Endeavour Silver (EXK) – Higher Commodity Prices Expected to Benefit 2H Performance

Friday, July 10, 2020

Endeavour Silver (EXK)(EDR:CA)

Higher Commodity Prices Expected to Benefit 2H Performance

As of April 24, 2020, Noble Capital Markets research on Endeavour Silver is published under ticker symbols (EXK and EDR:CA). The price target is in USD and based on ticker symbol EXK. Research reports dated prior to April 24, 2020 may not follow these guidelines and could account for a variance in the price target.
Endeavour Silver Corp is a precious metal mining company. The company is primarily engaged in silver mining and owns three high-grade, underground, silver-gold mines in Mexico. Its other business activities include acquisition, exploration, development, extraction, processing, refining and reclamation. The company is organized into four operating mining segments, Guanacevi, Bolanitos, El Cubo, and El Compas, which are located in Mexico as well as Exploration and Corporate segments. Its Exploration segment consists of projects in the exploration and evaluation phases in Mexico and Chile.

Mark Reichman, Senior Research Analyst of Natural Resources, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.

Refer to the full report for the price target, fundamental analysis, and rating.

    Second quarter production results. Compared to the prior year period, second quarter silver and gold production declined 43.7% and 39.1% to 596,545 ounces and 5,817 ounces, respectively. Sequentially, silver and gold production declined 30.4% and 31.4%, respectively. Second quarter production was negatively impacted by the temporary suspension of mining operations in Mexico due government-mandated work restrictions. Mining operations resumed in late May. The bright spot for the quarter was the improvement at the Guanacevi mine as a result of access to new higher grade ore bodies. We expect improvement at the Bolanitos mine beginning in the third quarter.

    Updating estimates. We have narrowed our 2020 loss per share estimate to $(0.14) from $(0.15) based on higher gold and silver prices. Additionally, we have increased our 2021 EPS estimate to …



    Click to get the full report

This research is provided by Noble Capital Markets, Inc., a FINRA and S.E.C. registered broker-dealer (B/D).

*Analyst
certification and important disclosures included in the full report. 
NOTE: investment decisions should not be based upon the content of
this research summary.  Proper due diligence is required before
making any investment decision.
 

Great Panther Mining Limited (GPL) – 2Q Production Highlights Solid Performance at Tucano

Friday, July 10, 2020

Great Panther Mining (GPL)(GPR:CA)

Encouraging Initial Results from the 2020 Tucano Drilling Program

As of April 24, 2020, Noble Capital Markets research on Great Panther Mining is published under ticker symbols (GPL and GPR:CA). The price target is in USD and based on ticker symbol GPL. Research reports dated prior to April 24, 2020 may not follow these guidelines and could account for a variance in the price target.
Great Panther Mining Limited, headquartered in Vancouver, Canada, is a precious metals mining and exploration company that operates three mines. These include: 1) the Tucano gold mine in Amapa State, Brazil, 2) the Guanajuato mine complex which includes the Guanajuato and San Ignacio mines in Mexico, and 3) the Topia mine in Mexico. Great Panther also owns the Coricancha Mine in Peru, which is expected to restart operations in 2020. The shares are traded under the ticker “GPR” on the Toronto Stock Exchange and under the ticker “GPL” on the NYSE American.

Mark Reichman, Senior Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.

Refer to the full report for the price target, fundamental analysis, and rating.

    Second quarter production results. Great Panther produced 38,540 gold equivalent ounces, including 36,356 ounces of gold and 142,457 ounces of silver. Compared with the prior year period, gold production increased 8.7%, while silver production declined 59.3%. Sequentially, gold production increased 25.6%, while silver production decreased 62.0%. Notably, Tucano mine gold production increased 18.5% on a year-over-year basis and 35.3% sequentially due to greater ore processing rates and higher gold grades and recoveries. The company’s operations in Mexico, which produce mostly silver, resumed production in June following government mandated COVID-19 work restrictions.

    Updating estimates. The company provided updated 2020 production guidance and expects to produce between 146,000 and 158,000 gold equivalent ounces, inclusive of the Topia mine. We have narrowed our 2020 loss per share estimate to …



    Click to get the full report.

This research is provided by Noble Capital Markets, Inc., a FINRA and S.E.C. registered broker-dealer (B/D).

*Analyst
certification and important disclosures included in the full report. 
NOTE: investment decisions should not be based upon the content of
this research summary.  Proper due diligence is required before
making any investment decision.
 

Neovasc (NVCN)(NVCN:CA) – FDA Meeting is Scheduled for October

Friday, July 10, 2020

Neovasc (NVCN)(NVCN:CA)

FDA Meeting is Scheduled for October

As of April 24, 2020, Noble Capital Markets research on Neovasc is published under ticker symbols (NVCN and NVCN:CA). The price target is in USD and based on ticker symbol NVCN. Research reports dated prior to April 24, 2020 may not follow these guidelines and could account for a variance in the price target.
Neovasc Inc is a specialty medical device company. The company develops, manufactures and markets products for the rapidly growing cardiovascular marketplace. Its products include the Tiara for the transcatheter treatment of mitral valve disease and the Neovasc Reducer for the treatment of refractory angina. Neovasc is developing the Tiara for the treatment of mitral valve disease. Neovasc operates its business in one segment.

Ahu Demir, Ph.D., Biotechnology Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.

Refer to the full report for the price target, fundamental analysis, and rating.

FDA meeting is scheduled.  Yesterday, Neovasc announced the date for the Circulatory System Devices Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On October 27, 2020, the panel will review the premarket approval application (PMA) for Reducer.

The Reducer is for the treatment of refractory angina in the U.S. Neovasc is seeking FDA approval to commercialize the Reducer for the treatment of refractory angina in the United States. The device is currently…



Click to get the full report.

This Company Sponsored Research is provided by Noble Capital Markets, Inc., a FINRA and S.E.C. registered broker-dealer (B/D).

*Analyst
certification and important disclosures included in the full report. 
NOTE: investment decisions should not be based upon the content of
this research summary.  Proper due diligence is required before
making any investment decision.
 

The Risk of Economic Confidence Waning

The Role of Confidence in Today’s Fed Policy

In recent years, the government and the Federal Reserve have been employing a policy closely aligned to Modern Monetary Theory (MMT).  Under MMT, the government pushes the economy up to a point near full employment by stimulating the economy through fiscal spending and a loose monetary policy.  Government is less concerned with running up the federal debt than expanding the economy.  At the same time, the Federal Reserve declares its intent to keep interest rates low by buying bonds.  By stating interest rate targets, it may not even need to actively buy bonds in the open market as investors will be reluctant to sell bonds at interest rates above targeted levels.  Lower interest rates, of course, serve the government well as its debt grows.  MMT argues that federal debt should not be a concern because the government can always print money.  Given the political attraction of being able to spend without worrying about debt levels, politicians on both sides of the aisle have been embracing MMT.

 

Such a policy has served the United States, Japan, and Germany well in recent years.  But the policy relies on two key assumptions.  First, the government will only stimulate the economy up to the point that it begins to cause inflation.  Once there are signs of inflation, the government will reduce its spending or raise taxes to lower private-sector spending.  If consumers do not believe the government will cut back on spending, they will continue to consume ahead of price increases.  Second, investors must believe that the Federal Reserve will step in to support its price targets.  If investors believe interest rates are about to rise, they will sell bonds and offset any efforts by the Fed to buy bonds.  At the heart of MMT is the belief that federal debt is different from private debt and that rising federal debt will not crowd out the ability of the private sector to issue debt.  To date, foreign investors have actively purchased U.S. debt. 

When the economy shut down this spring, the government stepped in with a heavy dose of both fiscal and monetary stimuli just as it did after the Great Recession when it bailed out troubled banks.  That stimulus helped offset reduced private sector spending.  The action did not lead to inflation because unemployment levels were high.  But what will happen when the pandemic ends?  The economy entered the pandemic in a position of near full employment.  In fact, some would say that it was operating at a rate below the transitional unemployment rate.  When unemployment gets too low, workers are not available to find their way towards fast-growing industries.  This can reduce future economic growth.

 

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

 

So, what happens if furloughed workers return to work at the same time the economy is exploding with pent-up demand.  Under MMT, the government should react by raising taxes and increasing targeted interest rates.  However, raising taxes and increasing interest rates may be difficult to do in a politically charged environment.

 

 

And, what happens if bond market participants lose confidence in the United States?  Interest rates could rise in defiance to the Federal Reserve’s attempts to target low rates.  In such a scenario, the Fed would be forced to print more money to buy bonds, essentially doubling down its bet.  In essence, MMT is comparable to the gambler who keeps doubling his bet, thinking that eventually, he will win and eliminate his losses.  Like the gambler, MMT supporters are not concerned with debt, and the gambit works as long as the holders of debt remain confident that it will be repaid.

 

Suggested Reading:

The Limits of Government Tinkering

Will There be an Explosion in New Acquisitions?

Gold May Become Investors’ Favorite for Several Years

 

Enjoy Premium Channelchek Content at No Cost

 

Sources:

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/4/16/18251646/modern-monetary-theory-new-moment-explained, Dylan Matthews, Vox, April 16, 2019

https://www.businessinsider.com/modern-monetary-theory-mmt-explained-aoc-2019-3, Jim Edwards and Theron Mohamed, Business Insider, March 2, 2020

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/heres-who-owns-a-record-2121-trillion-of-us-debt-2018-08-21#:~:text=Some%2070%25%20of%20the%20national,information%20from%20the%20U.S.%20Treasury., Jeffry Bartash, MarkeWatch, August 23, 2018

Warren Buffet vs. Elon Musk: Who’s Right?

Is Warren Buffett or Elon Musk Making the Right Bet?

Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway is acquiring the natural gas transmission and storage assets from Dominion Energy for approximately $10 billion. At the same time that Berkshire is investing in the carbon-based energy infrastructure, Elon Musk and Tesla are preparing for “Battery Day” (see Channelchek article on June 17, 2020, “Is Elon Musk’s ‘Battery Day’ Losing its Charge?” Many believe that Tesla is on the brink of announcing significant improvements in the capacity and life of car batteries and the ability to store power generated from solar electricity. This is technology that could reduce the value of utility assets such as those bought by Berkshire. The two have a long history of butting heads. To quote Elon Musk, Buffett “does a lot of capital allocation” and “we should have, I think, fewer people doing law, fewer people doing finance, and more people making stuff.” So, who is right: the reigning champ of value investing or the upcoming king of growth investing?

Source: Bloomberg Businessweek

 

The Case for Warren Buffett and Value Investing

Warren Buffet is an unabashed supporter of value investing. He favors taking passive investment in well-known brand names that have dominant market positions. He likes companies that are well run but are facing a weakened financial position due to external events outside of managements’ control. Berkshire has long favored the stability of utility stocks dating back to the purchase of MidAmerican Energy in 1999. Berkshire followed the MidAmerican Energy acquisition by acquiring PacifiCorp, Northern Powergrid, CalEnergy Generation, Kern River Gas Transmission, Northern Natural Gas, NV Energy, and AltaLink. With the acquisition of assets from Dominion Energy, Berkshire will now own 18% of the gas transmission assets in the United States. The purchase, which includes spending $5 billion in cash, will hardly put a dent in Berkshire’s cash position, which was $137 billion as of May. From management’s point of view, the acquisition is putting cash to use that is earning a low return. As such, the company’s return on investment will increase even if it is being used to buy low-growth utility assets. As you might expect, the shares of Berkshire Hathaway tend to trade in a manner reflective of its underlying assets. Analysts following Berkshire project a growth rate in the single digits, and the shares trade at valuation multiples similar to the broader market.

 

The Case for Elon Musk and Growth Investing

Elon Musk and Tesla, Inc. take a different approach to investing. Tesla designs develops, manufactures, and sells electric vehicles, energy storage systems, and solar products. Tesla is a product disruptor that is not interested in acquiring out-of-favor companies. The few acquisitions that Tesla has made, such as Maxwell Technologies or SolarCity, have been done to support its drive to make technological breakthroughs. It does not want to purchase utility assets; it wants to make utility assets irrelevant. Some believe its development of solar energy and Powerwall and electric car batteries is a way to create a virtual power plant (see Channelchek article on June 22, 2020, entitled “Virtual Power Plants and Tesla Car Batteries. Tesla is investing in the future, and the shares of Tesla reflect that strategy. Tesla has a market capitalization of $260 billion even though it does not report a profit or positive cash flow.

 

A Review of How Utilities Work

Utility operations can be broken down into three primary categories: generation, transmission, and distribution. Gas utilities are somewhat different from electric utilities in that the “generation” of natural gas is typically done by unregulated exploration and production companies. Natural gas prices can vary in different points in the country, depending on production supply and consumption demand. Different price points create the need for gas transmission pipelines to move natural gas from areas of low prices to areas of high prices. Natural gas is used primarily for space heating, creating the need for storage fields that are filled in the summer and drained in the winter. Natural gas prices are constantly changing as supply and demand changes, sometimes creating the need for new pipelines or storage to be built or sometimes, meaning existing pipelines or storage are not profitable.

 

So, is Warren Buffett or Elon Musk Making the Right Bet?

Are utility assets temporarily out of favor, or has their importance been permanently reduced due to changes in technology? It is probably safe to say that utilities will continue to be involved in the generation of power. The emergence of solar and wind power has gone a long way towards reducing the nation’s reliance on carbon-based fuels for generations. That said, solar and wind power have reliability issues that will only partly be solved by improved battery technology. Natural gas is often viewed as the bridge from a carbon-based energy system to a renewable-based energy system and will remain a primary source of power generation. As such, the need for natural gas transmission and storage assets such as that being purchased by Berkshire Hathaway is not going away anytime soon. What’s more, the need for natural gas to heat homes will continue. Yes, increased use of solar generations combined with battery storage may result in increased use of electric heaters. However, people typically do not change their furnaces until they are broken, meaning natural gas heating will be around for decades if not centuries. In the end, then, the real question to ask is not “who is the better investor?” but “what time frame are we talking about?”

 

Suggested Reading:

The Last Thing You’ll Ever Need to Read About the Berkshire Hathaway Meeting

Raw Materials and the Scalability of Tesla’s Vision

Cobalt and Rare Earth Metals from the Ocean Floor Eyed to Meet Growing Battery Demand

 

Enjoy Premium Channelchek Content at No Cost

 

Sources:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/06/why-warren-buffett-made-his-latest-blockbuster-deal-a-bet-on-electric-vehicles.html, Yun Li, CNBC, July 6, 2020

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/05/warren-buffetts-berkshire-buys-dominion-energy-natural-gas-assets-in-10-billion-deal.html, Becky Quick, CNBC, July 5, 2020

https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-not-biggest-fan-warren-buffett-joe-rogan-interview-2020-5, Alex Wong & Rebecca Cook, Getty and Reuters, May 7, 2020

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/07/business/dealbook/warren-buffett-elon-musk.html, John Foley, The New York Times, May 7, 2018

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-solar-power-buffett-vs-musk/, Noa Buhayar, Bloomberg Businessweek, January 28, 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPgiBzJzR6M Elon Musk: I am not Buffett’s biggest fan, CNBC, May 7,2020

Exploration and Production Second Quarter Review and Outlook

Thursday, July 9, 2020

Energy Industry Report

Exploration and Production Second Quarter Review and Outlook

Michael Heim, CFA, Senior Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.

Listen To The Analyst

Refer to end of report for Analyst Certification & Disclosures

  • Oil and Gas Prices rebounds after hitting record lows.  Oil spot prices even went negative after COVID- 19 killed demand and Saudi Arabia and Russia began a price war. Current prices rebounded to finish the quarter near $40. Natural gas prices fell to $1.58, a level not seen since December 1998, before rising to finish the quarter at $1.67.
  • Energy stocks reported a strong quarter rising 33%.   The strength largely reflects a rebound in the overall market. The XLE Energy Index remains down 40% year to date.
  • The outlook has improved but remains dark given COVID-19 reemergence concerns and a shaky OPEC truce.   Low-cost producers will generate positive cash flow if oil remains above $40, but high-cost producers are not out of the woods yet.
  • We recommend investors remain cautious and focus on low-cost producers with limited debt.

Energy Prices

When you hit bottom, there is nowhere to go but up. Oil prices crashed in April following the spread of COVID-19 and a price war between Saudi Arabia and Russia. Spot prices even traded as low as negative $37 per barrel. The concept of investors paying another investor to take oil off their hands is perhaps bizarre, explainable when viewed only as a short-term issue of speculators being caught with contracts in their hands and nowhere to dump the contracts with storage fields full. Nevertheless, longer-term contracts followed spot prices downward, if not into the negative range. Oil future contracts going out a month or two fell from prices in the thirties per barrel into prices around $20 per barrel. As expected, the sharp drop in pricing lead to an immediate response. Domestic producers all but eliminated new drilling and Saudi Arabia, Russia and other allies made up (kind of) and agreed to cut supply by 10% through the end of July. Whether the cuts last remains to be seen as there are already reports that several OPEC members are not adhering to reductions. However, current WTI and Brent oil prices, both near $40 per barrel, provide energy companies a lifeline they didn’t have three months ago.

 

Natural Gas prices fell, albeit not as much as oil prices. Spot prices began the quarter around $1.75 per thousand cubic feet (mcf) and fell as low as $1.38 per mcf, the lowest level in nominal dollars since December 1998. Inventories remain high following a mild winter and demand remains low due to the shut down of the economy. Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) terminals are reporting a decrease in gas exports and the pace of development of new projects is slipping. Production levels are holding steady even as natural gas rig count has decreased.

Energy Stocks

Energy stocks, as measured by the XLE Energy Index, rose 33% in the second quarter. The strong performance generally tracked the rise in oil prices with most of the gain coming at the end of the quarter. Truth be told, however, the gain is primarily due to an improvement in the overall market and not a rise in energy prices. The S&P 500 Composite index rose 26% during the quarter. Both indices were down sharply in the first quarter and the strong performance in the second quarter merely reflects a rebound from the first quarter. Year to date, the XLE is still down some 40%.

Outlook

The return to oil prices in the forties was welcome news to leveraged energy companies facing negative cash flow and an inability to meet financial obligations. At prices in the forties, companies with a low-cost basis should generate positive cash flow. That said, marginal wells will most likely not be drilled. Of particular interest is whether or not these companies will lock in modest gains by hedging out production. Or, will they view these returns as inadequate to compensate owners for the risks they are taking and continue to roll the dice on the hopes of higher prices? In the end, the outlook for energy prices and energy company stocks has not changed. The outlook will depend on the pace of recovery of global economic conditions and the will of OPEC plus to hold the line on pricing.

 

Recommendations

We believe investors should continue to be wary regarding energy stocks. Investors would be wise to focus energy investment towards companies with little to no debt. A large hedge position may provide a lifeline. Low lifting costs per barrel remain important. A supportive ownership group with a long investment timeframe is also important. That said, there are compelling values within the group now that individual stock prices have fallen. We continue to believe energy prices will eventually return to higher levels with a return to more normal economic conditions and a supply response by domestic producers. We have adjusted our long-term oil and gas price assumption to $50/bbl and $2.50/mcf respectively, although we believe it may be several years before we reach those levels. Our individual stock net asset values and price targets are based off of our long-term energy price assumptions.

 

GENERAL DISCLAIMERS

All statements or opinions contained herein that include the words “we”, “us”, or “our” are solely the responsibility of Noble Capital Markets, Inc.(“Noble”) and do not necessarily reflect statements or opinions expressed by any person or party affiliated with the company mentioned in this report. Any opinions expressed herein are subject to change without notice. All information provided herein is based on public and non-public information believed to be accurate and reliable, but is not necessarily complete and cannot be guaranteed. No judgment is hereby expressed or should be implied as to the suitability of any security described herein for any specific investor or any specific investment portfolio. The decision to undertake any investment regarding the security mentioned herein should be made by each reader of this publication based on its own appraisal of the implications and risks of such decision.

This publication is intended for information purposes only and shall not constitute an offer to buy/sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy/sell any security mentioned in this report, nor shall there be any sale of the security herein in any state or domicile in which said offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or domicile. This publication and all information, comments, statements or opinions contained or expressed herein are applicable only as of the date of this publication and subject to change without prior notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Noble accepts no liability for loss arising from the use of the material in this report, except that this exclusion of liability does not apply to the extent that such liability arises under specific statutes or regulations applicable to Noble. This report is not to be relied upon as a substitute for the exercising of independent judgement. Noble may have published, and may in the future publish, other research reports that are inconsistent with, and reach different conclusions from, the information provided in this report. Noble is under no obligation to bring to the attention of any recipient of this report, any past or future reports. Investors should only consider this report as single factor in making an investment decision.

IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES

This publication is confidential for the information of the addressee only and may not be reproduced in whole or in part, copies circulated, or discussed to another party, without the written consent of Noble Capital Markets, Inc. (“Noble”). Noble seeks to update its research as appropriate, but may be unable to do so based upon various regulatory constraints. Research reports are not published at regular intervals; publication times and dates are based upon the analyst’s judgement. Noble professionals including traders, salespeople and investment bankers may provide written or oral market commentary, or discuss trading strategies to Noble clients and the Noble proprietary trading desk that reflect opinions that are contrary to the opinions expressed in this research report.
The majority of companies that Noble follows are emerging growth companies. Securities in these companies involve a higher degree of risk and more volatility than the securities of more established companies. The securities discussed in Noble research reports may not be suitable for some investors and as such, investors must take extra care and make their own determination of the appropriateness of an investment based upon risk tolerance, investment objectives and financial status.

Company Specific Disclosures

The following disclosures relate to relationships between Noble and the company (the “Company”) covered by the Noble Research Division and referred to in this research report.
Noble is not a market maker in any of the companies mentioned in this report. Noble intends to seek compensation for investment banking services and non-investment banking services (securities and non-securities related) with any or all of the companies mentioned in this report within the next 3 months

ANALYST CREDENTIALS, PROFESSIONAL DESIGNATIONS, AND EXPERIENCE

Senior Equity Analyst focusing on Basic Materials & Mining. 20 years of experience in equity research. BA in Business Administration from Westminster College. MBA with a Finance concentration from the University of Missouri. MA in International Affairs from Washington University in St. Louis.
Named WSJ ‘Best on the Street’ Analyst and Forbes/StarMine’s “Best Brokerage Analyst.”
FINRA licenses 7, 24, 63, 87

WARNING

This report is intended to provide general securities advice, and does not purport to make any recommendation that any securities transaction is appropriate for any recipient particular investment objectives, financial situation or particular needs. Prior to making any investment decision, recipients should assess, or seek advice from their advisors, on whether any relevant part of this report is appropriate to their individual circumstances. If a recipient was referred to Noble Capital Markets, Inc. by an investment advisor, that advisor may receive a benefit in respect of
transactions effected on the recipients behalf, details of which will be available on request in regard to a transaction that involves a personalized securities recommendation. Additional risks associated with the security mentioned in this report that might impede achievement of the target can be found in its initial report issued by Noble Capital Markets, Inc.. This report may not be reproduced, distributed or published for any purpose unless authorized by Noble Capital Markets, Inc..

RESEARCH ANALYST CERTIFICATION

Independence Of View
All views expressed in this report accurately reflect my personal views about the subject securities or issuers.

Receipt of Compensation
No part of my compensation was, is, or will be directly or indirectly related to any specific recommendations or views expressed in the public
appearance and/or research report.

Ownership and Material Conflicts of Interest
Neither I nor anybody in my household has a financial interest in the securities of the subject company or any other company mentioned in this report.

NOBLE RATINGS DEFINITIONS % OF SECURITIES COVERED % IB CLIENTS
Outperform: potential return is >15% above the current price 88% 43%
Market Perform: potential return is -15% to 15% of the current price 12% 3%
Underperform: potential return is >15% below the current price 0% 0%

NOTE: On August 20, 2018, Noble Capital Markets, Inc. changed the terminology of its ratings (as shown above) from “Buy” to “Outperform”, from “Hold” to “Market Perform” and from “Sell” to “Underperform.” The percentage relationships, as compared to current price (definitions), have remained the same. Additional information is available upon request. Any recipient of this report that wishes further information regarding the subject company or the disclosure information mentioned herein, should contact Noble Capital Markets, Inc. by mail or phone.

Noble Capital Markets, Inc.
225 NE Mizner Blvd. Suite 150
Boca Raton, FL 33432
561-994-1191

Noble Capital Markets, Inc. is a FINRA (Financial Industry Regulatory Authority) registered broker/dealer.
Noble Capital Markets, Inc. is an MSRB (Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board) registered broker/dealer.
Member – SIPC (Securities Investor Protection Corporation)
Report ID: 11365

Energy Industry Report – Exploration and Production Second Quarter Review and Outlook

Thursday, July 9, 2020

Energy Industry Report

Exploration and Production Second Quarter Review and Outlook

Michael Heim, CFA, Senior Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.

Listen To The Analyst

Refer to end of report for Analyst Certification & Disclosures

  • Oil and Gas Prices rebounds after hitting record lows.  Oil spot prices even went negative after COVID- 19 killed demand and Saudi Arabia and Russia began a price war. Current prices rebounded to finish the quarter near $40. Natural gas prices fell to $1.58, a level not seen since December 1998, before rising to finish the quarter at $1.67.
  • Energy stocks reported a strong quarter rising 33%.   The strength largely reflects a rebound in the overall market. The XLE Energy Index remains down 40% year to date.
  • The outlook has improved but remains dark given COVID-19 reemergence concerns and a shaky OPEC truce.   Low-cost producers will generate positive cash flow if oil remains above $40, but high-cost producers are not out of the woods yet.
  • We recommend investors remain cautious and focus on low-cost producers with limited debt.

Energy Prices

When you hit bottom, there is nowhere to go but up. Oil prices crashed in April following the spread of COVID-19 and a price war between Saudi Arabia and Russia. Spot prices even traded as low as negative $37 per barrel. The concept of investors paying another investor to take oil off their hands is perhaps bizarre, explainable when viewed only as a short-term issue of speculators being caught with contracts in their hands and nowhere to dump the contracts with storage fields full. Nevertheless, longer-term contracts followed spot prices downward, if not into the negative range. Oil future contracts going out a month or two fell from prices in the thirties per barrel into prices around $20 per barrel. As expected, the sharp drop in pricing lead to an immediate response. Domestic producers all but eliminated new drilling and Saudi Arabia, Russia and other allies made up (kind of) and agreed to cut supply by 10% through the end of July. Whether the cuts last remains to be seen as there are already reports that several OPEC members are not adhering to reductions. However, current WTI and Brent oil prices, both near $40 per barrel, provide energy companies a lifeline they didn’t have three months ago.

 

Natural Gas prices fell, albeit not as much as oil prices. Spot prices began the quarter around $1.75 per thousand cubic feet (mcf) and fell as low as $1.38 per mcf, the lowest level in nominal dollars since December 1998. Inventories remain high following a mild winter and demand remains low due to the shut down of the economy. Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) terminals are reporting a decrease in gas exports and the pace of development of new projects is slipping. Production levels are holding steady even as natural gas rig count has decreased.

Energy Stocks

Energy stocks, as measured by the XLE Energy Index, rose 33% in the second quarter. The strong performance generally tracked the rise in oil prices with most of the gain coming at the end of the quarter. Truth be told, however, the gain is primarily due to an improvement in the overall market and not a rise in energy prices. The S&P 500 Composite index rose 26% during the quarter. Both indices were down sharply in the first quarter and the strong performance in the second quarter merely reflects a rebound from the first quarter. Year to date, the XLE is still down some 40%.

Outlook

The return to oil prices in the forties was welcome news to leveraged energy companies facing negative cash flow and an inability to meet financial obligations. At prices in the forties, companies with a low-cost basis should generate positive cash flow. That said, marginal wells will most likely not be drilled. Of particular interest is whether or not these companies will lock in modest gains by hedging out production. Or, will they view these returns as inadequate to compensate owners for the risks they are taking and continue to roll the dice on the hopes of higher prices? In the end, the outlook for energy prices and energy company stocks has not changed. The outlook will depend on the pace of recovery of global economic conditions and the will of OPEC plus to hold the line on pricing.

 

Recommendations

We believe investors should continue to be wary regarding energy stocks. Investors would be wise to focus energy investment towards companies with little to no debt. A large hedge position may provide a lifeline. Low lifting costs per barrel remain important. A supportive ownership group with a long investment timeframe is also important. That said, there are compelling values within the group now that individual stock prices have fallen. We continue to believe energy prices will eventually return to higher levels with a return to more normal economic conditions and a supply response by domestic producers. We have adjusted our long-term oil and gas price assumption to $50/bbl and $2.50/mcf respectively, although we believe it may be several years before we reach those levels. Our individual stock net asset values and price targets are based off of our long-term energy price assumptions.

 

GENERAL DISCLAIMERS

All statements or opinions contained herein that include the words “we”, “us”, or “our” are solely the responsibility of Noble Capital Markets, Inc.(“Noble”) and do not necessarily reflect statements or opinions expressed by any person or party affiliated with the company mentioned in this report. Any opinions expressed herein are subject to change without notice. All information provided herein is based on public and non-public information believed to be accurate and reliable, but is not necessarily complete and cannot be guaranteed. No judgment is hereby expressed or should be implied as to the suitability of any security described herein for any specific investor or any specific investment portfolio. The decision to undertake any investment regarding the security mentioned herein should be made by each reader of this publication based on its own appraisal of the implications and risks of such decision.

This publication is intended for information purposes only and shall not constitute an offer to buy/sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy/sell any security mentioned in this report, nor shall there be any sale of the security herein in any state or domicile in which said offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or domicile. This publication and all information, comments, statements or opinions contained or expressed herein are applicable only as of the date of this publication and subject to change without prior notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Noble accepts no liability for loss arising from the use of the material in this report, except that this exclusion of liability does not apply to the extent that such liability arises under specific statutes or regulations applicable to Noble. This report is not to be relied upon as a substitute for the exercising of independent judgement. Noble may have published, and may in the future publish, other research reports that are inconsistent with, and reach different conclusions from, the information provided in this report. Noble is under no obligation to bring to the attention of any recipient of this report, any past or future reports. Investors should only consider this report as single factor in making an investment decision.

IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES

This publication is confidential for the information of the addressee only and may not be reproduced in whole or in part, copies circulated, or discussed to another party, without the written consent of Noble Capital Markets, Inc. (“Noble”). Noble seeks to update its research as appropriate, but may be unable to do so based upon various regulatory constraints. Research reports are not published at regular intervals; publication times and dates are based upon the analyst’s judgement. Noble professionals including traders, salespeople and investment bankers may provide written or oral market commentary, or discuss trading strategies to Noble clients and the Noble proprietary trading desk that reflect opinions that are contrary to the opinions expressed in this research report.
The majority of companies that Noble follows are emerging growth companies. Securities in these companies involve a higher degree of risk and more volatility than the securities of more established companies. The securities discussed in Noble research reports may not be suitable for some investors and as such, investors must take extra care and make their own determination of the appropriateness of an investment based upon risk tolerance, investment objectives and financial status.

Company Specific Disclosures

The following disclosures relate to relationships between Noble and the company (the “Company”) covered by the Noble Research Division and referred to in this research report.
Noble is not a market maker in any of the companies mentioned in this report. Noble intends to seek compensation for investment banking services and non-investment banking services (securities and non-securities related) with any or all of the companies mentioned in this report within the next 3 months

ANALYST CREDENTIALS, PROFESSIONAL DESIGNATIONS, AND EXPERIENCE

Senior Equity Analyst focusing on Basic Materials & Mining. 20 years of experience in equity research. BA in Business Administration from Westminster College. MBA with a Finance concentration from the University of Missouri. MA in International Affairs from Washington University in St. Louis.
Named WSJ ‘Best on the Street’ Analyst and Forbes/StarMine’s “Best Brokerage Analyst.”
FINRA licenses 7, 24, 63, 87

WARNING

This report is intended to provide general securities advice, and does not purport to make any recommendation that any securities transaction is appropriate for any recipient particular investment objectives, financial situation or particular needs. Prior to making any investment decision, recipients should assess, or seek advice from their advisors, on whether any relevant part of this report is appropriate to their individual circumstances. If a recipient was referred to Noble Capital Markets, Inc. by an investment advisor, that advisor may receive a benefit in respect of
transactions effected on the recipients behalf, details of which will be available on request in regard to a transaction that involves a personalized securities recommendation. Additional risks associated with the security mentioned in this report that might impede achievement of the target can be found in its initial report issued by Noble Capital Markets, Inc.. This report may not be reproduced, distributed or published for any purpose unless authorized by Noble Capital Markets, Inc..

RESEARCH ANALYST CERTIFICATION

Independence Of View
All views expressed in this report accurately reflect my personal views about the subject securities or issuers.

Receipt of Compensation
No part of my compensation was, is, or will be directly or indirectly related to any specific recommendations or views expressed in the public
appearance and/or research report.

Ownership and Material Conflicts of Interest
Neither I nor anybody in my household has a financial interest in the securities of the subject company or any other company mentioned in this report.

NOBLE RATINGS DEFINITIONS % OF SECURITIES COVERED % IB CLIENTS
Outperform: potential return is >15% above the current price 88% 43%
Market Perform: potential return is -15% to 15% of the current price 12% 3%
Underperform: potential return is >15% below the current price 0% 0%

NOTE: On August 20, 2018, Noble Capital Markets, Inc. changed the terminology of its ratings (as shown above) from “Buy” to “Outperform”, from “Hold” to “Market Perform” and from “Sell” to “Underperform.” The percentage relationships, as compared to current price (definitions), have remained the same. Additional information is available upon request. Any recipient of this report that wishes further information regarding the subject company or the disclosure information mentioned herein, should contact Noble Capital Markets, Inc. by mail or phone.

Noble Capital Markets, Inc.
225 NE Mizner Blvd. Suite 150
Boca Raton, FL 33432
561-994-1191

Noble Capital Markets, Inc. is a FINRA (Financial Industry Regulatory Authority) registered broker/dealer.
Noble Capital Markets, Inc. is an MSRB (Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board) registered broker/dealer.
Member – SIPC (Securities Investor Protection Corporation)
Report ID: 11365

Seanergy Maritime (SHIP) – Acquisition Expands Cape Fleet and Operating Leverage.

Wednesday, July 8, 2020

Seanergy Maritime (SHIP)

Acquisition Expands Cape Fleet and Operating Leverage.

Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp., an international shipping company, provides marine dry bulk transportation services through the ownership and operation of dry bulk vessels. Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp. is the only pure-play Capesize shipping company listed in the US capital markets. Seanergy provides marine dry bulk transportation services through a modern fleet of 10 Capesize vessels, with total capacity of approximately 1,748,581 dwt and an average fleet age of about 9.8 years. The Company is incorporated in the Marshall Islands with executive offices in Athens, Greece and an office in Hong Kong. The Company’s common shares trade on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “SHIP” and class A warrants under “SHIPW”.

Poe Fratt, Senior Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.

Refer to the full report for the price target, fundamental analysis, and rating.

  • Acquisition expands Cape fleet by 10%. A definitive agreement was signed with an unaffiliated third party to acquire a 2005-built Cape vessel for $11.4 million. The vessel was built was Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding in Japan and has 177.5k DWT of capacity. The acquisition expands the Cape fleet to 11, or by 10%, and other opportunities are under review.
  • Positive impact. Increasing 2020 EBITDA estimate by ~$1.6 million to $22.1 million. The acquired Cape will be renamed the Goodship and delivery is slated near the end of July. Given the rebound in Cape TCE rates, the acquisition appears well timed and it should be …


    Click to get the full report.


This Research is provided by Noble Capital Markets, Inc., a FINRA and S.E.C. registered broker-dealer (B/D).

*Analyst
certification and important disclosures included in the full report. 
NOTE: investment decisions should not be based upon the content of
this research summary.  Proper due diligence is required before
making any investment decision.
 

E.W. Scripps (SSP) – Looks Like A Stitch In Time Will Pay Off Big

Wednesday, July 8, 2020

E.W. Scripps Company (SSP)

Looks Like A Stitch In Time Will Pay Off Big

The E.W. Scripps Co. (www.scripps.com) serves audiences and businesses through a growing portfolio of television, print and digital media brands. After approval of its acquisition of two Granite Broadcasting stations later this year, Scripps will own 21 local television stations as well as daily newspapers in 13 markets across the United States. It also runs an expanding collection of local and national digital journalism and information businesses including digital video news service Newsy. Scripps also produces television programming, runs an award-winning investigative reporting newsroom in Washington, D.C., and serves as the longtime steward of one of the nation�s largest, most successful and longest-running educational programs, Scripps National Spelling Bee. Founded in 1879, Scripps is focused on the stories of tomorrow.

Michael Kupinski, Director of Research, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.

Refer to the full report for the price target, fundamental analysis, and rating.

    Reported sale of Stitcher higher than expected. Reports that Scripps is close to selling Stitcher for roughly $300 million is well above our original expectations of $200 million and a significant return from a combined purchase price of roughly $59.5 million in 2016. A prospective sale to XM Sirius would likely be on a fast track for regulatory approval and the deal would be viewed favorably.

    Another example of creating value.  We believe that the potential sale and significant return on its investment will be another feather in the company’s cap for identifying and building value for …



    Click to get the full report.

This research is provided by Noble Capital Markets, Inc., a FINRA and S.E.C. registered broker-dealer (B/D).

*Analyst
certification and important disclosures included in the full report. 
NOTE: investment decisions should not be based upon the content of
this research summary.  Proper due diligence is required before
making any investment decision.
 

Analyzing Text to Predict Market Volatility

The Complex Relationship Between the Pandemic and Market Volatility

The Coronavirus pandemic has impacted the global and U.S. economies and led to a sharp rise in unemployment. The U.S. unemployment rate was reported at 13.3% for May based on U.S. Department of Labor statistics, representing levels not seen since the great depression (Exhibit 1). There are currently over 40 million Americans unemployed. Following 128 months of expansion, representing the longest on record since 1854, U.S. entered a recession in February. As the markets react to the uncertainty attributed to coronavirus infections and unemployment, the volatility in the markets seems to be inevitable (Exhibit 2).

Exhibit 1. The Percentage of Unemployment in the last 10 years in U.S.

 

Exhibit 2. The Overlay of S&P 500 (SPX) Index and CBOE’s Volatility
Index (VIX)

Source:
indexindicators.com and Noble Capital Markets

Nobel Laureate and NYU Stern professor Robert F. Engle and his co-authors (Ahmet K. Karagozoglu and Nazli Sila Alan) wrote a working paper on a forecasting model for the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on volatility in global equity markets.  The paper recently became available on the Volatility and Risk Institute at NYU Stern School of Business website at https://vlab.stern.nyu.edu/covid19. The authors used a multi-regime forecasting model to investigate the impact on market volatility. The findings include

  1. daily number of active cases are significant predictors of realized volatility,
  2. stricter policy responses by individual countries result in lower stock market volatilities,
  3. higher negative managerial sentiment causes an increase in realized volatilities.

 

Exhibit 3. Daily COVID-19 Cases for selected 7 countries January 22 to
May 1, 2020

Source: Alan, Engle, and Karagozoglu,
“Multi-regime Forecasting Model for the Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on
Volatility in Global Equity Markets”, Volatility and Risk Institute Working
Paper, Stern School of Business New York University, June 15, 2020

Two different measures of equity market volatility (i) GJR-GARCH volatility based on global stock indices and, ii) realized volatility based on intraday prices of country specific ETFs), were used to differentiate the market uncertainty attributed to the pandemic. The intraday 5-minute returns for 46 country-specific ETFs were used to determine the realized volatilities, and daily GARCH volatilities are estimated using the stock market indices of 88 countries around the world. Dr. Engle received the 2003 Nobel prize in Economic Sciences for his work on analyzing economic time-series data, that formed the basis of the GJR-GARCH model used in this paper.

The largest increase in volatility levels were observed on February 24th, March 9th, and March 16th , then realized volatility (RV) returned to its pre-pandemic levels on April 3rd. GARCH and RV volatility levels for seven of sample countries are shown in Exhibit 4.  The U.S. stock market reached peak volatility level on March 16th, 4 days after the Italian market. The volatility levels for all countries have been declining since then.

Exhibit 4. Daily Realized Volatility (5-min) for selected 7 countries
between January 22 to May 1, 2020

CHN (China), DEU (Germany), ESP (Spain), GBR (United Kingdom), ITA (Italy), KOR (Korea), and USA Source: Alan, Engle, and Karagozoglu,
“Multi-regime Forecasting Model for the Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on
Volatility in Global Equity Markets”, Volatility and Risk Institute Working
Paper, Stern School of Business New York University, June 15, 2020

In Exhibit 4, the daily median realized volatilities (RV), calculated using 5-minute intraday returns for country specific ETFs and GARCH volatilities are shown for seven countries including China (CHN), Germany (DEU), Spain (ESP), United Kingdom (GBR), Italy (ITA), Korea (KOR), and the USA. A total of 46 country specific ETFs were analyzed and estimated using GARCH model for daily stock index returns of 88 countries as well as the CBOE VIX for the U.S.

The analysis of text of publicly traded firms earnings call transcripts of in various countries (Textual Data Analytics of Transcripts database of the S&P Global Market Intelligence for 6,500 publicly traded firms from 38 countries) was used to correlate managerial negative sentiment due to the pandemic and the broader market volatility. Negative Sentiment were identified as the ratio of total number of negative words to total number of Master words in the same transcript.

Exhibit 5. Daily Median GARCH Volatility for Global Equity Markets vs
Mean Global COVID-19 Curvature and The Comparison to CBOE Volatility Index
between January 22 to May 1, 2020

 

Source: Alan, Engle, and Karagozoglu,
“Multi-regime Forecasting Model for the Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on
Volatility in Global Equity Markets”, Volatility and Risk Institute Working
Paper, Stern School of Business New York University, June 15, 2020

The empirical analysis suggests a complex relation between the pandemic metrics and stock
market volatility
. The multi-regime forecasting model for the relation between equity market volatility and the coronavirus pandemic hypothesize that the number of active cases and negative sentiments by the management teams are powerful predictors of daily cross section of volatilities, while stricter policy responses by individual countries result in lower stock market volatilities.

 

Suggested Reading:

 

More
Accurate than Polls to Gauge Election Outcomes

Can the Market Continue to Defy Gravity?

Are
we on the Verge of Acquisition-Mania?

 

Research Over 6000 Small and Microcap Companies on  Premium Channelchek Content at No Cost!

 

Sources:

https://vlab.stern.nyu.edu/static/Covid19Volatility_MultiregimeForecasting_VRI_NYU_20200615.pdf


Carbon-Free Nuclear Energy Expectations Through 2050

Ruling Out Nuclear Energy Now Could Be a Mistake

With expected growth in electric vehicles and demand for lower greenhouse gas emissions, one might think the merits of nuclear energy are growing more powerful.  Nuclear plants generate almost 20% of the electricity produced in the United States and 55% of its carbon-free electricity.  However, the U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA) expects renewables to be the fastest growing source of electricity generation through 2050 with nuclear generation expected to decline from 20% in 2019 to 12% in 2050.  On April 23, 2020, the U.S. Department of Energy released a document summarizing work by the U.S. Nuclear Fuel Working Group entitled “Restoring America’s Competitive Nuclear Energy Advantage” and offered recommendations to revive and strengthen the uranium mining industry, preserve and grow the assets and investments of the U.S. nuclear enterprise and regain global nuclear leadership .  Will the recommendations change the trajectory of existing expectations?

 

Positives

Source of clean energy. According to the EIA, nuclear energy is the largest source of clean energy in the United States and produced more carbon-free electricity than all other sources combined.  Nuclear generation avoids greater than 525 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions that would otherwise emanate from fossil fuels.

Economical and reliable source of electricity. In 2019, nuclear power plants operated at roughly 94% of their capacity and are a reliable source of baseload demand for electricity.  Even though there were fewer nuclear reactors than in 2000, the amount of energy production in 2019 increased due to greater capacity from power plant upgrades and shorter refueling and maintenance cycles. While costs are high to commission a nuclear plant, they can be a source of less expensive power on a cost per kilowatt hour compared to coal or gas-fired power plants.

Nuclear industry may be a source of innovation.  Investment in advanced nuclear technology could support a safe and reliable source of energy and promote a cleaner environment.  Additionally, growth and innovation in the nuclear power industry could be a source of job growth for those wanting or needing to transition from the fossil fuel industry to careers in green energy.

 

Negatives

Renewables are a better option.  According to the Annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report, renewables, including new wind and solar generators are increasingly cost competitive with existing nuclear power plants with generating capacity increasing faster than any other source of power.  Viewed as a cleaner and relatively inexpensive fuel, natural gas is increasingly viewed as the fossil fuel of choice to bridge the gap as the United States transitions to lower carbon renewable energy sources such as wind and solar. 

Risk of accidental nuclear meltdown.  Three major nuclear meltdowns, including Three Mile Island in 1979, Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011, resulted in environmental and human costs for those living in the affected areas.  Opponents of nuclear energy believe the risks and costs associated with one accident outweighs the benefits of expanding the nuclear power generation fleet.

Nuclear waste disposal.  Opponents view nuclear energy as undesirable due to the production and use of radioactive fuels and the need to dispose of nuclear waste that takes years to degrade.  Additionally, the question of where to store it is also controversial.  Radiation associated with spent fuel slowly declines as it generally is stored on the grounds of operating reactors in impenetrable storage facilities.

 

Balanced View:

Renewables are becoming a more viable source of energy due to advances in technology and lower cost, albeit with significant government subsidies presently.  While the United States pioneered nuclear technology, the number of nuclear plants in the U.S. is declining while growing abroad. With investment in advanced nuclear reactors, electric transmission, and greater consideration to designing safe and efficient siting, could the U.S. industry be reimagined and play an important role in supplying low-cost and reliable energy while promoting a cleaner environment?  While the market will be the final arbiter, recommendations from the U.S. Nuclear Fuel Working Group deserve consideration.

 

Suggested Reading:

The Case for Silver

Gold is the New Green

Energy Sector in Rapidly Growing Indonesia

 

Still Spots Open to Attend Wednesday July 8, Virtual Road Show

Indonesia Energy with Frank Ingriselli, President

 

Sources:

Monthly Energy Review, U.S. Energy Information Administration, June 2020.

Annual Energy Outlook 2020 with projections through 2050, U.S. Energy Information Agency, January 29, 2020.

Restoring America’s Competitive Nuclear Energy Advantage, U.S. Department of Energy, 2020.

Don’t Ignore the Nuclear Option, Bloomberg, Clara Ferreira Marques, May 31, 2020.

Nuclear Is Getting Hammered by Green Power and the Pandemic, Bloomberg, Lars Paulsson and Rachael Morison, May 3, 2020.

The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2019, A Mycle Schneider Consulting Project, Mycle Schneider and Antony Froggat et al., September 2019.

Nuclear Energy Too Slow, Too Expensive to Save Climate: Report, Reuters, Marton Dunai and Geert De Clerq, September 23, 2019.

Why Nuclear Power Must Be Part of the Energy Solution, Yale Environment 360, Richard Rhodes, July 19, 2018.

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock (GLDD) – New Awards total $51.1 million. Positive Dredging Market Outlook Intact.

Tuesday, July 7, 2020

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock (GLDD)

New Awards total $51.1 million. Positive Dredging Market Outlook Intact.

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Corp is a provider of dredging services in the United States. The company only’s operating segments is Dredging. Dredging involves the enhancement or preservation of navigability of waterways or the protection of shorelines through the removal or replenishment of soil, sand or rock. Its projects portfolio includes Coastal Restoration, Coastal Protection, Port expansion, and others.

Poe Fratt, Senior Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.

Refer to the full report for the price target, fundamental analysis, and rating.

    Several awards announced. Total awards of $51.1 million include Coastal Protection work of $44.0 million and Maintenance work of $7.1 million. Please see page two for more details.

    No change in dredging market outlook, but competition has increased. The recent backlog trend has been down and backlog has dropped over the past two quarters to $475 million, but smaller projects have successfully sustained operating results, including a record 1Q2020. News expected this quarter on several large opportunities and …



    Click to get the full report.

This Company Sponsored Research is provided by Noble Capital Markets, Inc., a FINRA and S.E.C. registered broker-dealer (B/D).

*Analyst
certification and important disclosures included in the full report. 
NOTE: investment decisions should not be based upon the content of
this research summary.  Proper due diligence is required before
making any investment decision.
 

Seanergy Maritime (SHIP) – Financing Agreement Creates More Refinancing Clarity

Monday, July 6, 2020

Seanergy Maritime (SHIP)

Financing Agreement Creates More Refinancing Clarity

Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp., an international shipping company, provides marine dry bulk transportation services through the ownership and operation of dry bulk vessels. Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp. is the only pure-play Capesize shipping company listed in the US capital markets. Seanergy provides marine dry bulk transportation services through a modern fleet of 10 Capesize vessels, with total capacity of approximately 1,748,581 dwt and an average fleet age of about 9.8 years. The Company is incorporated in the Marshall Islands with executive offices in Athens, Greece and an office in Hong Kong. The Company’s common shares trade on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “SHIP” and class A warrants under “SHIPW”.

Poe Fratt, Senior Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.

Refer to the full report for the price target, fundamental analysis, and rating.

  • Letter of financing commitment secured. A commitment letter for a five-year financing with an existing lender has been secured to refinancing maturing debt. While details on pricing and amortization are limited at this point, the maturity date is expected to be July 2025. The goal of the new financing is securing longer term financing at a reasonable cost and lowering annual debt amortization. The new financing should also enhance financing flexibility.
  • June 30th maturity pushed out to July 31st. Secured debt of $30.1 million on the Geniuship and Gloriuship was due on June 30th. In order to finalize the terms and facilitate the closing of the new financing, the maturity date was …


    Click to get the full report.


This Research is provided by Noble Capital Markets, Inc., a FINRA and S.E.C. registered broker-dealer (B/D).

*Analyst
certification and important disclosures included in the full report. 
NOTE: investment decisions should not be based upon the content of
this research summary.  Proper due diligence is required before
making any investment decision.