Pro and Cons

PROs
Low PE
Substantial discount to NTA
Over 90% of the shares held by the top 20
Ownership of power Stations and gas producing properties
Well positioned to benefit from the replacement of coal by gas for base load power until renewables can
take over - Maybe a 20 year transition period

CONS
Conflict between Elliot and Chandler as evidenced by recent director resignations and significant votes against reappointment of Brian Allen
Elliot treating the Coy as his own private Coy
Funding not always in place before capital expenditure.
Slipform loan able to be used as a means of Elliot gaining control by converting the loan to equity.
If the current Slipform loan is US335m then an issue at AUD 0.20 per share would more than double the existing capital.
Irrespective of the treatment of Slipform future lenders would wish to see the large excess of current liabilities over current assets addressed.
The 48 m shares held in short position at end of Dec - These are likely to have been lent by the top 6 shareholders which confuses me. Is there some double game going on?
The short positions can also be a pro if funding is resolved and the net profit increases substantially in 2016 and 2017. The shorters may be forced to quickly buy back over a dollar.

Currently I have reduced my position until I see funding in place and the Slipform liability addressed.
I am also uncertain about which of the existing and future Indonesian and Phillipines plants will be BOTs.

My instinct says this could be a 10 bagger. My rational side is wary about committing a large sum.

I am happy for the very informed posters here to address my analysis
Waiken