year ago. Definitive evidence that the value of a commodity company is based more on the value of its product, than the quality of its management. Quality does matter, but price trumps it. Fundamental, & technical analysis posits that we can predict future price, based on history. We use this everyday; to produce market reports that might say there is an 80% probabilty that the current price of X could go up 90% within one-year, and only a 20% probability that the current price of X could go down 15% within one-year; therefore buy X. There is no such thing as 50/50 - that's just idiotic!! Really? If I buy X today, and hold it for the one-year as prescribed; there are only two possible outcomes, I either make money, or I lose it. Statistics posits that if I do this (coin-flip) many, many times - the probability of either outcome will approach 50%. But if the pre-specified outcome comes up more than 50% of the time, I must be generating alpha, and should be comped for it. 50/50 implies that I'm just lucky, & have no skill. All we can do is look forward; and estimate production, decline rates, commodity prices and costs to come to a FFO. And an estimate as to price, X months from now. After that the market just proves us either right or wrong. In our accounts, the 'lucky' and the 'skilled' dollars look the same. SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 Sometimes I think SD is just trolling us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roundball100 Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 Liberty, I think you nailed it with your explanation about the sun coming up. I will be flipping that darned coin an awful lot of times before the getting the outcome "the sun did not come up today". Anyone who doesn't understand this should probably not be investing their own, or anyone else's money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc75 Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 If I buy X today, and hold it for the one-year as prescribed; there are only two possible outcomes, I either make money, or I lose it. Statistics posits that if I do this (coin-flip) many, many times - the probability of either outcome will approach 50%. But if the pre-specified outcome comes up more than 50% of the time, I must be generating alpha, and should be comped for it. 50/50 implies that I'm just lucky, & have no skill. No, it really doesn't. You are picking stocks, looking at % of picks that make money (as opposed to net amount of money made) and then comparing your success with a sequence of random coin flips. This is mathematical insanity. To be clear, I'm commenting only on your abuse of probability, not on the PWE investment thesis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharperDingaan Posted March 23, 2019 Share Posted March 23, 2019 "You are picking stocks, looking at % of picks that make money (as opposed to net amount of money made) and then comparing your success with a sequence of random coin flips. This is mathematical insanity." Per the random coin flips. Make 'heads'= made money, and 'tails' = lose money. The win/lose % outcome is identical to the coin flip, and the more times you flip/play, the more each outcome will trend to 50% Therefore at 50% 'wins' - your 'investment process' is no better than a coin flip. Highly relevant, and ouch! Per the net amount of money made. This is just win % x average $ win - lose % x average $ loss. You can only come out ahead if EITHER your win % is > 50%, OR your average $ win is > your average $ loss. Skill, particularly if you're using derivatives to leverage your gains/losses. We spoke ONLY to the coin flip - does your process produce a win % > 50% or not? Were this hockey; are at least 50% of your shots, shots on net? We said nothing about average $ win or loss The where you are placing your shots on the net No abuse of statistics. SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc75 Posted March 23, 2019 Share Posted March 23, 2019 "You are picking stocks, looking at % of picks that make money (as opposed to net amount of money made) and then comparing your success with a sequence of random coin flips. This is mathematical insanity." Per the random coin flips. Make 'heads'= made money, and 'tails' = lose money. The win/lose % outcome is identical to the coin flip, and the more times you flip/play, the more each outcome will trend to 50% Therefore at 50% 'wins' - your 'investment process' is no better than a coin flip. Highly relevant, and ouch! ... No abuse of statistics. SD This is a statistical #metoo moment for sure. You seem to believe "binary outcomes" are equivalent to independent flips of a fair coin. I don't know what to say. You're writing nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharperDingaan Posted March 23, 2019 Share Posted March 23, 2019 A numbers example. I flip 100 fair coins of $1 each. If the coin comes up heads I get my coin back plus 1 more. If the coin comes up tails I lose my coin 50 heads come up returning 100 coins, and 50 tails come up returning zero coins. I spent $100 to get back $100. No net change. I buy 100 calls on different stocks, with the same time horizon, and the SAME price of $1 (different strikes, volatilities, etc). 70 of them expire worthless (academic research finding), 30 expire in the money returning an AVERAGE of $3.33 each (total monies recieved/30). I spent $100 to get back $100. No net change. The point? The outcome of the derivative bet is identical to the coin flip. No net change. Hard evidence that the derivative 'investment process' is no better than the coin flip. SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc75 Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 A numbers example. I flip 100 fair coins of $1 each. If the coin comes up heads I get my coin back plus 1 more. If the coin comes up tails I lose my coin 50 heads come up returning 100 coins, and 50 tails come up returning zero coins. I spent $100 to get back $100. No net change. I buy 100 calls on different stocks, with the same time horizon, and the SAME price of $1 (different strikes, volatilities, etc). 70 of them expire worthless (academic research finding), 30 expire in the money returning an AVERAGE of $3.33 each (total monies recieved/30). I spent $100 to get back $100. No net change. The point? The outcome of the derivative bet is identical to the coin flip. No net change. Hard evidence that the derivative 'investment process' is no better than the coin flip. SD The fact that you view your example as "evidence" of anything is both telling and alarming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spekulatius Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 A numbers example. I flip 100 fair coins of $1 each. If the coin comes up heads I get my coin back plus 1 more. If the coin comes up tails I lose my coin 50 heads come up returning 100 coins, and 50 tails come up returning zero coins. I spent $100 to get back $100. No net change. I buy 100 calls on different stocks, with the same time horizon, and the SAME price of $1 (different strikes, volatilities, etc). 70 of them expire worthless (academic research finding), 30 expire in the money returning an AVERAGE of $3.33 each (total monies recieved/30). I spent $100 to get back $100. No net change. The point? The outcome of the derivative bet is identical to the coin flip. No net change. Hard evidence that the derivative 'investment process' is no better than the coin flip. SD The fact that you view your example as "evidence" of anything is both telling and alarming. Maybe it’s just me, but I can make less and less sense of SharperDingaans posts, starting at about the same time when marijuana got legalized in Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharperDingaan Posted March 24, 2019 Share Posted March 24, 2019 We just dont like the use being made. We're not publishing a proof, and this is not a classroom. To each his own SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc75 Posted March 25, 2019 Share Posted March 25, 2019 We just dont like the use being made. We're not publishing a proof, and this is not a classroom. To each his own SD Math doesn't work that way. What you said is simply nonsense --- in any room, let alone a classroom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardboard Posted March 25, 2019 Share Posted March 25, 2019 "Maybe it’s just me, but I can make less and less sense of SharperDingaans posts, starting at about the same time when marijuana got legalized in Canada." Trust me it goes way further than that. Ask some of the folks who were mislead by his comments on SFK Pulp... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Checking in again on this one out of curiosity. Still down 70% from last year, 97% past 5 years. Doesn't look like its getting much leverage from improving price of oil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe689 Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Nope, still a s*it show. ER tomorrow with new management. Maybe we finally hear the kiss of death, 'strategic alternatives' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe689 Posted May 20, 2019 Share Posted May 20, 2019 Announce sale of non-core asset and then today announces "Obsidian Energy Announces Fixed Income Investor Meetings" "Following these meetings, and subject to market conditions and acceptable terms, a 5-year senior unsecured bond issue of up to US$100 million (the “Bond Issue“) may take place. The proceeds from the Bond Issue would be used to refinance Obsidian Energy’s existing US$48 million secured notes as at May 31, 2019 maturing between 2020 to 2025 and for general corporate purposes." So day 1 they make sale to decrease leverage, and then day 2, add more leverage? huh? anybody help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
constala Posted May 20, 2019 Share Posted May 20, 2019 the benefit would not be so much in the leverage but in the balance sheet quality- a senior unsecured placed with retail and minor institutions with 5 year bullet maturity would be better than the syndicated bank loan facility. Less constraints/covenants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe689 Posted May 20, 2019 Share Posted May 20, 2019 They said they would use it to refinance the existing 48M in secured notes. I assume that means eliminate those secured notes? I see than advantage of going from secured to non secured, and getting rid of covenants. But if they get 100M, that is a lot more than the 48M existing notes. What are the doing with the ret of the cash? Their bank facility is 378M used. They not getting rid of this bank loan facility. They would need more than the residual left from the existing refinance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe689 Posted May 20, 2019 Share Posted May 20, 2019 Could they really be borrowing to buyback shares? That would be wild and reckless. They have a reverse split coming up. This is a mystery to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharperDingaan Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 Just a voluntary disclosure that we have again materially added to our position. Per the AGM Meeting Presentation, p3; 2PNPV10 is CAD 1702 MM, pre PR disposition - or CAD 3.34/share [1702/510] As at Dec 2018, adjusted for net debt, 2PNPV10 was CAD 2.40/share We anticipate that the decline in 2PNPV10 resulting from the PR sale, is largely offset by proceeds paying down debt. A wash. Resulting in an asset worth CAD 2.40, purchasable for CAD 0.28-0.30 - or 12c on the dollar [.29/2.40] Not a lot of risk. SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe689 Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 Yet no one is interested whether a corporate buyer or investor. It is worth noting that the reserve values are based on a inflated WTI price deck by Sproule. Also Ed Par dif is higher than historical averages. I'd like to see the reserves valued at a flat 55 wti and using current 8 diffs. Then am I mistaken but the reserve values do not include any ARO which in OBE case is very large. When comparing to peers, it is really cheap but the stock is falling like a rock in water. What will stop it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharperDingaan Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Yet no one is interested whether a corporate buyer or investor. It is worth noting that the reserve values are based on a inflated WTI price deck by Sproule. Also Ed Par dif is higher than historical averages. I'd like to see the reserves valued at a flat 55 wti and using current 8 diffs. Then am I mistaken but the reserve values do not include any ARO which in OBE case is very large. When comparing to peers, it is really cheap but the stock is falling like a rock in water. What will stop it? Reserve valuation is just an external estimate at a point in time; updated every year because actuals will not be the same as the estimates. Difference is expected, but absent a major price collapse it is seldom more than 10-15%. Still very cheap. What will stop it? Turn over the shareholder base, and show results. RS, debt reduction, successful refinancing, sale of Viking, FFO > 120M, etc. There may eventually be a sale, but not until after the pipeline expansions are actually built (maybe 3-5 yrs?). Not a popular view at the moment! SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 -45% YTD, -80% TTM. It just keeps going. At some point it'll go up 20% and the bulls will claim victory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roundball100 Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Liberty - but how can anything go wrong here? If I understand correctly (from others, not you), with this one we get an unlimited number of coin flips, and on every flip, by some magical force, we are guaranteed a 50% chance of being right. Isn't that the way it works? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spekulatius Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 -45% YTD, -80% TTM. It just keeps going. At some point it'll go up 20% and the bulls will claim victory. Thats how a beach house in St John becomes camping trip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now