zippy1 Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 quarterly out! http://finance.yahoo.com/news/chesapeake-energy-quarterly-profit-slashing-121708244.html Feb 25 (Reuters) - Chesapeake Energy Corp on Wednesday said it would slash its 2015 spending in response to low crude oil prices and reported a fourth-quarter profit compared with a year-earlier loss as results were boosted by hedging gains. Chesapeake reported a profit of $586 million, or 81 cents per share, compared with a loss of $159 million or 24 cents per share in the same period a year earlier. Chesapeake also said it expects total capital expenditures of $4 billion to $4.5 billion this year, down from $6.7 billion in 2014. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eye4Valu Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 CHK looking pretty cheap here near $15. Throwing the baby out with the bath water? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plato1976 Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 After all these non-core assets divesture, is CHK now a low-cost producer? I guess so for natural gas but how about oil? CHK looking pretty cheap here near $15. Throwing the baby out with the bath water? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frugalchief Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 It's been 6-7 years since I last read up on CHK, besides when the change happened when Aubrey left. I'm just now starting to bury my head into the 10K's to catch up and read all the posts in this thread to put my investment thesis together. Do ya'll still find the business cheap at the current price? Any issues going on to help speed me up? I've heard a few reports here and there over the years that the new management has been doing a decent job getting CHK more square and reducing debt. Appreciate the help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
argonaut Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 I bought in around May 2012 and counted myself lucky..............until last summer/fall....now back down to unfortunately just below what I purchased it at...with that trivia written... The new mgmt has done everything they said they would -- cleaned up the balance sheet, sold some things, spun off a company and seems very dedicated to creating an investment grade company...As you probably know, they were fortuitous in selling another section late last year...which gives them a chunk of liquidity...i think they are well situated...how long it will take to rise to fair value (which I believe is still substantially more than market price)...who knows.... in May 2012 I counted it in my easy pile...still there in 2015 but a little off center :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frugalchief Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Haven't gotten into a nitty-gritty analysis on the numbers side, but I do like what management has done. My risk meter exploded every time I'd read about Aubrey and he relentless spending/debt habits. I'm happy they divested of some of those non-core assets so they can concentrate more on their core areas that have better potential. Cleaning up the balance sheet and working on liquidity has been nice. I'm hoping they can continue to do so and get rid of more long-term debt I don't know much about the marketing, gathering, and compression business - but is there no way to make that more profitable? I understand it's an industry that requires heavy investments in the long-life assets, but it seems like they can have a nice niche there, if profitability could improve. All that said, it looks attractive at it's current price ($13.60). But their leases and operations have a ton of value there. Just haven't digged in there either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frugalchief Posted March 22, 2015 Share Posted March 22, 2015 One fascinating thing about CHK in 2014 was the sale of the noncore assets: Marcellus Shale & Utica Shale to Southwestern Energy Company: Proceeds of $5 billion Sold 413,000 net acres 1,500 wells (435 are in Marcellus/Utica formations) Daily net production of 57,000 boe Net proved reserves of 221 mmboe (which was 8% of CHK proved reserves) In addition, CHK's decrease in reserves was 209 mmboe (8%). Basically, their net decrease was from the sale of these assets. If that is even comparable (yes and no), that could put value of CHK's reserves at $60 billion based on that sale. Being non-core assets however, I believe the value is higher than that for their current holdings. They currently record the present value of reserves at $22 billion at current average prices. (Oil and Gas prices should be higher in long-term). Even discounting the reserves for a margin of safety (or if I'm that wrong), CHK would be worth $25-30 billion IMO. They even produced approx. $4 billion FCF last year. While this isn't a given every year (because of heavy asset sales in 2014), I think current management is on track to continue trying to deliver this by reducing cap ex and concentrating on generating cash while reducing debt. Selling for half of book value too. $1 billion share repurchase is authorized. Some of the many things going for CHK right now. I realize a lot of their debt is cheap, but it'd be nice to see some of that paid off to rid them of the liability. They have the $4 billion revolving facility (can increase $1 billion with approval) which could satisfy their needs in a few years once more issues are cleaned up. Am I wrong anywhere? Anything I may be missing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItsAValueTrap Posted March 22, 2015 Share Posted March 22, 2015 I would be careful about CHK's reserve estimation. - Read through their CORRESP filings. They seem to be very aggressive about assuming how long the wells will be economic. - Their behind-pipe reserves may be dubious given that shale is so new. In the past, Chesapeake made a lot of absolutely brilliant deals. They sold their acreage at very good terms and retained drilling carries. The royalty deals (they've since dropped Chesapeake from their names) were very favorable to CHK. These are short selling favorites. The midstream stuff with ACMP was very favorable to Chesapeake. I'm not sure if they're good at extracting hydrocarbons at a profit though. McClendon also wasted some money on beekeepers, chaplains, olympic hopefuls, real estate development, CHK buying his antique map collection, everybody flying around on corporate jets (including Lou Simpson), etc. etc. So CHK might be better now because the new CEO got rid of a lot of that stuff without telling shareholders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorpRaider Posted March 23, 2015 Share Posted March 23, 2015 Mr. Icahn just filed amended 13D, showing + ~6MM shares. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/895126/000092846415000015/chksch13damd5032315.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoch01 Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Please go down more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorpRaider Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Man, I might have to buy a little of this one. Are credit spreads blowing out like it is going to zero or anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeerBBQ Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Does anyone have any insights into the specifics of the midstream commitments issue, covenant issues, and/or other issues supporting the short case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted July 7, 2015 Share Posted July 7, 2015 Please go down more! Got your wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeerBBQ Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Anybody have a summary/bullet points of the Bernstein note put out today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tede02 Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 This has been like catching a falling knife. I personally think cutting the dividend is a good thing. I've never understood why companies with negative cash flow continue paying dividends. Perhaps I should rephrase that last sentence. I understand why they keep paying dividends even with negative cash flow, but I think its stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbluffzinc Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I agree that cutting the dividend was the only thing to do... I don't see any way the shares aren't worth substantially more than $8.50 per share so I initiated a position here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jawn619 Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I agree that cutting the dividend was the only thing to do... I don't see any way the shares aren't worth substantially more than $8.50 per share so I initiated a position here... Care to show your work on how you value CHK? The company has a fair amount of debt so it would be interesting to see how people come up with A valuation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeerBBQ Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Here's a recent view from a SA article: http://seekingalpha.com/article/3347015-chesapeake-energy-if-you-were-disappointed-by-the-recent-news-dont-be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gokou3 Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 The preferred D is at $60 now.. better risk/reward? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchman Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 Has anyone done any work on this one recently? Will they survive if oil prices stay low for another year or so? Seems like they'd have to sell big chunks of the company to stay afloat. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccplz Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 More than 80% of revenues comes from natural gas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbluffzinc Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 The company is unlikely to even have to draw on their credit revolver this year of $4B and anticipates funding operations from the cash of $2B. Q1 capex was inflated and Q2 capex should come down alongside the rest of the year. 18% of production is oil and 71% is natural gas which from my perspective is a much better place to be given that NG is an isolated market in the US and that will be changing... Thereby (hopefully) increasing demand without a corresponding increase in supply. The question you have to answer is can CHK make it to the other side, which you can actually see (2018) for natural gas producers if you subscribe to the view that exports will increase the local price.. That's not evident in pure play oil companies. (A relatively obvious catalyst) Given that you have what I consider a great capital allocator determined to do get to the other side, it becomes (somewhat similar to sears) a liquidation and asset value story only it's one where the assets are much more liquid. I had lower asset values than the article mentioned on the prior page, but I still had CHK being a 2x from these levels. I do my work by hand in a journal, so I can't (won't bother) uploading. I thought about things similarly to the article that came out the day I was asked to expand on my thesis. The asset value here is > $16 per share and the assets are liquid. Management has proven they're liquid by doing what I'm outlining, selling them. I don't know if they can liquidate all of them but I'm comfortable with the notion that they can liquidate enough to get to the other side of natural gas prices. I view this as 2 ways to win. 1 is pricing recovers quickly and this is all moot. 2 is they don't and they continue liquidating the assets for > $8/share net of debt. I don't believe they will come anywhere close to a liquidity crisis based on what management has outlined in their 10Q, their history of focusing on preservation over satisfying their investor base (cutting their dividend), and liquidating assets. (This is happening every quarter) The two investors who know the assets better than any outside investor would likely be their biggest shareholders, Carl Icahn who recently made a purchase of CHK common and Mason Hawkins/Staley Cates who have held their position flat after adjusting for exposure to options. The fact that Icahn was a net buyer at 12 and not a net seller at 30 gives me confidence in the asset values that I need to be there showing up as they liquidate ( I need confidence here because I believe they're dramatically higher than what everyone else seems to think they are). To sum it up I think Q1 overstated their cash burn & we'll see that on August 5th. I think people are over-focused on earnings and are under-emphasizing the asset value that's there and being surfaced by management. I think management will control costs as outlined and will avoid the use of its credit revolver this year. I think its two largest shareholders are a potential last ditch source of liquidity as they're exposure is tied to equity. And I'm bullish on natural gas three years out. At anything below $10 per share I think this is a no-brainer and sold a position I liked to get into this. Relative to peers CHK is trading at a huge discount with low-cost canadian players trading down 50% after adjusting for currency and chesapeake trading down 75%.. Superficially that may sound close, but that's 50% cut in half again... So it's a massive difference... The only thing I don't like is the nature of the business. So I won't be holding this position to realize full value, but for now it's too cheap to ignore in my view. I legitimately think that nothing could happen and we could see prices 50% higher on August 1st for basically no reason other than this is too cheap.. That may be naively optimistic but that's the reason I'm invested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Pitch Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 What are the odds that a company like Exxon would step in with a buyout offer? With all the LNG exports that's coming online in the next couple years... CHK might be a steal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbluffzinc Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Yeah didn't write out some of the other ways I think it's a win.. One of which is they get acquired.. I don't think they could be acquired for sub $15 per share because I think the two major shareholders would veto it... (A further testament to the value/share or an obstacle depending on how you view it). I also feel like there may have been some forced selling from shareholders that don't hold stocks that don't pay dividends.. And that for the most part the reason the opportunity exists is because people are (in my view) misinterpreting the dividend cut or placing a lot of weight on something I consider immaterial. I don't at all see it as an emergency rush to save $240M, I see it as a rational (inevitable) capital allocation decision.. The business became less likely to have liquidity issues from my perspective, because they canceled their dividend. The business became more robust, because they did this, not less... The business sold another asset, highlighting the value that's there, and alleviating further potential liquidity concerns... And the response is that shares trade down 33% in a week. People who are terrified that it means more are selling first and asking questions about why later. I had no position before it dropped to $8.30 so I'm not rationalizing away a loss.. I think that when it's clear the business isn't going broke it'll trade up 50% with no improvement in the asset base or anything else.. It would be a 12% position for me if the business/industry itself wasn't so crummy.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wellmont Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 What are the odds that a company like Exxon would step in with a buyout offer? With all the LNG exports that's coming online in the next couple years... CHK might be a steal. they generally don't go anywhere near controversial assets. 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