muscleman Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 Thanks a lot! Looks like you have already done the homework! So we would expect the result to come out in mid March? Why do Calyle and Riverstone hold exactly the same share count? That must be some kind of duplicate. I just pulled the holders list straight from Bloomberg, and sometimes there are errors in the data. I don't have a view/position on SD, but wanted to help out. There you go.... http://holdings.nasdaq.com/asp/Institutional.asp?FormType=Institutional&symbol=SD&Selected=SD This data is the same as the excel file that thomcapital pulled out. I am very confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 Does anyone have a detailed breakdown of the major shareholders? See attached... Thanks. Looks like Allan Mecham bought 1806134 shares in Q4 2012. ~$10 million… http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/the-400-man!/ Thanks a lot! Where did you get that data? From sec.gov, I searched for Arlington Value Management, and couldn't find anything like 13HR. That sounds amazing given the fund only has 20 M under management currently. Oh...... I just realized that the original post is pretty old. Do you know the current size of this fund? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alertmeipp Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 ISS recommends removing SandRidge board, Bloomberg reports Will be interesting to see how FFH will vote. In FBK case, they own big chunk of RFP and FBK's management didn't delivery, so they logically support RFP over MERC's. Now what... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clestor Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 Riverstone/Carlyle Energy Partners IV, L.P. owns 51,370,888 shares of Sandridge. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1349436/000119312512171010/d337799dsc13g.htm The holdings lists posted previously from Bloomberg and NASDAQ are double-counting this position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 Riverstone/Carlyle Energy Partners IV, L.P. owns 51,370,888 shares of Sandridge. http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1349436/000119312512171010/d337799dsc13g.htm The holdings lists posted previously from Bloomberg and NASDAQ are double-counting this position. That is for April 2012. I think they no longer have the position. http://www.riverstonellc.com/Investments.aspx For any hedge funds or mutual funds that don't have a long lockup period, I think they will all vote for yes for the immediate gain. Otherwise there would be too much pressure from their investors. For firms like FFH that has permanent capital, they can afford to wait longer, so they have the chance to vote no. Retail investors may vote yes or no, and they may even be confused about the green card vs the white card. So there is some uncertainty here on the retail side. I think the total hedge fund + mutual fund ownership is over 40%? (Excluding Riverstone and FFH) Then the chance to pass the vote is pretty high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alertmeipp Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 So, I want SD to fix the issues that TPG raised, but I am not sure about some of its candidates TPG proposed. TW would have been a hero if Miss plays out as hoped. (i.e. 100%+ IRR, not 40%.) So I am not sure what to do, and no action means supporting existing management. But a close but defeating vote will also send the signal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 So, I want SD to fix the issues that TPG raised, but I am not sure about some of its candidates TPG proposed. TW would have been a hero if Miss plays out as hoped. (i.e. 100%+ IRR, not 40%.) So I am not sure what to do, and no action means supporting existing management. But a close but defeating vote will also send the signal. Do you see any sign that TW would address those issues? I only see that they blatantly denied all issues. Regarding operations, this is not offshore. How difficult is it to operate the land drilling? I think even if we replace TW with a monkey, it is better for the shareholders. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longlake95 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Boy, is the mud fly'in today on the newswires TPG vs. SD/TW. Even the proxy firms are joining in.... http://finance.yahoo.com/news/egan-jones-recommends-sandridge-stockholders-141200867.html http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/texelart/texelart1112/texelart111200017/11790791-businessmen-in-a-boxing-match.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Boy, is the mud fly'in today on the newswires TPG vs. SD/TW. Even the proxy firms are joining in.... http://finance.yahoo.com/news/egan-jones-recommends-sandridge-stockholders-141200867.html Yeah this is getting funny. After ISS recommended voting for TPG's plan last Friday, TW found this random firm that recommends rejection of the TPG's plan, but the reason for the rejection is quite funny. It does not mention anything about TPG's allegations. I think it is a pretty weak one. The result will come out in Mid-March, right? If TPG fails, can it reassemble another vote soon? I think hedge funds are taking this opportunity to buy more, up to the 10% limit. Then they can reassemble another vote and make even more money in that way, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longlake95 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 I think the vote goes "green", there are enough dis-satisfied holders out there to side with TPG. I'm no expert on Delaware law, but I think TPG can put forward another slate of directors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 I think the vote goes "green", there are enough dis-satisfied holders out there to side with TPG. I'm no expert on Delaware law, but I think TPG can put forward another slate of directors. As I said, even if the entire board plus TW are replaced with monkeys, shareholders are probably better off. Why? Because the business is so easy that it doesn't need a highly paid "genius" to run it. So the argument that TPG's proposed new members are inexperienced is weak. A board of monkeys will do more benefits than the current toxic and corrupted board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longlake95 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Agreed!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 I have this feeling that TW is in tight with this one. Sentiment seems to reside with removing him. I'll start a poll. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sampr01 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Sanjeev Do you have any stake in SD... thanks I have this feeling that TW is in tight with this one. Sentiment seems to reside with removing him. I'll start a poll. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Sanjeev Do you have any stake in SD... thanks I have this feeling that TW is in tight with this one. Sentiment seems to reside with removing him. I'll start a poll. Cheers! Yes, we bought a nice slug on Thursday, after long deliberation and trying to make sense of all of this. We won't get to vote, but I think the assets are undervalued...the best I can tell...and markets will be pleased with whatever way the vote ends up going. They should have plenty of cash after completion of the Sandridge E&P sale, so that sort of took care of one of my qualms for a long-time. I'm somewhat agnostic on Tom...I like the guy and his abilities, but I'm not keen on his compensation or the numerous related party/conflict of interest deals. If you look at it in terms of "Could the reputation and ethics be beyond reproach, if they took this manner of compensation and removed the sweet-heart deals?" The natural prelude to that question is then "wouldn't any shareholder or ethical CEO want that?" Maybe removing Tom is not such a great idea, but I think adding other voices to the board is almost dutifully warranted if that is what we expect from CEO's at Berkshire or Fairfax, and the CEO's of any other company we invest in. Buffett and his kind have set the bar very high...maybe too high...but it is now set there. That may be at the peril of other CEO's! Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wisdom Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 Impact of shale on oil prices and renewables - pwc study http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/14/shale-oil-threat-renewables-pwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardboard Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 What is your target price under the following scenarios and assuming no change to current energy prices? 1- The company is sold. 2- The assets are all sold but, separately. 3- New management is put in place and the company is run to maximize free cash flow. I have not had much luck with what appeared to be cheap oil & gas companies in the past. Although, they were smaller than SD which should help with unexpected negative surprises on depletion or exploration. So I am kind of lazy here and would like your opinions on upside potential before digging much deeper into SD. ::) Cardboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nestorius Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 *GLASS LEWIS RECOMMENDS REMOVING SIX SANDRIDGE DIRECTORS :SD US *GLASS LEWIS RECOMMENDATIONS ON SANDRIDGE IN REPORT :SD US *SANDRIDGE BOARD 'IN NEED OF NEW PERSPECTIVE' GLASS LEWIS SAYS *GLASS LEWIS CITES LAND DEALS WITH SANDRIDGE CEO'S FAMILY :SD US I'm sure TPG-Axon will be out with a press release shortly. With ISS and G-L in hand, you can probably tally most if not all of the more passive holders onto TPG's side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fareastwarriors Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 glass report1394871.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muscleman Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 Sanjeev Do you have any stake in SD... thanks I have this feeling that TW is in tight with this one. Sentiment seems to reside with removing him. I'll start a poll. Cheers! Yes, we bought a nice slug on Thursday, after long deliberation and trying to make sense of all of this. We won't get to vote, but I think the assets are undervalued...the best I can tell...and markets will be pleased with whatever way the vote ends up going. They should have plenty of cash after completion of the Sandridge E&P sale, so that sort of took care of one of my qualms for a long-time. I'm somewhat agnostic on Tom...I like the guy and his abilities, but I'm not keen on his compensation or the numerous related party/conflict of interest deals. If you look at it in terms of "Could the reputation and ethics be beyond reproach, if they took this manner of compensation and removed the sweet-heart deals?" The natural prelude to that question is then "wouldn't any shareholder or ethical CEO want that?" Maybe removing Tom is not such a great idea, but I think adding other voices to the board is almost dutifully warranted if that is what we expect from CEO's at Berkshire or Fairfax, and the CEO's of any other company we invest in. Buffett and his kind have set the bar very high...maybe too high...but it is now set there. That may be at the peril of other CEO's! Cheers! Do you think it is possible that Prem has not done his due diligence on SD before buying so many shares? I think it is very unlikely. But why did he buy with the facts in mind that TW has done a lot of things that hurt the shareholders, and kept quite for so long? He started buying SD since a few years ago. If TPG didn't stand up for the fight, will FFH tolerate TW for a few more years? You can say that recently Prem said he backs TW up but maybe he had some private talks with TW to ask him to clean the shit up. But why didn't he start the private talks with TW a few years ago? If he did tell TW to correct himself a few years ago and things didn't improve for a few years, why would he still back up TW? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 What is your target price under the following scenarios and assuming no change to current energy prices? 1- The company is sold. 2- The assets are all sold but, separately. 3- New management is put in place and the company is run to maximize free cash flow. I have not had much luck with what appeared to be cheap oil & gas companies in the past. Although, they were smaller than SD which should help with unexpected negative surprises on depletion or exploration. So I am kind of lazy here and would like your opinions on upside potential before digging much deeper into SD. ::) Cardboard The assets are worth at least double what they are trading for. Under any of those circumstances, the stock moves up 50% quickly. I think Tom is out based on sentiment. How can we as Berkshire and Fairfax shareholders justify some of the points brought up by TPG? I suspect without immediate changes they lose this proxy. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardboard Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Thanks Sanjeev. Wasn't Tom Ward who was at a Fairfax shareholders meeting a few years back? Didn't he have dinner with you guys too and Francis Chou? I would imagine that he had been invited by Prem. I would understand Prem to be loyal to his friends and business partners, but he must feel betrayed by now if these allegations are anywhere close to the truth. It will be interesting to see how he reacts. If he keeps supporting him then I will feel very confused. Cardboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berkshiremystery Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Thanks Sanjeev. Wasn't Tom Ward who was at a Fairfax shareholders meeting a few years back? Didn't he have dinner with you guys too and Francis Chou? I would imagine that he had been invited by Prem. I would understand Prem to be loyal to his friends and business partners, but he must feel betrayed by now if these allegations are anywhere close to the truth. It will be interesting to see how he reacts. If he keeps supporting him then I will feel very confused. Cardboard Cardboard,... Of course Tom Ward was at last years FFH shareholders dinner... http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/fairfax-financial/two-days-in-toronto-fairfax-dinner-fairfax-agm/msg75606/#msg75606 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Thanks Sanjeev. Wasn't Tom Ward who was at a Fairfax shareholders meeting a few years back? Didn't he have dinner with you guys too and Francis Chou? I would imagine that he had been invited by Prem. I would understand Prem to be loyal to his friends and business partners, but he must feel betrayed by now if these allegations are anywhere close to the truth. It will be interesting to see how he reacts. If he keeps supporting him then I will feel very confused. Cardboard Tom hasn't done anything unethical. He's just overcompensated, and boards have agreed to that compensation, including things like the well participation program that they had at Chesapeake and now at SD. That's no different than the hundreds of other companies where CEO's feel they should get what they deserve. If blame belongs anywhere, it belongs with the board of directors for not doing their job...in particular the compensation committee. And that's the risk you take as a CEO, because if your compensation isn't in line with performance, then you risk having a revolt by the shareholders. SD is now feeling that wrath, started by TPG...and in my opinion, rightfully so...when you examine the compensation structure versus the industry, and the fact the board allowed these conflicts of interest to permeate the business. This will end how it should end...with a shareholder vote. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardboard Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Well Sanjeev, I have to disagree. If he bought land adjacent to SD for next to nothing, then let SD take all the risks of proving reserves on their own land and developing infrastructure that Tom's land could eventually benefit from knowing and making all the decisions about such effort then it sounds to me like a major conflict of interest and highly unethical. On top of that, some parcels apparently have been bought then resold quickly to SD at much higher prices. Smells pretty bad to me. Not the kind of guy that is willing to eat the same returns offered to SD shareholders. There is CEO compensation, but this is something totally different. Even worst than insider trading if there is some truth to it. Cardboard 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