KNL MCAP - Diagram of Progress, page-47

I don't disagree with your regurgitated EV formula - I have read as much BJG as any other person out there.

The practical reality is that after a cap raise the number of shares on issue goes up, so does the MCAP, so the market sells down the share price to get back to closer to the MCAP before the new shares were issued. In many cases it falls right back down to the CR price if it was at a discount.

There are many lenses you can use to provide clarity to an investment or a trade. The reason I bring up LNG is that sometimes people choose the wrong one. Yes, you hedged your bets by selling down 50% of your LNG (that's an arbitrary number for a professional, isn't it?) but you maintain a $4.50 - $18.00 implied share price based on EV, I am sure. Surely you accept that you applied the wrong strategy to that one right? Or is it just even more undervalued and ripe for buying now?

On the same stroke, I do not disagree with your methods of calculating EV, it's very simple for a company like KNL which requires you to plug in barely any variables into the formula. However I do not consider it the only method of determining whether it is overvalued or undervalued, or that it is necessarily the right one for deciding whether to buy or sell in the context of a trade or investment.

If, for instance, you decide to value KNL on the basis of its future potential profit or its future potential revenues (as they say, it will be producing next year) and taking into account the prospect of further dilution (70:30 / 90:10 debt/equity ratio, earnings in the BFS, etc) then using the MCAP to determine whether the company is a buy or a sell is completely reasonable. Would you even bother to buy KNL if the MCAP was $1bn? I would hope not, but if it was $10m despite the progress the company has made then it might be well within your risk/reward parameters.

But hey - listen, if you really want to lay out some information instead of having a go at me, why don't you make a historical EV graph?