Wave Analysis 02.05.2014 (DJIA Index, Crude Oil)

Article By RoboForex.com

Analysis for May 2nd, 2014

DJIA Index

Index is still moving close to its historic maximums. Earlier, after completing double three pattern inside wave [2], Index formed initial impulse inside wave [1]. Possibly, market has already completed correction inside the second wave and may continue moving upwards.

As we can see at the H1 chart, Index finished zigzag pattern inside wave (2). On minor wave level, price formed bullish impulse inside wave 1. In the near term, instrument is expected to move upwards and form extension inside wave 3.

Crude Oil

Oil continues falling down inside the third wave. Earlier price formed bearish impulse inside wave 1 and then completed wave 2. In the near term, instrument is expected to continue falling down and break minimum of the first wave.

More detailed wave structure is shown on H1 chart. After finishing double zigzag pattern inside wave 2, Oil formed descending impulse inside wave [1]. It looks like right now instrument is forming extension inside wave [3]. Price may reach new minimum during the day.

RoboForex Analytical Department

Article By RoboForex.com

Attention!
Forecasts presented in this section only reflect the author’s private opinion and should not be considered as guidance for trading. RoboForex LP bears no responsibility for trading results based on trading recommendations described in these analytical reviews.

 

 

 

 

Fibonacci Retracements Analysis 02.05.2014 (EUR/USD, USD/CHF)

Article By RoboForex.com

Analysis for May 2nd, 2014

EUR USD, “Euro vs US Dollar”

After rebounding from level of 50% (1.3788) several times, Eurodollar started growing up. Closest target for bulls is the group of fibo levels at 1.3955. In the future, price is expected to complete local correction and then break latest maximums.

As we can see at H1 chart, target of current correction is at level of 38.2% (1.3844). Possibly, market may rebound from this level inside temporary fibo-zone. If pair does rebound from this level, I’m planning to increase my long position.

USD CHF, “US Dollar vs Swiss Franc”

Franc is trying to start new descending movement. Earlier price rebounded from correctional level of 50%. Probably, bears’ next target is the group of fibo levels at 0.8695.

As we can see at H1 chart, target of current local correction is at level of 38.2% (0.8807). According to analysis of temporary fibo-zones, this correction may complete during the day. Intermediate target for bears is the group of fibo levels at 0.8755.

RoboForex Analytical Department

Article By RoboForex.com

Attention!
Forecasts presented in this section only reflect the author’s private opinion and should not be considered as guidance for trading. RoboForex LP bears no responsibility for trading results based on trading recommendations described in these analytical reviews.

 

 

 

 

 

GBPJPY: Sets Up For Further Recovery

GBPJPY: Sets Up For Further Recovery

GBPJPY – With the cross reversing its Wednesday losses on Thursday to close higher, further upside is now envisaged. In such a case, resistance comes in at the 173.13 level where a break will open the door for additional gains towards the 174.00 level. Further out, resistance stands at the 174.84 level and then the 175.50 level. Its daily RSI is bullish and pointing higher supporting this view. On the downside, support is located at the 171.93 level where a break will aim at the 170.00 level followed by the 169.49 level. A cut through here if seen will target the 168.63 level and then the 168.00 level. All in all, the cross remains biased to the upside in the long term.

Article by http://www.fxtechstrategy.com/daily-technical-strategist-on-gbpjpy-new-8

 

 

 

 

 

 

How to Avoid Getting Fleeced by This Dangerous Stock Market Myth

By MoneyMorning.com.au

I don’t buy into superstitions.

I have no problem with Friday the 13th. You won’t find a rabbit’s foot hanging from my computer screen. My family even owned a black cat when I was a kid.

I just don’t see any supernatural forces at work there.

I think it goes back to my university training in physics.

As a physicist, I was trained to rigorously apply the scientific method. That means I let reality speak for itself.

You support a theory when reality confirms its predictions…but when those predictions prove to be wrong, you tear that theory down.

That’s not only the secret to success in experimental physics. It’s also a solid basis for investing.

But investors are only human. We’re hardwired to look for patterns, even when none exist.

Especially at this time of year, you might have fallen into the trap of trading superstitiously.

Here’s my advice about how to avoid that trap…

Sell in May and go away,’ is one of the stock market’s great persisting superstitions.

Some punters believe this saying is steeped in logic because it comes with a colourful old story. Here’s where it comes from.

Once upon a time, it’s said that the entire London financial district enjoyed a leisurely European summer. They were more focused on sporting events than their clients’ portfolios.

That meant there were fewer people buying and selling shares. That means higher levels of volatility. And with the buyers on holiday, it’s said that gravity would pull the stock market down over the warmer months.

This situation would last until the end of the northern summer in September.

To be precise, the second half of the saying is ‘come back on St Leger’s Day.’ The St Leger Stakes is the oldest of England’s five horseracing classics and is the last to be run.

With the suntanned stockbrokers back in their offices, stocks would resume a smoother upwards ride each year in September.

Or so the story goes.

Look, I can vouch for the fact that the European trading floors go quiet over summer. When I sold US equities in London, on some summer days you could almost hear a pin drop.

But the facts simply don’t support this idea that stocks always go down in May.

Don’t buy or sell blindly

‘Sell in May’ advocates usually point to the last few years as evidence that their theory is valid.

And to be fair, in May of each year from 2010 to 2013, Australia’s benchmark S&P/ASX 200 index fell by -7.86%, -2.38%, -7.29% and -5.10%.

A blindly superstitious May seller would feel vindicated.

But I don’t buy or sell blindly.

I’m either in the market or out of it, based on the underlying fundamentals.

And there’s a fundamental reason for each shaky May in the past four years.

May 2010, if you remember, brought the ‘flash crash’ and a deeply unpredictable Greek debt crisis.

2011 saw a relatively benign May, but the European debt situation was still stressing out global investors that month.

May 2012 saw a sharp sell-off of emerging markets as political upheaval threatened the Greek bailout. On top of that, the Spanish conglomerate Bankia sought its own rescue.

And last May, then US Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke dropped his first hints that the Fed was thinking about slowing down its money printing presses.

But hey, let’s extend the retrospect by an extra year. If you’d chosen to sit out the six months from May 2009, you would have cost yourself almost 30% upside in the Australian, US and European stock markets. That was a huge result for large-cap stocks.

Here’s my point: when markets go up or down, there’s generally a fundamental reason that underpins the move.

Don’t bank on a coin flip

Stock markets are massively more sophisticated now than they were 100, 50 or even 20 years ago.

The days of lazy brokers nicking off to the polo and constraining the progress of an entire market are long gone.

So the colourful old story I told you earlier clearly has no basis as a reliable investment strategy.
There have been many, many years when “sell in May” hasn’t worked out.

And looking back over a 30-year period, it becomes a real flip of the coin. You can’t bank on that.

The statistics just don’t present a strong enough case for it.

I’m not trying to tell you that stocks always go up. I’m just saying there’s no room for emotion or superstition in the stock market.

When smarter investors catch wind of irrational behaviour, they exploit it ruthlessly. Don’t get sucked in.

Advice to profit

Here’s a strategy that outperforms ‘sell in May’, ‘buy before Halloween’ or any number of other bogus investment schemes.

Are you ready for it?

Here it is: buy stocks when they look undervalued relative to their potential. Then hold them long-term.

Yes, stocks have enjoyed a good rally over the past nine months. But you can still capture plenty of upside by investing in certain carefully selected companies.

Sometimes a stock’s story can take a while to play out. To benefit from the capital appreciation when catalysts ignite, you have to be in the market.

And market catalysts, be they macroeconomic or stock-specific, don’t wait for a calendar date.

Here’s the valuable point that punters who ‘sell in May’ ignore.

When you own dividend-paying stocks, you get paid to stay in the market and wait for those catalysts.

Dividends are an important component of total stock returns, especially here in Australia.

That’s even the case for some small-cap stocks.

Not every small-cap pays a dividend. But when they do, I look for companies that have a real prospect of raising that dividend, and also scream ‘buy me’ on a valuation basis.

I call those stocks ‘Turbo Caps’.

And there’s a few belters in that group among the exciting speculations on the Australian Small-Cap Investigator buy list.

If you want to generate real wealth through the stock market, you can’t get there by following kooky sayings and folk tales.

You get there by buying stocks for less than they’re worth…and holding them for the long term.

Cheers,
Tim Dohrmann+
Small-Cap Analyst, Australian Small-Cap Investigator

From the Archives…

Investing in Technology — the Cheat’s Guide
26-04-14 – Shae Smith

Join Money Morning on Google+


By MoneyMorning.com.au

X-Ray Vision or Due Diligence? How SeeThruEquity Analysts Find Hidden Small-Cap Biotech Plays

Source: Peter Byrne of The Life Sciences Report (5/1/14)

http://www.thelifesciencesreport.com/pub/na/x-ray-vision-or-due-diligence-how-seethruequity-analysts-find-hidden-small-cap-biotech-plays

SeeThruEquity stays an arm’s length away from the small biotech firms it analyzes for investors, but gets intimate enough to discover firms that hold promise. In this interview with The Life Sciences Report, senior analyst Brandon Primack and the firm’s CEO, Ajay Tandon, explain why they find this handful of small biotechs intriguing.

The Life Sciences Report: SeeThruEquity specializes in analyzing companies with capitalizations under $1 billion ($1B). What is special about the small-cap life sciences sector?

Ajay Tandon: We cover 66 small-cap and micro-cap companies across a variety of sectors, the majority of which fall into the healthcare, life sciences and technology spaces. From our perspective, the past year was very hot for investors in this range of stocks—and also for the investment banks raising capital for the life sciences sector.

TLSR: Do you invest in the companies that you analyze?

Brandon Primack: We do not do any banking or trading in the firms that we research.

AT: Our research is completely unbiased, and we do not charge companies for it. We do host investor conferences on a regular basis. We have a conference coming up on May 28 in New York City. A lot of life sciences companies will be represented, among other small-cap sectors.

TLSR: What drives the rates of return for biotech these days?

BP: We look for catalyst-driven events. There are names in our research universe from which we expect to hear milestone news in the next few months: DelMar Pharmaceuticals Inc. (DMPI:OTCQB),Cynapsus Therapeutics Inc. (CYNAF:OTCQX; CTH:TSX.V) and Pressure BioSciences Inc. (PBIO:OTCQB). The milestone events can be truly transformative—producing as much as a 100% return on these companies.

TLSR: What is the potential milestone for Cynapsus Therapeutics?

BP: Cynapsus is reformulating apomorphine, which is the only approved drug for Parkinson’s patients experiencing off-motor symptoms. Since apomorphine was approved as a treatment many years ago, we assign the reformulation a high probability of success.

Apomorphine is for patients with impaired motor function who have trouble taking their medicines. Cynapsus’ reformulation of the vital drug is in a thin-strip sublingual application (APL-130277). The existing drug is sold worldwide as Apokyn (apomorphine hydrochloride injection; US WorldMeds [private]). It is administered as an injectable—a cumbersome process, often involving 21 steps, making it difficult to access for patients experiencing impaired motor function. Cynapsus’ film strip for apomorphine is simply placed under the tongue, making it a tremendous leap forward in technology.

Cynapsus has just released data from a dose escalation study at 25 milligrams (25 mg). The topline data is positive, meaning that when the dose went from 15 mg to 25 mg, the amount of drug in the bloodstream two hours later was significantly increased. Another element that we like is that worldwide sales of apomorphine are in the $60–70 million ($60–70M) range. If the reformulation is successful, the expanded market potential could be 10 times that.

Cynapsus has laid out a concrete drug-testing roadmap, including bioequivalence and safety studies, culminating in a new drug application filing. It finished last year with $2.29M in cash. It has outlined spending needs of $18–20M for the next two years.

TLSR: How is it planning to capitalize that need?

BP: The climate for raising money for this company is obviously robust. When we initiated on Cynapsus around Thanksgiving, it was a $0.38/share stock. After it rose to $1.40/share, some warrants were exercised. When the company releases its full study data for apomorphine during the next month or so, we expect the share price will respond positively.

TLSR: Is the firm in debt?

BP: It has no debt. It had converted some debt to equity in H2/13, so additional capital will flow from equity raises. The market cap is about $21M. Our price target is $1.54/share.

TLSR: Do you have any firms specializing in developing orphan drugs in cancer research?

BP: We have initiated research on DelMar Pharmaceuticals—a name that is receiving a lot of media attention. It is working on a great drug, VAL-083, for glioblastoma multiforme, the most common and aggressive form of brain cancer.

What we find attractive is that this drug is also currently approved, in China for lung cancer. It was studied extensively many years ago by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). For whatever reason, the drug fell by the wayside as other therapies emerged and received more funding and more attention. The drug has already been tested against current standards of care.

TLSR: What is the story in China?

BP: In China, DelMar is looking for marketing partners and a strong marketing voice. It has contracted with Guangxi Wuzhou Pharmaceutical Co. (600252:SS) to put more research dollars into the Chinese lung cancer product. A round of new studies is being paid for by the Chinese firm. This deal represents no-cost, complete upside for DelMar as it both expands Chinese sales and moves through the U.S. regulatory process.

TLSR: How can a drug that works in brain cancer be used for lung cancer?

BP: VAL-083 was originally synthesized and studied in the 1960s. It is a novel alkylating agent, a first-in-class, small molecule therapeutic, and not an analog or derivative of other small molecule chemotherapeutics. It is a commonly used class of drugs. It works by binding to DNA and interfering with normal DNA replication processes within the cancer cells, thus preventing the cell from making the proteins necessary for survival and growth. In the ’60s, the drug was assessed in multiple clinical studies by the NCI as a treatment against various cancers. When a drug is effective against a certain type of tumor or cancer, it makes sense to test it against other types of cancer. Positive results in DelMar’s brain cancer studies compelled the firm to pursue further studies in brain cancer, and longer term the company hopes to examine the drug’s efficacy in lung cancer, especially since VAL-083 is already approved for lung cancer therapy in China. For an early-stage biotech, DelMar is an attractive dual-track investment thesis.

TLSR: How has DelMar’s stock been performing?

BP: When we initiated on DelMar in January, the stock was $1/share. It now trades at about the same price.

It’s important to note that the company is doing a dose escalation study, administering VAL-083 in higher dosages than were used in the old NCI studies. It is breaking new ground and reporting positive topline data. DelMar plans to release a full report soon. This kind of major milestone event can take a probability-adjusted estimation of approval from a 10 to a 30 to a 70, especially in an orphan drug category where there is a significant unmet need—where patients just are not living very long on the standard of care.

TLSR: Do you have a target price for this stock?

BP: Our target price on DelMar is $4.53/share.

TLSR: That’s a good jump.

AT: Two weeks ago, New York City-based investment bank Maxim Group LLC initiated coverage on DelMar. The company is increasingly visible, which is a positive sign that an increase in coverage by other investment banks is around the bend.

TLSR: Moving on to the third company you mentioned: Investors are hearing about a novel technology called “pressure cycling.” What is pressure cycling and what potential does it carry in terms of researching biomolecular interactions?

BP: Pressure BioSciences came up with a proprietary, revolutionary technology in biological sample preparation. Its unique machinery puts cells through alternating cycles of high levels of hydrostatic pressure to extract information. The process looks for biomarkers that indicate the presence or absence of a disease condition. There are numerous markets for this machine; the system has applications that compare to those currently used with mass spectrographers, forensics and DNA detection. It is also a useful technique for histology—analyzing biopsies.

Most laboratories use a variety of methods to analyze cells, from old-fashioned mortars and pestles to modern heat treatments. Pressure Bio’s technology is a next-generation leap. And thousands of labs around the world can use it. Pressure Bio has just released its Barocycler HUB880 High Pressure Generator, which is a new, higher-pressure machine that will allow high utilization labs to process a significantly greater number of samples than they can now. The older machines operate at 35,000 pounds per square inch (35,000 psi). The new version goes up to 100,000 psi. Pressure Bio has existing relationships with 150 of the top labs in the country and it reported that the first HUB880 has been sold and shipped to the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). And the company is on track to release what it calls a high-throughput system. Sales growth of the machine will clearly be accelerated by the H1/14 release of the high-throughput equipment.

TLSR: How is Pressure BioSciences’ stock performing?

BP: We initiated on Pressure Bio in late October 2013, at $0.23/share. It is now trading at about $0.46/share. It spiked to $0.70/share in late March, after news of its next-generation technology was released. Like many biotechs, its shares get a little hot, and then return to Planet Earth. But at the end of 2013, Pressure Bio only had $400 thousand ($400K) in debt. It had expected to raise $1.5M in a private placement. It actually raised $2.9M in February, and has extended the opportunity. We do not yet have final numbers but raising a private placement from $630K in December to $1.5M in January to $2.9M in February speaks to a strong capital raising environment.

TLSR: Let’s move on to cardiovascular technologies. Any notable successes there?

BP: We are highlighting AtheroNova Inc. (AHRO:OTCQB). It has a novel compound called AHRO-001. To quote the firm, the new drug will “change the paradigm in cardiovascular disease management.”

The company’s intellectual property revolves around naturally occurring bile acids, which break down lipids for absorption in the body. There are numerous cardiovascular standards of care, the most popular being the statin regime, of course. But none of these standards of care deal with plaque regression, which reduces the amount of plaque buildup in the arteries. And that is precisely what AtheroNova believes to be the paradigm shift offered by its compound: the regression of coronary plaque. This new drug is a tremendous opportunity because, as we know, statins are the largest-selling drug category of all time. AtheroNova believes that AHRO-001 is an alternative therapy to statins, and possibly an add-on to statins. Layer this new treatment onto the whole population, and we are talking about multiple billions of dollars a year.

TLSR: Does AHRO-001 have any side effects?

BP: Because bile acids are naturally occurring chemicals in the body, the side effect profile is mild. The drug increases the quantity of the bile acid.

TLSR: Are study results in?

BP: AtheroNova released data last summer. The study was conducted at UCLA. Mice were given an eight-week diet of Western food and placed in a control group where they were given AHRO-001 for 15 weeks. The study group that received AHRO-001 had 95% less innominate arterial plaque than the control group. The drug decreases calorie absorption while improving the ability of high-density lipoproteins (HDLs) to mediate cholesterol efflux. Again, the current standard of care with statins doesn’t address this.

TLSR: Does AtheroNova have partners?

BP: AtheroNova has a promising research collaboration agreement with Maxwell Biotech Venture Fund, which the company calls “Russia’s premier biotech venture capital firm.” In 2011, Maxwell agreed to commit $4M to fund Phase 1 and Phase 2 studies in Russia. In Russia, the approval process is less onerous than in the U.S. The Russian studies will give AtheroNova significant insight into the side effects and the most effective dosages for AHRO-001. The company will use that knowledge to detail a framework for its own U.S. trials. At the end of February, the firm released topline data. We have very little information as of yet, but the company revealed, “The safety data is unequivocally encouraging, yielding valuable information about the tolerability of the drug.”

TLSR: How has AtheroNova stock been performing?

BP: We initiated coverage in January at $0.42/share with a $1.03/share price target. Right now, the stock is at $0.36/share. It spiked in the beginning of March to $0.51/share, and has traded on the flat line since.

TLSR: Do you view the companies we have talked about as acquisition candidates, or as companies that are going to make it on their own?

BP: Pressure Bio has a go-it-alone plan. Due to its next-generation technology in equipment and consumables, it might be a very attractive candidate.

Cynapsus plans to do a trade sale or licensing—making it a very attractive candidate, too. Once we see some more study data from Cynapsus during the next 12 months, we will know more.

We also cover Tonix Pharmaceuticals Holding Corp. (TNXP:NASDAQ). We initiated on it last summer at around $4/share. It is reformulating cyclobenzaprine, a pain drug for fibromyalgia. At $4, the firm was preparing for its Phase 2 trial. It uplisted to NASDAQ. ROTH Capital Partners picked it up. The stock attracted significant interest, significant capital. It closed a $43M capital raise in January. Just six months ago, Tonix was considering a licensing agreement in 2015. Now, it has the money now to do its own Phase 2 and its own Phase 3 studies. It has accelerated the pipeline. With access to capital, the story can change quite rapidly for a biotech.

Maybe it is a chicken-and-egg scenario: Does the good news make it easier to raise your valuation, making you more resistant to being acquired? Or does the good news make a company more likely to want to acquire you?

TLSR: Excellent interview, gentlemen. Thanks.

Ajay Tandon brings more than 15 years of experience in the financial service industry, and considerable experience advising, structuring transactions and raising capital for small-cap public and private enterprises to his role as chief executive officer and director of research at SeeThruEquity. Tandon cofounded Emissary Capital, a private investment firm focused on micro-cap investment banking. Previously, Tandon served as vice president of equity capital markets at Maxim Group LLC, where he led the firm’s equity syndicate and origination efforts with respect to PIPEs, registered IPOs and follow-on offerings. Prior to his role at Maxim, Tandon served as an executive for v, an analytics platform used by global and regional investment banks worldwide to help optimize performance and improve competitiveness. Tandon began his career in financial services as a management consultant with IBM Global Services, and earned his bachelor’s degree from Cornell University.

Brandon Primack, senior equity research analyst with SeeThruEquity, has more than 15 years of experience in the asset management business with a focus on equity research and portfolio management. Prior to joining SeeThruEquity, Primack founded Primack Capital LLC, where he ran a structured derivative product and provided asset allocation consulting services to high net-worth individuals. Prior to that, Primack spent seven years at Allianz Global Investors, where he served as a senior equity research analyst covering healthcare and industrials for large- and mid-cap growth-oriented products. He also served as a quantitative analyst in Allianz’s Structured Product Group, which focused on enhanced derivative products. Primack received his master’s degree in business administration (finance) from New York University’s Stern School of Business, and his bachelor’s degree in economics from the University of Michigan. He has been a CFA charterholder since 2004.

Want to read more Life Sciences Report interviews like this? Sign up for our free e-newsletter, and you’ll learn when new articles have been published. To see recent interviews with industry analysts and commentators, visit our Streetwise Interviews page.

DISCLOSURE:

1) Peter Byrne conducted this interview for Streetwise Reports LLC, publisher of The Gold Report, The Energy Report, The Life Sciences Report and The Mining Report, and provides services to Streetwise Reports as an independent contractor. He owns, or his family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None.

2) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors of Streetwise Reports: Cynapsus Therapeutics Inc., DelMar Pharmaceuticals Inc. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services.

3) Ajay Tandon: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I personally am, or my family is, paid by the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. My company has a financial relationship with the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview.

4) Brandon Primack: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I personally am, or my family is, paid by the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. My company has a financial relationship with the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview.

5) Interviews are edited for clarity. Streetwise Reports does not make editorial comments or change experts’ statements without their consent.

6) The interview does not constitute investment advice. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her individual financial professional and any action a reader takes as a result of information presented here is his or her own responsibility. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports’ terms of use and full legal disclaimer.

7) From time to time, Streetwise Reports LLC and its directors, officers, employees or members of their families, as well as persons interviewed for articles and interviews on the site, may have a long or short position in securities mentioned. Directors, officers, employees or members of their families are prohibited from making purchases and/or sales of those securities in the open market or otherwise during the up-to-four-week interval from the time of the interview until after it publishes.

Streetwise – The Life Sciences Report is Copyright © 2014 by Streetwise Reports LLC. All rights are reserved. Streetwise Reports LLC hereby grants an unrestricted license to use or disseminate this copyrighted material (i) only in whole (and always including this disclaimer), but (ii) never in part..

Streetwise Reports LLC does not guarantee the accuracy or thoroughness of the information reported.

Streetwise Reports LLC receives a fee from companies that are listed on the home page in the In This Issue section. Their sponsor pages may be considered advertising for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1734.

Participating companies provide the logos used in The Life Sciences Report. These logos are trademarks and are the property of the individual companies.

101 Second St., Suite 110

Petaluma, CA 94952

Tel.: (707) 981-8204

Fax: (707) 981-8998

Email: [email protected]

 

 

 

 

 

Ask Yourself These Questions About Your Stocks…

By MoneyMorning.com.au

We’re now into the second day of May.

Get ready for the rehashed news stories telling you to ‘sell in May and go away’.

Small-cap analyst Tim Dohrmann pours cold water in this hackneyed old phrase in today’s second essay.

And yet, it does bring up a key point. How do you know when to sell a stock?

Here’s some breaking news.

The fact is you don’t know when to sell.

Or rather, you don’t know for sure when you should sell.

A selling decision may look like a great idea at the time, as the stock falls just after you sell it.

But it may not look so great when the stock doubles, triples or more over the next few months or years.

So while this advice may seem a cop out, the reality is that there isn’t a single cover-all formula for selling. That’s just in the same way that there isn’t a single cover-all formula for buying.

Don’t Overpay For Your Stocks

The most important aspect to consider when you think about selling is what your initial expectations were when you bought the stock.

Many investors forget about this during the heat and excitement of watching the stock market each day.

That’s especially true if they see the share price fall four or five percent in a short timeframe. Or if they see the share price rise 20% in a similar timeframe.

Their reaction is usually to panic, in both cases.

They’ll sell because they’re worried the stock will fall further, or they sell because they’re worried they’ll give up the ‘easy’ 20% gain.

So, was the investor right to sell? Or should they have held on?

In truth we can’t answer that because we don’t know the type of stocks involved and the investor’s expectations when they bought the stock.

This is why we recommend investors think carefully about a stock before they buy it. It sounds obvious, but many investors get over-excited and then jump into the market paying any old price.

It’s for that reason that we encourage our analysts to publish a maximum buy-up-to price when they recommend a stock. For instance, in the April issue of Australian Small-Cap Investigator Tim Dohrmann recommended a tiny medical company.

At the time the stock was trading for less than three cents. But to make sure that subscribes didn’t flood the market, unnecessarily pushing up the price, he told readers to pay no more than 3.7 cents.

It’s important to use an approach like this in small-cap stocks especially, as stock prices can be volatile.

Make Sure The Reward Matches The Risk

But even before you buy the stock you need to figure out if it’s worth your while investing in it.

That’s the same for blue-chip stocks and small-cap stocks.

For instance, by all rights you probably wouldn’t invest in a high-risk penny stock if you only expected to make a 3–6% gain over 12 months. The reward compared to the risk doesn’t stack up.

You can get that sort of return from a bank account or a dividend-paying, relatively safe blue-chip stock.

However, if you’re after a big triple-digit percentage gain from a stock, such as the potential an 800% gain Tim’s looking at for his medical stock tip, then punting on a high-risk speculative small-cap stock could make sense.

In that instance, seeing as you’re looking for a big (OK, huge) return you should be willing to accept short-term volatility that could see the share price fall a few percent or more.

In this case, if the stock fell 5% and you immediately sold, then we could say that was a panicked reaction. But that may not necessarily be a bad thing for you to do. It may just indicate that you’re not the risk-taking speculator that you thought you were.

At least now you’d know and you could either stick to what you perceive to be ‘safer’ stocks, or you could perhaps not stake as much on your next speculation.

It’s something we call the ‘sleep well’ test. If a stock is giving you sleepless nights then you’ve either made the wrong investment or you’ve staked too much.

Do You Pass The “Sleep Well” Test?

Once you’re comfortable with your investment, that’s when it’s time to sit back and hopefully wait for what you hope to happen — a rising stock price and/or a steady stream of dividends.

Realistically, you should own a combination of dividend stocks and growth stocks.

If you’ve picked the right dividend stock in the first place there really shouldn’t be any need to sell the stock for several years. That doesn’t mean you’ll hold it forever, things change…companies change…the markets change.

But if a stock is paying you a nice and steady income, which it may pay you for year after year, why bother selling the stock just for a ‘measly’ 20% gain?

Over the longer term a good dividend payer can give you a much bigger return than just 20%.

As for your growth stocks, this all depends on the opportunity. Ask yourself these questions about each of your growth stocks:

  • Why did you buy it?
  • Can it still achieve what you hoped it would achieve? Or has it already achieved what you hoped it would achieve?
  • Has anything changed for the better or the worse?

Depending on how you answer those simple questions you should know exactly what to do.

Selling can be hard.

Just make sure that you invest the appropriate amount in a stock and pass the ‘sleep well’ test. Also regularly ask yourself those questions about each of your stocks.

Doing this should ensure that you don’t panic and sell your stocks before they’ve had the chance to make you the kind of gains that you hoped for when you first made the investment.

Cheers,
Kris+

Special Report: Secure and Protect Family Wealth for Generations

Join Money Morning on Google+


By MoneyMorning.com.au

Are You Smarter than the Average Portfolio Manager? Joe Reagor Says to Invest in Energy Six Months Ahead

Source: Peter Byrne of The Energy Report (5/1/14)

http://www.theenergyreport.com/pub/na/are-you-smarter-than-the-average-portfolio-manager-joe-reagor-says-to-invest-in-energy-six-months-ahead

According to Joe Reagor, analyst with ROTH Capital Partners, the average portfolio manager focused on uranium sees the potential for the uranium price to rebound in the second half of 2014—that’s why some uranium miners have already felt jolts in their share prices. In this interview with The Energy Report, find out about companies with crucial access to capital, and how undervalued oil and gas producers in the U.S. and Poland could deliver stealth profits to your energy investment portfolio.

The Energy Report: Looking forward to the end of this quarter, Joe, what is the prognosis for uranium pricing in terms of global supply and demand?

Joe Reagor: We expect to start seeing nuclear plant restarts in Japan. Each one of the restarted plants will consume 0.5 million pounds (0.5 Mlb) a year on average. With restarts lining up for early Q3/14, a resurgence of spot purchasing in the market will likely rally up the price of uranium.

TER: With a level of popular dissatisfaction about nuclear power roiling Japan, what is propelling the restarts?

JR: Earlier this year, there was a lot of speculation that Japan might move away from nuclear power. But the simple truth is that fossil fuels cost too much to import. Although uranium-based nuclear power is a bit more dangerous, as proved by the Fukushima situation, at the end of the day, it is a much cleaner and cheaper source of energy for Japan. As a result, the Japanese government is updating its policies in support of nuclear energy. Although the average person in Japan might not approve of this policy move, nuclear energy is the most cost-effective way for the country to move forward.

TER: Is there a growth curve for the long term?

JR: There are 53 shut-down reactors. If 30 of those are restarted, that will increase demand by 15 Mlb a year. Right now, worldwide, there is less than 10 Mlb of uranium idled. With the Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) Agreement completed, and Russia no longer blending down its high-grade uranium stockpile, there is definitely a shortfall in the future supply of uranium. There are a couple of large-scale projects that can step in as we go along, but, globally, there are over 60 additional power plants in varying stages of permitting and construction. That is another 30 Mlb a year, so the potential upside scenario by 2030 for demand is an additional 45 Mlb/year uranium, roughly.

TER: How have companies that explore and produce yellowcake in the major uranium mining areas of the U.S. been faring post Fukushima?

JR: Some firms have been forced to idle. For example,Uranium Resources Inc. (URRE:NASDAQ) has a smaller-scale facility in Texas. Right now, it has about 600 thousand pounds (600 Klb) in resources sitting on the sidelines that it could produce in a healthy market. And Energy Fuels Inc. (EFR:TSX; EFRFF:OTCQX; UUUU:NYSE.MKT) has the White Mesa mill, with a capacity of 8 Mlb/year, running at a 1 Mlb/year rate. It began idling that in the middle of last year. And it is expected to be fully idled by the middle of this year, barring a change in the uranium spot market. It will deliver to contracts using both spot production, alternate feed production, and a little bit of production that was left over from its own mines. It is a tough ride for the U.S.-based junior uranium producers, in general.

On the other hand, the larger companies, like Denison Mines Corp. (DML:TSX; DNN:NYSE.MKT) andAREVA SA (AREVA:EPA) are doing alright. Obviously, their share prices are tied to the uranium price, but they are moving forward with plans to expand production. There are delays, of course. Cigar Lake, owned by Cameco, has been delayed before, but it is ramping up now.

TER: Do these troubles sweeten the deal for acquirers?

JR: There were a few smaller, undercapitalized groups. Energy Fuels picked up one of those—Strathmore Minerals Corp. But most of the large projects are consolidated down to a few players at this point in the U.S. The essential issue is that when the price finally turns, these companies will still be too undercapitalized to fully develop all of their projects simultaneously. They will have to cherry pick their best projects, and the other ones will sit on the sidelines. So there is not a lot of hope for a resurgence in supply in the short term, even if the price moves up significantly.

TER: If the price does move up significantly, will exploration take off?

JR: Around the world, there are numerous uranium deposits that could be brought into production, but in the U.S., the process of permitting and environmental approvals can take years. Historically, when there is a shortage of uranium, the spot price tends to jump significantly. It was riding a strong rally right before the Fukushima incident occurred, and that was on the back of the realization that there was going to be a 24 Mlb shortfall when the HEU Agreement went away. So if the supply shortage mounts, the uranium price will likely move upward, and the process of permitting new projects will take years, leaving the shortage in place or the foreseeable future.

TER: What firms are your top picks in the uranium area at this point?

JR: Let’s highlight Energy Fuels. It still uses conventional mining methods, as opposed to in situ recovery (ISR). Most people will argue that using conventional is a higher-cost method of recovering uranium. But looking at the potential for a strong uranium price environment, I believe that flexibility and scalability will become valued over cost of production metrics. Now, take a firm like Uranium Resources; it might be able to produce using ISR at a lower cost metric than Energy Fuels does conventionally, but Energy Fuels has the scalability to move from being an alternative feed producer of 500 Klb/year this year, to being as much as a 3 Mlb producer in a couple of years. Other companies will have a very hard time achieving that type of scalability.

TER: How do in situ mining techniques affect profit margins?

JR: In situ mining was originally touted as a significant cost saver, but it has not performed as a cost saver compared to conventional mining on a direct cost-per-pound of production, or at least not to the extent once anticipated. Generally, the all-in cost is in the $30–40 range for ISR, while conventional mining sits in the $40–50 range. Obviously, there is a difference, but it is just not as significant as people once believed it would be. The other side of that coin is the upfront cost to develop a mine. It can take hundreds of millions of dollars to develop a new conventional mine, whereas an ISR project can be brought online for, in some cases, less than $10 million ($10M). That significant cost saving is making the biggest impact for producers around the world. There are various tradeoffs between conventional and ISR methods to consider depending on the particular situation and access to capital.

TER: What’s the capital market looking like for uranium firms in this environment?

JR: It is better than it was six months ago. The average portfolio manager in the space is aware of the potential for a uranium price recovery in H2/14. Generally, you find that the market looks six months ahead. In the early part of this year, mostly in February, there was a strong move up in the share prices of a number of uranium producers and explorers. That occurred because of the expectation that, six months from then, or in August of this year, there would be a healthier commodity price environment, and investors are trying to get ahead of that curve on uranium. Capital for nuclear energy ventures is available, albeit at depressed valuations compared to what these companies were worth when the price of uranium was closer to $70/lb. The determinant consideration on all sides is how much new capital a management team can take into its kitty.

TER: Do you have any favorites the oil and gas space?

JR: One of our Top Picks is Synergy Resources Corp. (SYRG:NYSE.MKT). Its management team is continuing to deliver on its promises. The company has experienced some minor delays, but nothing that is a value-changing proposition. We believe that coming out of the end of its fiscal year in August, Synergy will be in a very strong position to build on its past success. This is a young company, remember, that only 18 months ago was not even drilling horizontal wells, and it is now developing its fourth drill pad. Synergy understands its drilling environment. It is in a rural area outside Denver, where there are a lot of people concerned with noise levels. Synergy uses pad drilling to keep noise levels consolidated to a single area. It is attention to that kind of seemingly minor, but important detail, that provides a good growth story to investors.

TER: How does pad drilling tamp down noise?

JR: Pad drilling confines the work to a single area and drills out horizontally. Drillers can access a large area with wells by using longer-reach laterals instead of having to space their wells out and drill closer to homes, businesses or schools. Instead, Synergy finds an area where the noise level is not a neighborhood concern, and it drills a series of horizontal wells from that point.

TER: Given oversupply issues in the U.S., what is your prognosis for the shale fields?

JR: The biggest supply issue in the shale fields is with natural gas. A lot of midstream firms are flaring off their natural gas. My personal view is that the midstream constraints are actually going to result in positives for the natural gas price. Earlier this year, natural gas spiked to over $6 per thousand cubic feet ($6/Mcf). That occurred because there were a few midstream shutdowns for maintenance reasons. One shutdown significantly impacted Synergy Resources; its midstream processing facility at the Leffler pad was shut down for 35 days. With the combination of the shutdown and the cold winter, the natural gas price spiked back up. This example demonstrates that all the excess supply of natural gas in the U.S. is still not enough to feed the system if the midstream does not keep up. Supply is relative to situation.

On the oil side, we are still not oil independent. We are approaching energy independence, but not oil independence. A significant increase in the production of oil should help to cap the worldwide oil price, but I do not believe that we are reaching a point of oversupply of oil in the U.S. or anywhere near it. The growth of the shale play is going to keep impacting worldwide oil supply during the next few years. There is going to be a tipping point that forces down the oil price. Most people believe that the forward curve of oil showing an $80–85 per barrel ($80–85/bbl) value of oil in a few years is accurate. It is just a matter of timing and how political issues around the world play out. Currently, the Ukraine situation is forcing up the price of oil, as there are fears of shortages. When that situation resolves itself, we could see a small pullback in the oil price. Then, the fundamentals should take over again and pull it down into the $80–85/bbl range.

TER: Can you suggest a reasonable weighting for a profitable energy portfolio?

JR: It really is important to have a balance of different types of energy sources. Some of the clean energy ideas out there—solar and wind and electric car batteries—all have their place. Weighting an investment portfolio toward any one specific energy type is not an investment strategy I would personally recommend! I believe that the uranium price has a strong fundamental story to go up in the next 12 months. I believe that the oil price has a strong fundamental story to go down in the next 12 months, while natural gas will be more seasonal, especially in the U.S. On the basis of these commodity price movements, I suggest a slightly stronger weighting toward uranium than oil and gas. From a production standpoint, however, many oil companies are growing at exceptional rates. As long as the oil price remains high, they are going to outperform most of the uranium producers, barring a significant change in the uranium price.

TER: Do you have any other picks in the energy space for us today?

JR: We cover a small natural gas company in Poland called FX Energy Inc. (FXEN:NASDAQ). It fell out of favor last year after drilling a dry hole on a well that had a 10% chance of success. If it had worked out, the well would have been a game changer, but it turned out to be watery and a loss of money. In today’s market, though, the valuation of FX Energy is a bit low. The company is now drilling a new well on a 100%-owned piece of land. It will not be an overnight game changer if successful, but it will allow the firm to develop a second situation like the Fences. The Edge Concession play could slowly develop into a second source of natural gas production in Poland for FXEN.

The nice thing about natural gas in Poland is that it gets $8/Mcf, compared to the roughly $4.5–5/Mcf that gas goes for in the U.S. today. That depression of prices caused by the shale boom in the U.S. has not taken hold in Europe. And since no one has been successful with the Polish shale plays, natural gas prices in Poland have remained strong.

TER: Is FX Energy only in Poland, or is it in other countries as well?

JR: It has some small legacy assets in the U.S., but 95% of the valuation of the company is based on the natural gas asset that it holds in Poland.

TER: Do you have a target price for FX Energy?

JR: Our target price for FX Energy is $5.75. It just goes to point out that stories that are out of favor tend to be the most interesting investment ideas when the firm is fundamentally strong, despite the momentary market disconnect.

TER: Thanks for joining us, Joe.

JR: Happy to be here.

Joe Reagor is a research analyst with ROTH Capital Partners, providing equity research coverage of the natural resources sector. Prior to joining ROTH, he worked in equity research at Global Hunter Securities and at Very Independent Research, covering a wide array of resource companies, including metals (steel and aluminum), mining (gold, silver and base metals) and forest products (containerboard, OCC, UFS and pulp). Reagor earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics and mathematics from Monmouth University.

Want to read more Energy Report interviews like this? Sign up for our free e-newsletter, and you’ll learn when new articles have been published. To see a list of recent interviews with industry analysts and commentators, visit our Interviews page.
DISCLOSURE:

1) Peter Byrne conducted this interview for Streetwise Reports LLC, publisher of The Gold Report, The Energy Report, The Life Sciences Report and The Mining Report, and provides services to Streetwise Reports as an independent contractor. He owns, or his family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None.

2) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors of Streetwise Reports: Energy Fuels Inc. and FX Energy Inc. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services.

3) Joe Reagor: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I personally am, or my family is, paid by the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. My company has a financial relationship with the following companies mentioned in this interview: Within the last twelve months, ROTH has received compensation for investment banking services from Uranium Resources Inc. ROTH makes a market in shares of Uranium Resources Inc. and as such, buys and sells from customers on a principal basis. ROTH makes a market in shares of Energy Fuels Inc. and as such, buys and sells from customers on a principal basis. ROTH makes a market in shares of FX Energy, Inc. and as such, buys and sells from customers on a principal basis. ROTH makes a market in shares of Synergy Resources Corp. and as such, buys and sells from customers on a principal basis. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview.

4) Interviews are edited for clarity. Streetwise Reports does not make editorial comments or change experts’ statements without their consent.

5) The interview does not constitute investment advice. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her individual financial professional and any action a reader takes as a result of information presented here is his or her own responsibility. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports’ terms of use and full legal disclaimer.

6) From time to time, Streetwise Reports LLC and its directors, officers, employees or members of their families, as well as persons interviewed for articles and interviews on the site, may have a long or short position in securities mentioned. Directors, officers, employees or members of their families are prohibited from making purchases and/or sales of those securities in the open market or otherwise during the up-to-four-week interval from the time of the interview until after it publishes.

Streetwise – The Energy Report is Copyright © 2014 by Streetwise Reports LLC. All rights are reserved. Streetwise Reports LLC hereby grants an unrestricted license to use or disseminate this copyrighted material (i) only in whole (and always including this disclaimer), but (ii) never in part.

Streetwise Reports LLC does not guarantee the accuracy or thoroughness of the information reported.

Streetwise Reports LLC receives a fee from companies that are listed on the home page in the In This Issue section. Their sponsor pages may be considered advertising for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1734.

Participating companies provide the logos used in The Energy Report. These logos are trademarks and are the property of the individual companies.

101 Second St., Suite 110

Petaluma, CA 94952

Tel.: (707) 981-8204

Fax: (707) 981-8998

Email: [email protected]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Angelos Damaskos: The Best Way to Profit from Peak Oil

Source: Kevin Michael Grace of The Energy Report (5/1/14)

http://www.theenergyreport.com/pub/na/angelos-damaskos-the-best-way-to-profit-from-peak-oil

The era of cheap oil is over, declares Angelos Damaskos. In this interview with The Energy Report, the principal adviser of the Junior Oils Trust says that oil will become progressively more expensive to find, with prices topping the all-time high of $147 per barrel within 10 to 20 years. He counsels that investors should avoid the majors (too stodgy) and the pure explorers (too risky) and should instead choose producers or near-producers, highlighting five companies with good reserves and room to grow.

The Energy Report: You are the principal advisor of the Junior Oils Trust. What are the advantages of junior oil companies?

Angelos Damaskos: When we set up the Junior Oils Trust in 2004, we believed in the development of a supercycle in energy. China was in the early stages of industrialization and urbanization, and would thus require increasing volumes of oil. At the time, new discoveries of oil were scarce and much smaller. We wanted exposure to what we believed would be rising oil prices, and thought the best way to do so would be to invest in companies that focused exclusively on finding and producing reserves of oil in safe political territories. The main thesis of my investment philosophy was to acquire a lot of reserves in the ground that could be brought to production with a growing rate, managed by competent and experienced teams that would continue to explore and develop these resources and add to production profiles.

TER: What are the disadvantages of the oil majors?

AD: The integrated majors typically carry more than half of their balance sheets in activities such as storage, transportation, chemical processing, refining and distribution, which do not benefit from the rising oil price.

The juniors are more agile and entrepreneurial. They are more efficient and better able to discover new sources of production.

TER: Which factors determine the price of oil?

AD: The price of oil is clearly supply and demand driven. It spiked to $147/barrel ($147/bbl) by 2008 and then dropped precipitously throughout the financial crisis. The past three years have seen rather stable trading, at least for Brent, which has traded from $100–120/bbl.

TER: Why the spread between Brent oil and West Texas Intermediate (WTI)?

AD: The Brent price governs the European, North African and Asian crude market, including the Middle East. WTI generally dictates the pricing of American crude.

America has seen the huge development of shale oil and gas in the last two to three years, which introduced a massive amount of new supply. It could potentially bring about U.S. energy independence in the next 10–20 years.

On the other hand, Europe, the Middle East and North Africa have seen supply greatly disrupted by geopolitical instability. This began three years ago with the Arab Spring in North Africa and then spread to Syria and Iran. Now we have the conflict between Russia and Ukraine that could potentially destabilize the supply of gas through Europe, which gets more than one-third of its gas from Russia.

TER: Some people claim that because fracking is so expensive and the returns from each well diminish so quickly, the amount of oil and gas it produces is likely to be quite short-term in nature. Do you agree?

AD: Fracking is a very expensive business because of the process it employs. Fluids, sand and lubricants are pushed down a well hole with extreme pressure to break up the rock that hosts the gas and oil. As a result, these escape with great pressure, and even though there is very strong production for a few months, it declines very rapidly because there is no sustained pressure to maintain the production level. Therefore, the companies must add new wells, which drive the cost of production so much higher.

Some analysts estimate that many of the shale gas fields have marginal economics of around $5 per million British thermal units ($5/MMBtu), roughly the price today. We need high prices for these deposits to remain economically viable. If, for whatever reason, the prices of oil or gas drop, many operators will be forced to suspend production.

TER: How does the oils sands industry in Canada compare to fracking?

AD: The oil sands produce very heavy oil. Very low viscosity, very bituminous. It’s effectively a mining process: The sands, which are mixed with oil, must be dug out, boiled and then chemically processed to remove impurities before refining.

Heavy-grade oil is not really suitable for petroleum products. It is suitable for asphalt, lubricants and other industrial products. Like fracking, it’s a very expensive and inefficient process that requires large energy inputs and high prices to remain economically viable.

TER: How high must the oil price be to support oil sands mining?

AD: We reckon the marginal cost of production to be $70–80/bbl. Operators need at least $100/bbl to make a satisfactory return and continue growing operations. The massive development and production of shale oil and gas has hit the oil sands operators very hard. West Canadian Select has been trading between $40–50/bbl for the last few months. That is not good enough.

TER: It has been suggested that the price of oil is constrained, particularly after the economic crisis of 2007–2008, because high oil prices led to economic regression, which in turn led to lower demand. Do you agree?

AD: I do not. After 2008, the Asian economies continued growing at rates that more than compensated for any reduction in demand from the developed world. This explains the recent stability in oil prices I mentioned earlier. Generally, prices have to rise significantly above $120–130/bbl to cause a reduction in demand.

The world is so dependent on oil for its energy needs that even at higher prices, it’s very difficult to cut back. We may drive a little bit less, but 80% of oil consumption is used by transportation fuels, shipping, aviation, railways and commercial trucking. These are essential for the economy to function.

TER: Where do you see the price of oil going this year?

AD: The demand for oil continues to grow based on increasing demand from China, other Asian countries and the developed world. Demand has grown significantly in the last couple of years in the United States, whereas supply, even though it has grown significantly in the U.S., has been severely constrained elsewhere. For the last two to three years, new supply from America has filled in the gaps from elsewhere.

I don’t see very strong U.S. or Eurozone growth, despite quantitative easing and all the liquidity pumped to the system. China’s growth seems to have slowed down. That said, I expect 2014 prices for Brent to remain $100–120/bbl. WTI is a different category because its price is at times dictated by the storage capacity at Cushing, Oklahoma, which is the giant storage center where many pipelines meet. The storage bottleneck there has been relieved by a couple of new pipelines. This has allowed WTI to close the gap with Brent. There’s now less than $5/bbl difference between them; a year ago, the split was as high as $20/bbl. So WTI should trade from $100–120/bbl in 2014, unless the Russia-Ukraine dispute results in instability of supply from Russia into Europe.

TER: Do you believe in “peak oil,” in the sense that the era of cheap oil is over?

AD: This is indisputable. Even considering the fracking breakthrough, the easy oil fields have been found and now we are reaching into deeper territory, into very high-depths offshore, into oil fields with much more complex geology that require much more complex technology.

TER: Given the difficulty and expense of finding new oil sources, how high can we expect the price of a barrel of oil to go in 10–20 years?

AD: We think that the price of oil will continue trending higher. 2012 saw on an annual average basis the highest-ever oil price. 2013 was only a couple of dollars lower, and 2014 should be higher than that.

In 10–20 years, oil should be well above the 2008 high of $147/bbl.

TER: Your Junior Oils Trust stresses the need to “avoid political and pure exploration risks.” Which regions in the world are risks to be avoided?

AD: We have avoided Russia and the former Soviet Union republics, such as Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. Elsewhere in Asia, we have avoided Kurdistan, the northern Iraqi territory bordering with Turkey. In Africa, we have avoided Uganda. In Latin America, Venezuela and Argentina.

The rule of law and title of ownership are the most important things in the oil business because if you find oil, having your hard-earned dollars confiscated is the worst possible outcome.

TER: Which jurisdictions do you like best?

AD: About a quarter of our investments are in the U.K. North Sea and Norway. Among the rest, we focus on East and West Africa, particularly offshore developments that carry less potential for political intervention.

We like Australia, Indonesia and the South China Sea. In Latin America, we like Colombia, which is emerging as a major oil-producing region.

TER: What are “pure exploration risks,” and how can they be avoided?

AD: By pure exploration risk, we mean companies very early in their development stage, companies that have secured licenses but require significant seismic processing to assess the likely targets before drilling them to find what lies beneath.

Exploration is a very risky business. The odds for success are typically 8:1 against the explorer. Companies with exploration potential only can either have an amazing result, in which case their share price will multiply several times over, or they can have unsuccessful well results, which blow huge holes in their balance sheets.

TER: Which criteria distinguish less-risky junior oil companies?

AD: Companies that have found resources that can be produced economically, companies already producing or working toward production. We also prefer companies to allocate funds to exploration drilling, either on the fringes of what they have found with the aim of adding to their reserves, or in new territories where an unsuccessful result will not be catastrophic.

TER: To what extent is future oil production dependent upon the success of oil juniors?

AD: To a very large extent, because the oil juniors typically are the first movers in virgin territories.

TER: Which junior oil companies are you most fond of?

AD: Caza Oil & Gas Inc. (CAZ:TSX; CAZA:LSE) is listed on both London Stock Exchange and the TSX. It controls large acreages in Texas, Louisiana and New Mexico, and holds a very large database of geological mapping and seismic-processing results. That enables them to identify lower-risk drilling candidates.

Caza keeps getting good drill results, adding to their production. It has just exceeded 1,000 barrels of oil per day (1,000 bbl/d) and is targeting to grow to 2,000 bbl/d in the next 12 months. For companies such as this, there can be a significant valuation uplift as it develops its resources and grows its production. In America, for similar companies, the metrics can vary from about $30,000 ($30K)/ flowing barrel for companies that produce less than 1,000 bbl/d to $60–100K/per flowing barrel for companies that produce over 2,000 bbl/d.

TER: Do their properties in New Mexico demonstrate the possibility of a significant increase in production?

AD: We think so. They have had some excellent results announced recently, with much stronger flow rates than expected. They have always been confident that the average result of their wells will be better than forecast.

TER: What do you like in Africa?

AD: One of the few companies in our portfolio without current production is FAR Ltd. (FAR:ASX). It operates in Kenya, Guinea Bissau and Senegal. Because their targets are primarily offshore, the wells would be expensive: $80–100M, too much money for a company of this size. But the company has been extremely successful in securing partnerships with midcaps to fund exploration drilling.

Its strategy is to be fully carried for the exploration span, and if the result comes in positive, it’s going to be phenomenal, leading to a high multiple of valuation. If unsuccessful, the company could write off the target, but it hasn’t lost anything in terms of monetary value and still controls the license.

TER: How low must juniors keep their failure rate in order to survive?

AD: That depends on existing production and sustainability. If the company has a solid asset with material reserves that keeps producing and delivering positive cash flow, it can afford an unsuccessful exploration program. Companies that depend exclusively on exploration success for growth and production cannot afford many unsuccessful wells.

TER: Can you give an example of a junior you like despite recent exploration reversals?

AD: One of our bigger holdings is Salamander Energy Plc (SMDR:LSE). It focuses on Indonesia and has had a fairly poor drilling record for the last three years. It has been unlucky, or perhaps it misinterpreted its targets. But because of the company’s very strong asset base, which features growing production and increasing reserves, we have recently increased our position in Salamander.

If Salamander’s exploration luck changes, all the better, but we feel now that the company’s valuation is supported by free-cash generation and by the existing value of its field.

TER: Are Caza, FAR and Salamander likely takeover targets?

AD: Yes, all of them are. It is the nature of the oil business. In the 10-year history of our fund, we have had more than 20 core holdings taken over. We like to say that we invest in the oil giants of the future.

TER: How much of a takeover premium do investors in these juniors receive typically?

AD: It is always related to the market price. The typical premium can vary from 30–60%, but if the takeover occurs in a period of depressed market conditions, like now, it’s not a very satisfactory event for us as investors. But even a less-than-spectacular takeover price means that investors can monetize their position at a significant premium and then circulate that capital to other companies that might become takeover targets in the future.

Another problem engendered by depressed market conditions is that it becomes more difficult to negotiate terms for project investments. For example, if a company is capitalized at $100M and discusses a $100M farm-in agreement with a larger company for one of its assets, the larger company is likely to ask why it should spend $100M to control one part of the smaller company instead of buying the small company outright.

TER: Are there any other junior oil companies you’d like to mention?

AD: Parex Resources Inc. (PXT:TSX.V) produces approximately 17,000 bbl/d out of Colombia. Growth has been rapid indeed: up from 10,000 bbl/d in less than a year. They should exceed 20,000 bbl/d this year. With a market cap of about one billion dollars ($1B), this makes for a very attractive valuation.

Even though Parex shares have risen significantly in the past year, it probably trades at around five times prospective cash flow, a very attractive metric. This is a company that has delivered sustained successful exploration results that keep on adding to reserves. It’s a very well-managed company in an attractive region.

TER: You mentioned your fondness for the North Sea earlier. What do you like there?

AD: Parkmead Group Plc (PMG:LSE). It is run by Tom Cross, with whom our fund had a long relationship through his previous company, Dana Petroleum. Dana grew from a small early-stage company, which Parkmead is now, to a midcap with production of 40,000 bbl/d. It was bought by Korea National Oil Corp for $1.8B in 2010.

With Parkmead, Cross is following the example he set with Dana, focusing on fallow assets that have been abandoned by the majors and on new licensed areas that can be developed with relatively low capital expenditure. Cross has been buying some of his smaller peers that have been unable to progress their projects in a weak market environment. He has even managed to acquire significant production. Parkmead is now a mix of production and development, as opposed to the pure development company it was a couple of years ago.

TER: Given how risky the junior oil business is, what should potential investors be looking for in companies?

AD: They must focus first on the reserves, what companies actually control of those reserves, and how economically viable a project is. It is not much use having a vast deposit of oil stuck somewhere that’s either extremely difficult to access or in a politically unstable region.

Management teams should have expertise not only in the territory, but most importantly in the geology and the type of reservoirs they control. A competent management team is much more likely to continue exploring and adding to the resources of the company.

TER: Angelos, thank you for your time and your insights.

Angelos Damaskos is the founder and CEO of Sector Investment Managers Ltd. of London, a regulated investment advisory company. He is the Principal Advisor of the Junior Oils Trust and the Junior Gold Fund. The Junior Oils Trust focuses its investments in smaller oil and gas exploration and production companies. An investment banker, Damaskos worked a decade for the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. He holds a BSc in mechanical engineering from the University of Glasgow and an MBA from the University of Sheffield.

Want to read more Energy Report interviews like this? Sign up for our free e-newsletter, and you’ll learn when new articles have been published. To see a list of recent interviews with industry analysts and commentators, visit our Interviews page.

DISCLOSURE:

1) Kevin Michael Grace conducted this interview for Streetwise Reports LLC, publisher of The Gold Report, The Energy Report, The Life Sciences Report and The Mining Report, and provides services to Streetwise Reports as an independent contractor. He owns, or his family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None.

2) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors of Streetwise Reports: Caza Oil & Gas Inc. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for its services.

3) Angelos Damaskos: I own, or my family owns, shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I personally am, or my family is, paid by the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. My company has a financial relationship with the following companies mentioned in this interview: Caza Oil & Gas, First Australian Resources, Salamander Energy, Parex Resources and the Parkmead Group, as they are holdings by the Junior Oils Trust, a fund that we advise. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview. Comments and opinions expressed are my own comments and opinions. I had the opportunity to review the interview for accuracy as of the date of the interview and am responsible for the content of the interview.

4) Interviews are edited for clarity. Streetwise Reports does not make editorial comments or change experts’ statements without their consent.

5) The interview does not constitute investment advice. Each reader is encouraged to consult with his or her individual financial professional and any action a reader takes as a result of information presented here is his or her own responsibility. By opening this page, each reader accepts and agrees to Streetwise Reports’ terms of use and full legal disclaimer.

6) From time to time, Streetwise Reports LLC and its directors, officers, employees or members of their families, as well as persons interviewed for articles and interviews on the site, may have a long or short position in securities mentioned. Directors, officers, employees or members of their families are prohibited from making purchases and/or sales of those securities in the open market or otherwise during the up-to-four-week interval from the time of the interview until after it publishes.

Streetwise – The Energy Report is Copyright © 2014 by Streetwise Reports LLC. All rights are reserved. Streetwise Reports LLC hereby grants an unrestricted license to use or disseminate this copyrighted material (i) only in whole (and always including this disclaimer), but (ii) never in part.

Streetwise Reports LLC does not guarantee the accuracy or thoroughness of the information reported.

Streetwise Reports LLC receives a fee from companies that are listed on the home page in the In This Issue section. Their sponsor pages may be considered advertising for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1734.

Participating companies provide the logos used in The Energy Report. These logos are trademarks and are the property of the individual companies.

101 Second St., Suite 110

Petaluma, CA 94952

Tel.: (707) 981-8204

Fax: (707) 981-8998

Email: [email protected]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GOLD: Weakens, Susceptible.

GOLD: Although GOLD still faces downside risk declining further on Thursday, recovery threats are now building up. On the upside, resistance is seen at the 1,318.30 level where a violation will aim at the 1,331 level. Above here if seen will trigger further gains towards the 1,359.00 level followed by the 1,380.00 level. Further out, resistance comes in at the 1,400.00 level. Conversely, support comes in at the 1,277.58 level with a turn below here targeting the 1,250.00 level followed by the 1,230.00 level. Its daily RSI is bearish and pointing lower suggesting further weakness. All in all, GOLD remains biased to the downside in the short term.

Article by www.fxtechstrategy.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Video] How to Easily Identify High-Confidence Trade Setups

By Elliott Wave International

Elliott Wave International’s technical analysis expert, Jeffrey Kennedy, shows you the first step in identifying a high-confidence trade setup in this 4-minute video clip. It’s taken from a live lesson he taught on April 9, 2014. If you would like to learn more, sign up for Jeffrey’s free 45-minute webinar, “4 Critical Elements of High-Confidence Trading,” on this Tuesday, May 6, at 3:30 p.m. Eastern time.


“4 Critical Elements of High-Confidence Trading”
Free webinar with Elliott Wave International’s technical analysis expert, Jeffrey Kennedy

During this free 45-minute presentation, you will learn how to find high-confidence trading and investing setups, using Elliott wave analysis and simple technical tools and indicators. You will see many charts of popular markets, so that you can become more comfortable applying these tools to your favorite market.

Register now for this FREE webinar on Tuesday, May 6, at 3:30 p.m. Eastern time >>