back again after looking at the FY. report more thoroughlyto me...

back again after looking at the FY. report more thoroughly

to me so many discrepancies and things which do not make sense. (that may not necssarily mean anything and could logically explained by their accountant, but then again it might)

further there is still the unexpained sudden departure of the ceo and the company secretary during the year.

below are my notes. make of them what you will - if you can understand them.

h1 results
�gWhite Eagle Project sale cash consideration of US$60.25million purchased by the Company in 2005 for US$55.6 million - gain on sale of available for sale assets 0.9m �g
(FY REPORT report gives a loss on sale of $2.9m ?? )
�gNormalised Profit Before Tax ** eps.3.5c./shr�h
-----------------------------------------------------------fy report ebitdax ($5.7m.) / 297m. shrs = (1.9c./shr.) ??

The Company�fs oil and gas reserves were upgraded in October 2010 to 7.8 million barrels of oil
equivalent (inclusive of the Sale Assets). The upgrade followed the identification and certification of
an additional 412,000 barrels of proven oil reserves

(ie should add to the company�fs assets )

fy results
Cash flow from operating activities was $11m, down on the previous full�]year of $16m. The reduction in operating cash flow was due to the sale of the Sale Assets which had an effective date of 1 October 2010. Oil sales were about 68% of previous at year and price of oil was substantially higher, yet cash flow from operating activities was just 31 % of of previous year ??
�] fair value gain/ (loss) on hedges ($2.0m.)

�] Income tax expense $3.9m.) ( much more than on previous year. don�ft understand why income tax should be paid when the net profit/ loss was a loss )

�g�] depreciation/amortisation of assets and intangibles $11.7m. �g ( a very large amount. I don�ft see why amu would amortise reduced income due to reduced production from sale of assets when the company has already received in cash full value for these, plus the income from this asset from oil production over the years )

depretiation in reported assetts when from all the reporting we would expect the opposite -
nta over last 2 years from results summary 30/8/2011 Net tangible asset backing per
ordinary share as at 30 June 6/2011 6/2010 ---------------------------US 28.8 US 30.8c

2011 2010 2009
Net assets 88,495 99,242 76,169

depretiation of assetts shown on table below show that there has been real and large depretiation of assets over the last 3 years - not due to currency exchange rates.
my figures for 2009 & 2010 come from comsec and have been converted to $US from the going rate of exchange at the time
_______________6/09 6/10 6/11
Book Value($A) $A0.48 $0.38 $0.30
Book Value($US) $US.38 $0.34 $0.29
$A buys $US $0.80 $0.90 $1.05

well done if you can understand all this

gk.