Wazua
»
Investor
»
Stocks
»
KenolKobil HY 2016 ebitda +5.9%, net profit +29.5%
Rank: Chief Joined: 1/3/2007 Posts: 18,349 Location: Nairobi
|
So @Pesanane - What KK has done has "provided" for the debt? [Assuming the claim by KPRL is valid]. Does that means 800mn is still not provided for? So if KK has to pay KPRL then its a 800mn hit? Or is Ohana providing for the claim while still holding out for the 3.5bn? Greedy when others are fearful. Very fearful when others are greedy - to paraphrase Warren Buffett
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 5/25/2012 Posts: 4,105 Location: 08c
|
VituVingiSana wrote:So @Pesanane - What KK has done has "provided" for the "debt?" [Assuming the claim by KPRL is valid].YES Does that means 800mn is still not provided for? YES and NO. YES going by the original claim, NO bearing in mind there is an out of court agreement (settlement terms unknown) So if KK has to pay KPRL the full claim then its a 800mn hit? YES
Or is Ohana providing for the claim while still holding out for the 3.5bn? NO. KPRL invoiced KK Ksh. 1.2Bn for refining their crude. KK refused to pay and sued KPRL for yield shift losses amounting to Ksh. 3.5Bn caused by the inefficiencies of the refinery. To KK, the yield shift loss (difference between expected and actual yield on refining) amounted to a breach of contract on the part of KPRL. The Ksh. 3.5Bn is therefore for breach of contract, actual losses, Excess tax paid to KRA, interest, cost of suit etc. After a long impasses and change of guard at KK, KK withdrew the suit in favour of arbitration terms of which only ahmednassir may know. Beware of layman interpretation of the saga. Pesa Nane plans to be shilingi when he grows up.
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 2/26/2015 Posts: 1,147
|
karasinga wrote:lochaz-index wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:karasinga wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:karasinga wrote:hope you wont mind my busy chart. trying bar by bar analysis.  I wish I understood the charts... @VVS, I fear my own humble musings would be much inferior to the excellent work that YOU have already produced here at wazua. at times I wish I understood fundamentals... I find fundamentals "easier" to understand. Though one has to dig through each item for hidden (+ve or -ve) information. I am following your thread but I admit I need to spend more time on understanding the graphs. Tough to master both. Most investors - even some obscenely successful ones - are limited to one. Having tried TA back in 2011/12 and failed miserably, I let that ship sail. bar by bar analysis continues... 9th August 2016. spinning top formed. This confirms prior analysis made for the last two trading days.This demonstrates some indecision on the part of the bulls and the bears and would warrant watching for the next day’s price action. correction.on 9th august, a black closing Marubozu formed. that indicated that sellers controlled the price action from the first trade to the last trade although on a small volume. The day opened and prices went slightly higher, forming an upper shadow. Then prices reversed direction moving below the opening level, and the decline continues all day ending with a closing price equal to the low of the day. The bears were very strong during that day except during the initial phase of the session. on 10th august, a hammer formed. The price opened and started to trade lower. The bears, from the previous trading day,were still in control. The bulls then stepped in. They started to bring the price back up towards the top of the trading range on high volume. This created a small body with a large lower shadow. This represents that the bears could not maintain control. The long lower shadow now has the bears questioning whether the decline is still intact. A higher open on 11th August would confirm that the bulls have taken control. It's not over until I winskype id: karasinga. email: kkarasinga@gmail.com
|
|
|
Rank: Chief Joined: 1/3/2007 Posts: 18,349 Location: Nairobi
|
Pesa Nane wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:So @Pesanane - What KK has done has "provided" for the "debt?" [Assuming the claim by KPRL is valid].YES Does that means 800mn is still not provided for? YES and NO. YES going by the original claim, NO bearing in mind there is an out of court agreement (settlement terms unknown) So if KK has to pay KPRL the full claim then its a 800mn hit? YES
Or is Ohana providing for the claim while still holding out for the 3.5bn? NO. KPRL invoiced KK Ksh. 1.2Bn for refining their crude. KK refused to pay and sued KPRL for yield shift losses amounting to Ksh. 3.5Bn caused by the inefficiencies of the refinery. To KK, the yield shift loss (difference between expected and actual yield on refining) amounted to a breach of contract on the part of KPRL. The Ksh. 3.5Bn is therefore for breach of contract, actual losses, Excess tax paid to KRA, interest, cost of suit etc. After a long impasses and change of guard at KK, KK withdrew the suit in favour of arbitration terms of which only ahmednassir may know. Beware of layman interpretation of the saga. Asante. So if KK has withdrawn its KES 3.5bn claim then... BTW, if there was an out-of-court settlement [as you say, we don't have all the details] the amount KK agreed to pay KPRL becomes a debt. Unless the agreement is still not finalized... If the settlement has been finalized in favor of KPRL (for the 1.2bn) then the debt does materialize since it is contractual. KK needs to come clean on this matter so we know where we stand. Greedy when others are fearful. Very fearful when others are greedy - to paraphrase Warren Buffett
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/21/2010 Posts: 6,194 Location: nairobi
|
VituVingiSana wrote:Pesa Nane wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:So @Pesanane - What KK has done has "provided" for the "debt?" [Assuming the claim by KPRL is valid].YES Does that means 800mn is still not provided for? YES and NO. YES going by the original claim, NO bearing in mind there is an out of court agreement (settlement terms unknown) So if KK has to pay KPRL the full claim then its a 800mn hit? YES
Or is Ohana providing for the claim while still holding out for the 3.5bn? NO. KPRL invoiced KK Ksh. 1.2Bn for refining their crude. KK refused to pay and sued KPRL for yield shift losses amounting to Ksh. 3.5Bn caused by the inefficiencies of the refinery. To KK, the yield shift loss (difference between expected and actual yield on refining) amounted to a breach of contract on the part of KPRL. The Ksh. 3.5Bn is therefore for breach of contract, actual losses, Excess tax paid to KRA, interest, cost of suit etc. After a long impasses and change of guard at KK, KK withdrew the suit in favour of arbitration terms of which only ahmednassir may know. Beware of layman interpretation of the saga. Asante. So if KK has withdrawn its KES 3.5bn claim then... BTW, if there was an out-of-court settlement [as you say, we don't have all the details] the amount KK agreed to pay KPRL becomes a debt. Unless the agreement is still not finalized... If the settlement has been finalized in favor of KPRL (for the 1.2bn) then the debt does materialize since it is contractual. KK needs to come clean on this matter so we know where we stand. were there two cases?? Yes,kenya pipeline case kk wanted to be paid 5billion kpc made a counter claim of 1.6b and the refinery case ,kk wanted 3.1 b while kprl wanted 1.2b where there was out of court settlement.we should be updated and given every detail in white. "Don't let the fear of losing be greater than the excitement of winning."
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/11/2010 Posts: 5,040
|
Out of court is normally softer than the original amount. Why write the debt down now, or they are paying the 400m now? Best case scenario will be that this is the full amount on settlement.. You can't fight gava and thrive as an enterprise in Kenya The investor's chief problem - and even his worst enemy - is likely to be himself
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 5/25/2012 Posts: 4,105 Location: 08c
|
mlennyma wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:Pesa Nane wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:So @Pesanane - What KK has done has "provided" for the "debt?" [Assuming the claim by KPRL is valid].YES Does that means 800mn is still not provided for? YES and NO. YES going by the original claim, NO bearing in mind there is an out of court agreement (settlement terms unknown) So if KK has to pay KPRL the full claim then its a 800mn hit? YES
Or is Ohana providing for the claim while still holding out for the 3.5bn? NO. KPRL invoiced KK Ksh. 1.2Bn for refining their crude. KK refused to pay and sued KPRL for yield shift losses amounting to Ksh. 3.5Bn caused by the inefficiencies of the refinery. To KK, the yield shift loss (difference between expected and actual yield on refining) amounted to a breach of contract on the part of KPRL. The Ksh. 3.5Bn is therefore for breach of contract, actual losses, Excess tax paid to KRA, interest, cost of suit etc. After a long impasses and change of guard at KK, KK withdrew the suit in favour of arbitration terms of which only ahmednassir may know. Beware of layman interpretation of the saga. Asante. So if KK has withdrawn its KES 3.5bn claim then... BTW, if there was an out-of-court settlement [as you say, we don't have all the details] the amount KK agreed to pay KPRL becomes a debt. Unless the agreement is still not finalized... If the settlement has been finalized in favor of KPRL (for the 1.2bn) then the debt does materialize since it is contractual. KK needs to come clean on this matter so we know where we stand. were there two cases?? Yes, kenya pipeline case kk wanted to be paid 5billion kpc made a counter claim of 1.6b and the refinery case ,kk wanted 3.1 b while kprl wanted 1.2b where there was out of court settlement.we should be updated and given every detail in white. To my understanding (and I could be very wrong) this was a totally different case and it involved other major oil marketers as well and the amount demanded was in excess of Ksh. 10Bn. KPRL, KRA and ERC did make commitment to honor some of the claims though not in cash. The oil marketers were to make collections through surcharge on pump price not exceeding Ksh. 0.10 per liter of fuel Pesa Nane plans to be shilingi when he grows up.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/21/2010 Posts: 6,194 Location: nairobi
|
Pesa Nane wrote:mlennyma wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:Pesa Nane wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:So @Pesanane - What KK has done has "provided" for the "debt?" [Assuming the claim by KPRL is valid].YES Does that means 800mn is still not provided for? YES and NO. YES going by the original claim, NO bearing in mind there is an out of court agreement (settlement terms unknown) So if KK has to pay KPRL the full claim then its a 800mn hit? YES
Or is Ohana providing for the claim while still holding out for the 3.5bn? NO. KPRL invoiced KK Ksh. 1.2Bn for refining their crude. KK refused to pay and sued KPRL for yield shift losses amounting to Ksh. 3.5Bn caused by the inefficiencies of the refinery. To KK, the yield shift loss (difference between expected and actual yield on refining) amounted to a breach of contract on the part of KPRL. The Ksh. 3.5Bn is therefore for breach of contract, actual losses, Excess tax paid to KRA, interest, cost of suit etc. After a long impasses and change of guard at KK, KK withdrew the suit in favour of arbitration terms of which only ahmednassir may know. Beware of layman interpretation of the saga. Asante. So if KK has withdrawn its KES 3.5bn claim then... BTW, if there was an out-of-court settlement [as you say, we don't have all the details] the amount KK agreed to pay KPRL becomes a debt. Unless the agreement is still not finalized... If the settlement has been finalized in favor of KPRL (for the 1.2bn) then the debt does materialize since it is contractual. KK needs to come clean on this matter so we know where we stand. were there two cases?? Yes, kenya pipeline case kk wanted to be paid 5billion kpc made a counter claim of 1.6b and the refinery case ,kk wanted 3.1 b while kprl wanted 1.2b where there was out of court settlement.we should be updated and given every detail in white. To my understanding (and I could be very wrong) this was a totally different case and it involved other major oil marketers as well and the amount demanded was in excess of Ksh. 10Bn. KPRL, KRA and ERC did make commitment to honor some of the claims though not in cash. The oil marketers were to make collections through surcharge on pump price not exceeding Ksh. 0.10 per liter of fuel so confusing, but the arbitration case was purely between kk and kpc "Don't let the fear of losing be greater than the excitement of winning."
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 2/26/2015 Posts: 1,147
|
karasinga wrote:karasinga wrote:lochaz-index wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:karasinga wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:karasinga wrote:hope you wont mind my busy chart. trying bar by bar analysis. I wish I understood the charts... @VVS, I fear my own humble musings would be much inferior to the excellent work that YOU have already produced here at wazua. at times I wish I understood fundamentals... I find fundamentals "easier" to understand. Though one has to dig through each item for hidden (+ve or -ve) information. I am following your thread but I admit I need to spend more time on understanding the graphs. Tough to master both. Most investors - even some obscenely successful ones - are limited to one. Having tried TA back in 2011/12 and failed miserably, I let that ship sail. bar by bar analysis continues... 9th August 2016. spinning top formed. This confirms prior analysis made for the last two trading days.This demonstrates some indecision on the part of the bulls and the bears and would warrant watching for the next day’s price action. correction.on 9th august, a black closing Marubozu formed. that indicated that sellers controlled the price action from the first trade to the last trade although on a small volume. The day opened and prices went slightly higher, forming an upper shadow. Then prices reversed direction moving below the opening level, and the decline continues all day ending with a closing price equal to the low of the day. The bears were very strong during that day except during the initial phase of the session. on 10th august, a hammer formed. The price opened and started to trade lower. The bears, from the previous trading day,were still in control. The bulls then stepped in. They started to bring the price back up towards the top of the trading range on high volume. This created a small body with a large lower shadow. This represents that the bears could not maintain control. The long lower shadow now has the bears questioning whether the decline is still intact. A higher open on 11th August would confirm that the bulls have taken control. on 11th, another hammer with a black head formed still on high volume. this indicates: 1. bears are still present although they seem to be losing steam(higher low). 2. bulls might be grouping to take it higher. A higher open as from 12th august would confirm bulls are in full control. BABY STEPS... It's not over until I winskype id: karasinga. email: kkarasinga@gmail.com
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 4/4/2016 Posts: 2,016 Location: Kitale
|
Kenolkobil HY 2016 Results-My take. Total income-37193744000 Expenses-36003807000 Balance-1189937000 Dividend payment-220764180 Retained earnings-969172820 *Shareholders got 19% of the net profit while 81% was retained. *What is the company planning to do with the 81% retained income? *cost of sales-why does it consume 90% of the total income? *What is the management doing to bring down the cost of sales? *Debt to equity ratio at 94%. Despite selling assets in tanzania,congo and uganda,why is this ratio still high? *Going forward,what are the growth plans? Towards the goal of financial freedom
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Investor
»
Stocks
»
KenolKobil HY 2016 ebitda +5.9%, net profit +29.5%
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|