Widgets Magazine
Page 15 of 99 FirstFirst ... 101112131415161718192065 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 375 of 2471

Thread: Chesapeake Business Practices

  1. #351

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Quote Originally Posted by Bellaboo View Post
    Let there be another major hurricane in the Gulf, such as Katrina, and prices will shoot to 13 bucks again, like they did in 2005.

    God forbid.
    That will not happen.
    The supply situation is now drastically different for NG.

    A bad hurricane season could send crude oil prices much higher though.

  2. Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    While I still do not think that I have a good grip of the issues and/or facts involved, the national press is certainly bearing down today. See this link at Business/Bloomberg, the Wall Street Journal, CNN Money, and locally even this Oklahoman link today, as examples.

    I also add that I congratulate the Oklahoman, in this case its reporter J. F. Marks, for apparently being proactive in its reporting. Good reporting journalists and their employers, should have their names mentioned (as should those less worthy).

  3. #353

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Loudenback View Post
    As well, perhaps the Journal Record might rethink whether it requires people to pay to read. Sure, its your right, so whatever you do will be OK, but please don't think that just because something is covered the Journal Record that very many people know about it.

    At the least, as a public service, how about providing some dates combined with bullet points which describe the Journal Record's coverage right here ... is that too much to ask?

    Well, I don't pretend that the JR has a very large subscriber base, but enough people are buying it to keep me employed anyway. My point was that we are reporting about the company's troubles. It irks me a little when people say that media outlets in the state aren't reporting on what is going on at Chesapeake, because we are. Here's some of our coverage over the past year. I challenge anybody to go through the Oklahoman archives and compare our coverage. This is just a sampling.

    4-20-2012:Chesapeake shareholder files lawsuit over McClendon loans (we posted multiple updates on our website through the day on this)
    http://journalrecord.com/2012/04/20/...-loans-energy/

    4-18-2012: Chesapeake defends McClendon loans
    http://journalrecord.com/2012/04/18/...-loans-energy/

    12-06-2012: Shareholders: Chesapeake settlement ignores McClendon’s $75M bonus http://journalrecord.com/2011/12/06/...ion-bonus-law/

    November 2, 2011: McClendon would repay Chesapeake $12.1 million as part of settlement
    http://journalrecord.com/2011/11/02/...lement-energy/

    October 19, 2011: Chesapeake to settle shareholder lawsuit
    http://journalrecord.com/2011/10/19/...r-lawsuit-law/

    September 9, 2011: Investors sue McClendon over 2008 pay http://journalrecord.com/2011/09/09/...ackage-energy/

    June 10, 2011: McClendon re-elected as Chesapeake chairman http://journalrecord.com/2011/06/10/...y-firm-energy/

    June 27, 2011: McClendon fires back at news report of overstated reserves
    http://journalrecord.com/2011/06/27/...serves-energy/

    June 3, 2011: ISS: Don’t reappoint McClendon to Chesapeake board of directors
    http://journalrecord.com/2011/06/03/...ectors-energy/

    April 29, 2011: Chesapeake CEO draws $21M in 2010 http://journalrecord.com/2011/04/29/...n-2010-energy/

    February 9, 2011: Continental Resources sues Chesapeake over land deal http://journalrecord.com/2011/02/09/...ne-bad-energy/

    December 20, 2010: Icahn builds stake in Chesapeake
    http://journalrecord.com/2010/12/20/...ompany-energy/

  4. #354

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Just your standard shareholders suing the CEO...Happens every day lol

  5. #355

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    It's interesting that the board of directors that some are saying should resign is heavy with former Republican political figures.

    http://newsok.com/chesapeake-board-o...rticle/3668262

  6. #356

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Quote Originally Posted by ljbab728 View Post
    It's interesting that the board of directors that some are saying should resign is heavy with former Republican political figures.

    http://newsok.com/chesapeake-board-o...rticle/3668262

    It’s interesting that Aubrey was an Obama supporter in 2008

  7. #357

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    More negative news from Reuters today.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...83M16Y20120423

  8. #358

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Quote Originally Posted by onthestrip View Post
    More negative news from Reuters today.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...83M16Y20120423
    More?

    Isn't that the exact same article from last week?

  9. #359

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    No, this is a new article with new concerns being raised:

    CEO Aubrey K. McClendon has employed another way to cash in on a perk unique to the company he runs: He sold his share of two large energy plays at the same time the company divested its interest.

    Analysts say the deals, which generated $6.5 billion in proceeds, pose a potential conflict because of the possibility that they could have been timed and structured to suit McClendon's personal interests, rather than those of the company he runs.

  10. #360

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    No, this is a new article with new concerns being raised:
    Ahh. My bad. Teach me to skim.

    Well, it probably won't. : )

  11. #361

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Quote Originally Posted by ljbab728 View Post
    It's interesting that the board of directors that some are saying should resign is heavy with former Republican political figures.

    http://newsok.com/chesapeake-board-o...rticle/3668262

    By "heavy with" do you mean 2 of 9??? Or am I missing someone?

  12. #362

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Quote Originally Posted by onthestrip View Post
    More negative news from Reuters today.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...83M16Y20120423
    This story is more worrisome than the first one. I know two people who are close to him and both say he's a megalomaniac. I've never met the guy, so I have no idea if they're saying something everyone believes or if it's just them. But Aubrey seems to have a consistent pattern of causing financial controversy with himself and his company. Pressure is building rapidly for him to step down. If he truly is a megalomaniac, he won't do it. Or if he's completely normal and he believes he's doing nothing out of the ordinary, he won't do it. It'll be interesting to see what happens in the future. Hopefully, it's good for Chesapeake and OKC.

  13. #363

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Quote Originally Posted by king183 View Post
    By "heavy with" do you mean 2 of 9??? Or am I missing someone?
    I count minimum of three former OK politicos ... Nickles, Keating, Hargis. Don't know if any of the others were politicos here or elsewhere.

  14. #364

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Quote Originally Posted by king183 View Post
    By "heavy with" do you mean 2 of 9??? Or am I missing someone?
    Note that I didn't say majority. And, yes, I would call one third of the board heavy coming from one segment.

  15. #365

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Chesapeake to halt CEO's well ownership plan 04/26 07:49 AM

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NEW YORK, April 26 - Natural gas producer Chesapeake Energy Corp (CHK:$18.13,00$0.36,002.03%) said on Thursday it would halt a controversial program that gave company founder and chief executive Aubrey McClendon an ownership stake in its wells.

    The company, the nation's second-largest natural gas producer behind Exxon Mobil Corp, said it would not extend the "Founder Well Participation Program" beyond 2015.

    The move comes days after Reuters reported McClendon had borrowed as much as $1.1 billion against his 2.5 percent interest in wells received under that program.

    The loans, taken out over the past three years, were previously undisclosed to shareholders, analysts and academics said, raising concerns that McClendon's personal financial deals could compromise his fiduciary duty to Chesapeake. The company's board is also reviewing financing arrangements between McClendon and third parties. "The board did not review, approve or have knowledge of the specific transactions engaged in by Mr. McClendon or the terms of those transactions," the company said.

    Shares in the company fell 2.4 percent to $17.70 per share in premarket trading after the announcement.

  16. #366

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Fitch revises Chesapeake outlook -- Rating Outlook is revised to Stable from Positive, Affirms rtgs 04/26 08:55 AM

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (The following statement was released by the rating agency)
    April 26 - Fitch Ratings has revised the Rating Outlook for Chesapeake
    Energy Corporation's (CHK:$18.26,00$0.13,000.72%) long-term Issuer Default Rating (IDR)
    to Stable from Positive and affirmed all of the company's ratings. A full list
    of rating actions follows at the end of this release. Chesapeake has
    approximately $13 billion of rated securities.

    The Outlook revision results primarily from the near and intermediate term weak
    outlook for natural gas prices in the U.S. coupled with Chesapeake's still
    aggressive spending plans in 2012. The current weakness in natural gas prices
    has accelerated since just a couple of months ago with the 12 month NYMEX strip
    decreasing by nearly 20% to $2.63/Mcf over that timeframe. These price
    expectations will reduce earnings and cash flow significantly from last year's
    level. Current capex and leasehold spending are expected to total approximately
    $8.5-$9 billion with spending in the company's other segments expected to be
    $2.5-$3.5 billion. Current spending plans are expected to result in a funding
    gap of $7-8.5 billion, which is to be funded with asset sales and monetizations
    potentially totaling $10 billion. The asset sale/monetizations figure was
    approximately 30% of total enterprise value as recently as a few weeks ago.

    Liquidity is provided by the company's $4 billion senior secured revolver due
    2015. Additionally, Chesapeake Midstream Operating, LLC has a $600 million
    senior secured revolver due 2016 that it can utilize, and Chesapeake Oilfield
    Operating, LLC has a $500 million senior secured facility that it can utilize.
    However, these latter two borrowing capacities are limited by certain
    restrictive provisions. Nearer-term maturities for Chesapeake are $464 million
    in 2013 and $1.6 billion in 2015. Key covenants are primarily associated with
    the senior secured credit facility and include maximum debt-to-book
    capitalization (70% covenant threshold) and maximum total debt-to-EBITDA (4.0x
    covenant level).

    Balance sheet debt totaled approximately $10.6 billion at the yearend 2011. In
    addition, the company has in the past sold approximately $6 billion of reserves
    into Volumetric Production Payments (VPPs) that Fitch considers to have
    debt-like characteristics and factors into its analysis for adjusted leverage.
    In addition, Chesapeake also has convertible preferreds and non-controlling
    interests in its capital structure totaling approximately $4 billion as of
    yearend 2011.

    The recent news regarding the personal borrowings by the company's CEO from the
    same group that has invested in preferred interests in two of Chesapeake's
    non-guarantor subsidiaries has raised issues regarding the potential for a
    conflict of interest and lack of transparency among some stakeholders. The
    borrowings and the lack of prior disclosure has focused a spotlight on the
    company's Board of Directors and its oversight of the company. Given this recent
    news, Fitch believes stakeholders will have a higher level of expectations for
    disclosure and transparency going forward.

    Given the reduction in near-term price expectations for natural gas, there
    exists a potential shortfall or delay in some of the expected proceeds from the
    remaining planned asset sales and monetizations this year. As such, a
    significant reduction in capital spending may be warranted for the Outlook to
    remain Stable. That said, Chesapeake has already completed or will complete soon
    approximately 25% of this year's $10 billion in planned assets
    sales/monetizations and has a proven track record of successfully monetizing
    assets in the past.

    Fitch has affirmed the ratings for Chesapeake as follows:

    --IDR at 'BB';
    --Senior unsecured debt at 'BB';
    --Senior secured revolving credit facility at 'BBB-';
    --Convertible preferred stock at 'B+'.

    The Rating Outlook is revised to Stable from Positive.

  17. #367

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Ouch. The hits keep on coming. Formal SEC investigation.
    http://t.co/CzVUwm8M

  18. #368

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    The Founder Well Participation Program is being ended, but not for another 3-1/2 years?

    Is it assumed that the $1.1 billion in personal borrowings went to pay for Aubrey's cost to participate in this program? If so, then isn't this a program that he can't afford to continue?

  19. #369

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Quote Originally Posted by onthestrip View Post
    Ouch. The hits keep on coming. Formal SEC investigation.
    http://t.co/CzVUwm8M
    Informal SEC investigation (which means CHK cannot be forced to produce documents).

  20. #370

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Quote Originally Posted by Maynard View Post
    Fitch revises Chesapeake outlook -- Rating Outlook is revised to Stable from Positive, Affirms rtgs 04/26 08:55 AM

    ---
    ---
    ---
    ---

    The following statement was released by the S&P rating agency - 04/26 01:43 PM

    Overview
    -- U.S. natural gas producer Chesapeake Energy Corp. (CHK:$17.5801,$-0.5499,-3.03%) has announced
    that it is negotiating an early termination of the Founder Well Participation
    Program (FWPP) after revelations about the CEO's personal transactions
    revealed shortcomings in the company's existing corporate governance
    practices. The board is currently reviewing financing agreements between the
    CEO and third parties.
    -- Turmoil resulting from these developments could hamper Chesapeake's
    ability to meet the massive external funding requirements stemming from its
    currently weak operating cash flow and continuing aggressive capital spending.
    -- We are lowering our corporate credit and senior unsecured debt issue
    ratings on Chesapeake to 'BB' from 'BB+', and lowering the ratings on two
    affiliates--Chesapeake Oilfield Operating LLC and Chesapeake Midstream
    Partners L.P.
    -- We are placing all these ratings on CreditWatch with negative
    implications.


    Rating Action
    On April 26, 2012, Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on
    Oklahoma City-based Chesapeake Energy Corp. (CHK:$17.5801,$-0.5499,-3.03%) , including the corporate credit
    rating to 'BB' from 'BB+', and lowered ratings on two related
    entities--Chesapeake Oilfield Operating LLC and Chesapeake Midstream Partners
    L.P. At the same time, we placed all these ratings on CreditWatch with
    negative implications.

    Rationale
    The downgrade and CreditWatch placement reflect our view that recent
    revelations about personal transactions undertaken by Chesapeake's CEO
    relating to the company's unusual FWPP underscore shortcomings in Chesapeake
    Energy Corp.'s (CHK:$17.5801,$-0.5499,-3.03%) corporate governance practices. Under the FWPP, Chesapeake's
    CEO, Aubrey McClendon can, before the beginning of each year, elect to take a
    small (up to 2.5%, subject to certain restrictions) working interest in all of
    the wells Chesapeake drills during that year. Recent press reports have
    revealed that Mr. McClendon has obtained loans to fund his investments under
    the FWPP from third parties (such as EIG Global Energy Partners LLC) who, at
    the same time, were also significant participants in financing transactions
    with Chesapeake. Mr. McClendon has also at times sold his interests in certain
    fields, in conjunction with asset sales by Chesapeake. We believe these
    transactions heighten the potential for unmanaged and unmonitored conflicts of
    interest, or the perception thereof. Under the terms of the FWPP, there has
    been no effective mechanism to protect against conflicts of interest, in our
    view. Indeed, Chesapeake has previously stated that the company does not
    review or approve financings of Mr. McClendon's personal assets, including his
    FWPP interests. It is our understanding that Mr. McClendon has also been under
    no obligation to disclose his dealings with third parties which also have
    lending, investment, or advisory relationships with the company.

    Chesapeake today has announced that its board and Mr. McClendon have committed
    to negotiate the early termination of the FWPP, which otherwise would have
    expired at the end of 2015. The company also announced that the Board is
    reviewing financing arrangements between Mr. McClendon (and the entities
    through which he participates in the FWPP) and any third party that has had a
    relationship with the company in any capacity. The board has also confirmed
    that it did not previously review, approve, or have knowledge of the specific
    transactions engaged in by Mr. McClendon or the terms of those transactions.
    In our view this represents a significant governance deficiency.

    Turmoil resulting from these developments--and from potential revelations
    resulting from the board investigation--could hamper Chesapeake's ability to
    meet the massive external funding requirements stemming from its currently
    weak operating cash flow and aggressive capital spending. Chesapeake's
    production is heavily skewed toward natural gas, and natural gas prices are
    severely depressed at this time. Although hedge-related gains had been an
    important support to Chesapeake's earnings and cash flow in recent years, the
    company terminated its natural-gas related hedge positions in late 2011.
    Chesapeake is in the midst of an extensive repositioning of its business mix,
    placing more emphasis on production of crude oil and natural gas liquids
    (collectively, liquids). The company's excellent drilling record and large
    acreage positions in the most promising North American liquids-rich basins
    afford confidence about its ability to make this transition.

    However, Chesapeake faces very large external funding requirements to sustain
    the aggressive planned investment needed to effect its strategic shift. In its
    investor presentation dated April 17, 2012, Chesapeake gave guidance of total
    investment of $10.9 billion to $12.4 billion in 2012, and $10.5 billion to
    $12.3 billion in 2013. This guidance encompasses well costs on proved and
    unproved properties, acquisition of unproved properties, and investment in
    oilfield services and midstream assets. Based on our estimates and price deck
    assumptions (including natural gas price of $2.00/btu in 2012, $2.75 in 2013,
    and $3.50 thereafter), we expect Chesapeake's funds from operations to total
    only $3.4 billion to $3.8 billion in 2012 and $5.4 billion to $5.8 billion in
    2013, implying massive internal funding shortfalls.

    To help fund its planned investment, Chesapeake has stated that it is
    targeting sales of proved and unproved properties, and monetization of
    oilfield services, midstream, and other assets, totaling $10 billion to $12
    billion in 2012, and $4.0 billion to $6.5 billion in 2013. Chesapeake is asset
    rich, and it has been adept at structuring varied and innovative transactions
    to generate funds, including outright asset sales, formation of joint ventures
    (JVs), issuance of securities by a royalty trust and by newly formed
    subsidiaries, and issuances of volumetric production payment (VPP)
    obligations. However, Chesapeake's ability to continue executing such
    transactions on favorable terms depends largely on capital market receptivity.
    From our analytical perspective, some of the company's actions to raise funds
    dilute the benefit of debt reduction, which it is also pursuing. Based on our
    price deck, we anticipate that coverage metrics over the next two years will
    be weak even for the revised rating--with debt to EBITDA higher than 5x and
    EBITDA of less than $4 billion in 2012 and less than $5 billion in
    2013--before Chesapeake's liquids production increases sufficiently to offset
    the effect of persisting depressed natural gas prices.

    CreditWatch
    As part of our CreditWatch review, Standard & Poor's will take account of the
    conclusions of the board's investigation; the terms under which the FWPP is
    terminated; Chesapeake's ongoing capital-raising initiatives; and potential
    changes to its growth strategy, financial policies, and governance structure.
    At this time, we cannot rule out further ratings downgrades of more than one
    notch; for example, if we believe that asset monetization actions will fall
    short of plans and that offsetting actions won't be taken to preserve
    liquidity and limit the increase in financial leverage.

    The ratings on Chesapeake Oilfield Operating LLC and Chesapeake Midstream
    Partners L.P. are constrained by our ratings on Chesapeake, given the extent
    of Chesapeake's ownership control over these entities, and the close business
    ties between Chesapeake and these entities.

    Over time, we could elevate Chesapeake Midstream Partners L.P. ratings above
    those of Chesapeake Energy (CHK:$17.5801,$-0.5499,-3.03%) if it achieves greater customer diversity and
    remains committed to conservative financial policies. However, given the large
    list of future drop-down candidates from Chesapeake, we do not anticipate any
    ratings separation.

  21. #371

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    I was introduced to an attorney at an event last weekend who is part of the team representing a group of over 500 individual CHK shareholders who are in the midst of filing a lawsuit against AKM and the CHK Board. He told me flatly that Aubrey would be gone "in less than two weeks." At the time I thought he was crazy, but I'm beginning to think he may have been right.

    Have a look at this video from CNBC and listed to their investment analyist saying that Chesapeake is now in a "death spiral" and predicting that their stock will go below $10/share. http://www.cnbc.com/id/47192199

    Scary stuff indeed.

  22. #372

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Quote Originally Posted by Boomer3791 View Post
    I was introduced to an attorney at an event last weekend who is part of the team representing a group of over 500 individual CHK shareholders who are in the midst of filing a lawsuit against AKM and the CHK Board. He told me flatly that Aubrey would be gone "in less than two weeks." At the time I thought he was crazy, but I'm beginning to think he may have been right.

    Have a look at this video from CNBC and listed to their investment analyist saying that Chesapeake is now in a "death spiral" and predicting that their stock will go below $10/share. http://www.cnbc.com/id/47192199

    Scary stuff indeed.
    Their tradable convertible preferred stock, CHKPRD, is down -8.55% today setting a new 52-week low @ 73.25. Par value is $100.

  23. #373

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    I'm doubting Aubrey will survive this. It's funny to me that those spineless jellyfish on the board of directors first stated they "approved" the loan guarantees, and are now saying they didn't. How credible is this? They must know the **** is hitting the fan and they don't want to be in front of the blades. What else is Chesapeake hiding?

    What's worse is that AKM seems to think his investors' money is his money -- very reckless attitude (and altogether much too common among the 1% atop corporate America).

  24. #374

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    Can anyone who is more sophisticated in the world of corporate finance comment on whether this makes CHK more vulnerable to a takeover attempt? Obviously, the ramifications for OKC would be huge.

  25. #375

    Default Re: Chesapeake Business Practices

    burn baby burn....o wait, i mean drill baby drill...i get confused sometimes.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Aubrey McClendon increases ownership in KSBI
    By Nermel in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-17-2009, 05:13 PM
  2. McClendon speaks out against OG&E's proposed plant
    By metro in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09-11-2007, 07:36 AM
  3. McClendon & Ward invest in KSBI TV
    By metro in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-07-2007, 12:32 AM
  4. new to the board....
    By BricktownGuy in forum Current Events & Open Topic
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 01-10-2005, 10:13 PM
  5. New to board and looking.
    By dirtrider73068 in forum Current Events & Open Topic
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-05-2004, 09:40 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO