- Joined
- 29 September 2008
- Posts
- 113
- Reactions
- 0
Thats the truth,
I dont think politics comes into it. Pretty much the same both of them.
When it comes to LINC.
LNC - Linc Energy
- Thread starter noirua
- Start date
-
- Tags
- linc energy lnc
Thats the truth,
I dont think politics comes into it. Pretty much the same both of them.
When it comes to LINC.
- Joined
- 1 August 2010
- Posts
- 164
- Reactions
- 0
I dont believe you actually bought your shares on the basis, that a conservative government would be better for LINC. Did you, really????
And tell the truth.
Being honest.... and excuse me as a non Aussie, and not necessarily a follower of Australian politics.
Ref this thread. Page No:70 #1398 also Page 71 #1403 & #1404
I assumed MR Monk was against a mining tax? If the opposition win, may the tax not be axed? If yes, then possibly it may have a SHORT TERM positive impact on the LNC energy sp?
Is it also possible, that other potentual buyers for the remaining coal tenements, are waiting on the side lines to see if the mining tax proposals will remain as is?
And of course as I mentioned in many previous comments, I have faith in the long term for this company, so I personaly think a sp of 1.71 has plenty of upside either way.
Maybe Linc's future lays beyond Australia, so in the long term, it may not matter which party or parties govern.
I continue to be open to advice, education and speculation.
- Joined
- 1 August 2010
- Posts
- 164
- Reactions
- 0
I don't understand why people have come to the conclusion that labor are anti UCG ? and trying to stand in the way..??
I hold all three of these companies, Linc since the beginning and Martin Ferguson in particular has been very supportive of what linc are trying to achieve.......
If state labor are the problem, surely fed lab would step in and tell em to back off as Ferguson himself recognises Australias growing dependance on foreign oil ...
I often wonder where my head is sir. My only defence is, it pays to think outside the box.
It seems I'm not the only one thinking a party change would help the cause.
Check page 63 #1259 in answer to a question posed by your good self.
Linc holder.
Good research there, I'm all for thinking outside the box, but my point about you buying shares based on a 50/50 at best election outcome is beyond my comprehension, however if it works out and you make a profit then good luck to you..
As you know, and has been said often enough here, Linc are not confined to Queensland, south Australia, or indeed anywhere in Australia for that matter with more than enough options over seas, so for this one reason I can't see the election here having any effect on the share price, but if your right I won't complaine, I'm holding enough already...
- Joined
- 29 September 2008
- Posts
- 113
- Reactions
- 0
If you are debating around the Super profits mining tax,
Its also necessary to know which one.
The first proposal was abandoned by the new PM when she took over.
The new proposal is way different to the first, much watered down,
only applies to ore and coal, and in effect is only there to close a loophole, in the current arrangements.
Mining companies understand this, of course they are greedy, but this closing of a loophole wont deter them from investing, as long as there is a market for coal.
The tax is still being worked on, and a long way from being presented to parliament, if the gov. can hold on.
I think it was 2013, before it starts anyway.
Its also necessary to know which one.
The first proposal was abandoned by the new PM when she took over.
The new proposal is way different to the first, much watered down,
only applies to ore and coal, and in effect is only there to close a loophole, in the current arrangements.
Mining companies understand this, of course they are greedy, but this closing of a loophole wont deter them from investing, as long as there is a market for coal.
The tax is still being worked on, and a long way from being presented to parliament, if the gov. can hold on.
I think it was 2013, before it starts anyway.
Linc's future is beyond Australia for sure. If they have the success I think they deserve they will be placed extremely well to develop into a 'new age' energy company. They will know what it takes to develop and bring to market new tech and they will be looking for it IMO and should have great cash flow to develop the next good idea. All pure speculation of course, looking well down the road, but once in a while you see a company that has got amazing potential, Linc IMO is one of those... Mad Monk or Witchy Poo ain't going to slow these guys down, even if they try! They have got it together, no BS, no spin and they do the yeoman's work!
I hold.
I hold.
- Joined
- 1 August 2010
- Posts
- 164
- Reactions
- 0
If you are debating around the Super profits mining tax,
Its also necessary to know which one.
The first proposal was abandoned by the new PM when she took over.
The new proposal is way different to the first, much watered down,
only applies to ore and coal, and in effect is only there to close a loophole, in the current arrangements.
Mining companies understand this, of course they are greedy, but this closing of a loophole wont deter them from investing, as long as there is a market for coal.
The tax is still being worked on, and a long way from being presented to parliament, if the gov. can hold on.
I think it was 2013, before it starts anyway.
Thank you for the clarification frankB.
Namrog, I started following this thread when I first purchaced Linc shares back in June, on the strong recommendation of a very good friend, who also contributes to this thread.
I've since read all pages, and noted many interesting facts, figures, statistics, charts and individuals points of view.
One thing we all have in common is our intension to make some cash, either in the long, medium or short term.
I'm sure you agree that the markets can act in strange, sometimes illogical ways, so I agree that to purchase shares, solely hoping for the election results to drive them up, would be stupid of me. But as stated I see the buy at 1.71, sooner or later a win win.
Pleasant weekend folks
Hmmmm yes! efficient market theory, biggest load of twaddle that an academic ever came up with! You just have to watch the markets for a year to work out they are very often irrational! If you think about it for a second there would really be very little opportunity if the markets where efficient. I subscribe to emotional roller coaster theory! I would not have it any other way! These guys trashed LNC beyond all sense, down around the $1 mark it was a gift! Boy am I glad they did it for one! Buy buy buy... LOL. Looking back it will seem silly... some gold miners are down there in silly territory today! GFC lows with gold at 1230 odd going into the strong season... what the heck Buy buy...
but I am bias I do hold and I am buying...!
DYODD etc etc
I would not have it any other way! These guys trashed LNC beyond all sense, down around the $1 mark it was a gift! Boy am I glad they did it for one! Buy buy buy... LOL. Looking back it will seem silly... some gold miners are down there in silly territory today! GFC lows with gold at 1230 odd going into the strong season... what the heck Buy buy...but I am bias I do hold and I am buying...!
DYODD etc etc
As we have some overseas posters on this thread, this is the official site of the election results.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
This is the current situation as at 23/8 12.52 pm-
Aust Labor Party (ALP) 71
Libs/Nats Coalition 72
Greens 1
Independents 2
Doubtful 4
------
TOTAL 150
Two of the doubtful seats could go to Independents so that group, whether 2, 3, or 4, will have a big say in who forms Government. At least one of the confirmed Independents, Bob Katter represents the top third of Queensland (excluding Cape York)which includes the mining areas of Mt Isa, Greenvale and Mungana. He has openly stated that he is against any mining tax so, while he doesn't speak for the group, it is unlikely that the Tax will go ahead in the current parliament. I have heard that the other confirmed Independent, Tony Windsor is also against a mining Tax.
Of course the Greens member will almost certainly vote with the ALP.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
This is the current situation as at 23/8 12.52 pm-
Aust Labor Party (ALP) 71
Libs/Nats Coalition 72
Greens 1
Independents 2
Doubtful 4
------
TOTAL 150
Two of the doubtful seats could go to Independents so that group, whether 2, 3, or 4, will have a big say in who forms Government. At least one of the confirmed Independents, Bob Katter represents the top third of Queensland (excluding Cape York)which includes the mining areas of Mt Isa, Greenvale and Mungana. He has openly stated that he is against any mining tax so, while he doesn't speak for the group, it is unlikely that the Tax will go ahead in the current parliament. I have heard that the other confirmed Independent, Tony Windsor is also against a mining Tax.
Of course the Greens member will almost certainly vote with the ALP.
Further to my last post, Bob Katter has not been a confirmed provisional winner. This is because the Lib/Nats have outpolled the ALP and they are redistributing ALP preferences for a new 2 party preferred vote.
So, either Katter or the Lib/Nats candidate will win. I think that the ALP would preference Katter (rather than Libs/Nats), so he should win.
So, either Katter or the Lib/Nats candidate will win. I think that the ALP would preference Katter (rather than Libs/Nats), so he should win.
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,357
- Reactions
- 7,232
Three weeks now since confirmation of the first coal sale. The market seems to have been definitely underwhelmed by that result.
I'm wondering at what stage we'll see further conversations about the remaining coal sales and any more definitive plans for the development of the various projects ?
Or maybe Peter has decided that since LINC won't have to go back for more capital raising he doesn't need to beat up the company as much ? And perhaps the drifting share price represents the last significant opportunity for people who understand what is happening to accumulate further holdings. Just speculation.
I'm wondering at what stage we'll see further conversations about the remaining coal sales and any more definitive plans for the development of the various projects ?
Or maybe Peter has decided that since LINC won't have to go back for more capital raising he doesn't need to beat up the company as much ? And perhaps the drifting share price represents the last significant opportunity for people who understand what is happening to accumulate further holdings. Just speculation.
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,357
- Reactions
- 7,232
Some heavy stop losses seem to be triggered today. $1.59 with a rock.............
Yes... we are being priced like a run of the mill oiler. I have support a 1.56 then again at 1.465 with the 200DMA at 1.47. Golden cross coming up (50/200 DMA), volume is not huge and we are looking oversold. I think I mused 1.56 could be the worst of it earlier, looks like we are all but there. I have divergences on some of my proprietary oscillators, a good indication. Maybe we are seeing some short action gunning the 200DMA, if so they can turn on a dime if we get some buying coming in soon. So far this looks like a good consolidation, if we close well here I would pick today as the worst of it... sofa so good, 1.615 as I type... going green today would be brilliant sign IMO!
- Joined
- 28 July 2010
- Posts
- 180
- Reactions
- 0
This and GGE/GGP = a poop day for my specs..
LNC
Last Trade 1.575
Bid 1.640 Offer 1.415
Today's Change -0.090 (-5.405%)
Open 1.665
Today's High 1.670 Today's Low 1.550
Volume 3647411
It was previously, mentioned that the "second" coal sale would be within the next few months, and 2 of those outbid were still interested.
I don't know many companies that would like to post news during a Hung Election
Except BHP
LNC
Last Trade 1.575
Bid 1.640 Offer 1.415
Today's Change -0.090 (-5.405%)
Open 1.665
Today's High 1.670 Today's Low 1.550
Volume 3647411
It was previously, mentioned that the "second" coal sale would be within the next few months, and 2 of those outbid were still interested.
I don't know many companies that would like to post news during a Hung Election
Except BHP
- Joined
- 27 May 2008
- Posts
- 165
- Reactions
- 0
http://www.lincenergy.com.au/pdf/investor-linc-issue-16.pdf
Lots of news
nice photo
Lots of news
- COAL SALE AWAY FOR BILLIONS
- WORTH ITS WEIGHT IN COAL
- A SMARTER USE FOR COAL
- FIRST STEPS INTO ALASKA
- KNOW YOUR UCG
nice photo
Very illuminating figures on construction costs of a GTL plant on page 3 of August 2010 Investor -Linc
http://www.lincenergy.com.au/pdf/investor-linc-issue-16.pdf
My understanding of these figures is that it is estimated that it will cost $450M minimum to construct a 5,000 bpd (oil equivalent) plant. This would include the oil equivalent of Naphtha and power
"Capital and operating cost information was used by Linc Energy to perform rigorous economic sensitivity analysis and for evaluating project specific
economics. Benchmarking Linc Energy’s facility with published coal to liquid facilities on an installed capital cost per barrel of daily capacity (see Table 2)
indicates Linc Energy’s UCG to GTL complex compares very favourably, and confirms the capital expenditure benefit of UCG to GTL.
Table 2: Reference of coal to liquid (CTL) costs expressed as USD capital expenditure required per equivalent barrel of capacity of the GTL complex
Reference.......................... USD (‘000)/ebpd”
Linc Energy.........................90 to 120
Commercial CTL facility........100 to 200
US DOE (Jan 09).................106 to 115
Aker Solution references.......120 to 140
CTL
* Please note the above ranges reflect various site locations.
This, in addition to the detailed economic evaluation performed by the company, confirms that a strong business case exists for a UCG to GTL facility. Using this information, further process and project optimisation work is planned in 2010 to support a smaller, modular scale capacity approach to further reduce the scale-up risks of the opportunity.
* bbl refers to barrel liquid fuels, DAF = dry-ash free basis
” ebpd = equivalent barrels per day, including associated power"
From the same page above-
"Results from the study indicate that 20,790 bpd of Fischer-Tropsch liquid fuels would be produced, with a product distribution of 62 per cent diesel, 33
per cent naphtha and 5 per cent LPG. The GTL facility will also be able to produce jet A-1 fuel, though this would reduce the diesel volume.
Electricity is expected to be exported via the South Australian electricity grid.
The calculated product yield for the proposed Linc Energy facility (see Table 1) refers to the amount of liquid product produced per tonne of coal (dry ash
free basis) consumed. The product yield of 1.9 equivalent barrels per tonne of coal (dry ash free basis) includes power generation, which based on
energy content, has been converted to an equivalent number of barrels of liquid product.
Table 1: Product Yield
Yield......................................................bbl/tonne coal (DAF)*
Fischer-Tropsch liquid fuels......................................1.4
Total liquid fuels ....................................................1.7
Equivalent barrels of liquid fuels (includes power)......1.9"
It appears to me that the profitability figures in the BBY analyst report of 23 April 09 are no longer relevant.
Any comments ????
http://www.lincenergy.com.au/pdf/analyst-20.pdf
http://www.lincenergy.com.au/pdf/investor-linc-issue-16.pdf
My understanding of these figures is that it is estimated that it will cost $450M minimum to construct a 5,000 bpd (oil equivalent) plant. This would include the oil equivalent of Naphtha and power
"Capital and operating cost information was used by Linc Energy to perform rigorous economic sensitivity analysis and for evaluating project specific
economics. Benchmarking Linc Energy’s facility with published coal to liquid facilities on an installed capital cost per barrel of daily capacity (see Table 2)
indicates Linc Energy’s UCG to GTL complex compares very favourably, and confirms the capital expenditure benefit of UCG to GTL.
Table 2: Reference of coal to liquid (CTL) costs expressed as USD capital expenditure required per equivalent barrel of capacity of the GTL complex
Reference.......................... USD (‘000)/ebpd”
Linc Energy.........................90 to 120
Commercial CTL facility........100 to 200
US DOE (Jan 09).................106 to 115
Aker Solution references.......120 to 140
CTL
* Please note the above ranges reflect various site locations.
This, in addition to the detailed economic evaluation performed by the company, confirms that a strong business case exists for a UCG to GTL facility. Using this information, further process and project optimisation work is planned in 2010 to support a smaller, modular scale capacity approach to further reduce the scale-up risks of the opportunity.
* bbl refers to barrel liquid fuels, DAF = dry-ash free basis
” ebpd = equivalent barrels per day, including associated power"
From the same page above-
"Results from the study indicate that 20,790 bpd of Fischer-Tropsch liquid fuels would be produced, with a product distribution of 62 per cent diesel, 33
per cent naphtha and 5 per cent LPG. The GTL facility will also be able to produce jet A-1 fuel, though this would reduce the diesel volume.
Electricity is expected to be exported via the South Australian electricity grid.
The calculated product yield for the proposed Linc Energy facility (see Table 1) refers to the amount of liquid product produced per tonne of coal (dry ash
free basis) consumed. The product yield of 1.9 equivalent barrels per tonne of coal (dry ash free basis) includes power generation, which based on
energy content, has been converted to an equivalent number of barrels of liquid product.
Table 1: Product Yield
Yield......................................................bbl/tonne coal (DAF)*
Fischer-Tropsch liquid fuels......................................1.4
Total liquid fuels ....................................................1.7
Equivalent barrels of liquid fuels (includes power)......1.9"
It appears to me that the profitability figures in the BBY analyst report of 23 April 09 are no longer relevant.
Any comments ????
http://www.lincenergy.com.au/pdf/analyst-20.pdf
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,357
- Reactions
- 7,232
In relation to the question of how much the LNC Gas to Liquids plant will cost it's worth recognizing what is happening to the availability and price oil. In that sense getting a plant underway as quickly as possible seems to make good sense and good economics.
Excellent article in Energy Bulletin which explores 3 separate reports on the question.
So what is the likelihood that they are all hopelessly wrong?
http://www.energybulletin.net/stori...point-oil-supply-turmoil-and-price-volatility
Excellent article in Energy Bulletin which explores 3 separate reports on the question.
So what is the likelihood that they are all hopelessly wrong?
http://www.energybulletin.net/stori...point-oil-supply-turmoil-and-price-volatility
With recent reports of the russians loading iran's nuclear reactor with fuel rods making international news, I wonder how long it will be before there is an israeli attempt to destroy it...
I believe that if there is to be oil supply and price volatility, then there is a great chance that this is where it will come from...
If this were to happen, and making the terrible assumption that it will at some stage, world oil supplies will surely suffer massive disruption...and I would think for many years....
So if there is such a thing as an "ill wind blowing some good" then Linc ungently need to go ahead with a coal to liquid plant asap , providing, and here lays the big IF still in my mind, that they have proven their technology works to a satisfactory level, to proceed...?
Call me cynical, but I'm not convinced it does, or if it does then why is there no or little credit given for such, and shouldn't that be reflected with a premium built into the current share price ....?
And why aren't some of the oil majors climbing all over Linc to get a piece of the action... ??
Something just doesn't add up ???
I believe that if there is to be oil supply and price volatility, then there is a great chance that this is where it will come from...
If this were to happen, and making the terrible assumption that it will at some stage, world oil supplies will surely suffer massive disruption...and I would think for many years....
So if there is such a thing as an "ill wind blowing some good" then Linc ungently need to go ahead with a coal to liquid plant asap , providing, and here lays the big IF still in my mind, that they have proven their technology works to a satisfactory level, to proceed...?
Call me cynical, but I'm not convinced it does, or if it does then why is there no or little credit given for such, and shouldn't that be reflected with a premium built into the current share price ....?
And why aren't some of the oil majors climbing all over Linc to get a piece of the action... ??
Something just doesn't add up ???
Their newsletter painted a nice picture. But still nothing solid with gtl. I think this is what the market is waiting for. selling coal is great money and will boost the share price but ultimitely this is just money that can whittle away and be spent. What is needed are definite plans for where and when this 20000 bpd plant will be complete. That will give all a substanial date to work to and when we will see cash flow from their prime business
- Joined
- 5 September 2008
- Posts
- 54
- Reactions
- 0
A friend in the UK just e-mailed me an update sheet for a UK AIM listed penny share based tipsheet which has this comment for AFC which it tipped just before the arrangement with Linc was announced.
I believe that should mean some revenue for Linc following the exclusivity agreement they have with AFC Energy? Of course it also means that there are companies in the same arena as Linc that are sneaking ahead while Linc tries to sell coal and sort out its funding for the projects. Linc is no longer leading as it was 2 years ago.
However, this 'competition' has the advantage that it may get UCG into the mainstream news which is really where we need it to get investor interest and the Linc stock behaving like we all think it should. Of course, the downside is that if any of these projects screw up (and I beleive Linc is one of the most professional of the companies involved) the news could taint Linc before it is even got off the ground!
In the same tipsheet (RHPS) they have another company related to what Linc is trying to do - but at the other end:-
I wrote to Linc telling them about OCG about 6 months ago as they have a micro-channel FT reactor which is a lot smaller (and I guess cheaper to build) than the traditional tower. Their original idea was to build an FT reactor small enough to use on oil rigs and convert the gas they normally flame-off to fuel rather than waste it. The also sell catalysts to industries so I thought there may be some use Linc could get from these guys. No idea whether any contact was made.
Come on Linc, get a fri**in move on!
Get rid of the beard, dump the daft fonts on Investorlinc and start making some electricity at least!!! I'm producing more gas than you have and I would much rather prefer it the other way round !!!
Note: I hold Linc, the other 2 are on my wish list at present.
I believe that should mean some revenue for Linc following the exclusivity agreement they have with AFC Energy? Of course it also means that there are companies in the same arena as Linc that are sneaking ahead while Linc tries to sell coal and sort out its funding for the projects. Linc is no longer leading as it was 2 years ago.
However, this 'competition' has the advantage that it may get UCG into the mainstream news which is really where we need it to get investor interest and the Linc stock behaving like we all think it should. Of course, the downside is that if any of these projects screw up (and I beleive Linc is one of the most professional of the companies involved) the news could taint Linc before it is even got off the ground!
In the same tipsheet (RHPS) they have another company related to what Linc is trying to do - but at the other end:-
I wrote to Linc telling them about OCG about 6 months ago as they have a micro-channel FT reactor which is a lot smaller (and I guess cheaper to build) than the traditional tower. Their original idea was to build an FT reactor small enough to use on oil rigs and convert the gas they normally flame-off to fuel rather than waste it. The also sell catalysts to industries so I thought there may be some use Linc could get from these guys. No idea whether any contact was made.
Come on Linc, get a fri**in move on!
Get rid of the beard, dump the daft fonts on Investorlinc and start making some electricity at least!!! I'm producing more gas than you have and I would much rather prefer it the other way round !!!
Note: I hold Linc, the other 2 are on my wish list at present.
