Earnings Analysis; Q1-19 vs Q1-18

The rows below should be pretty self explanatory.  Ultimately I wanted to get to earnings adjusted for asset sales.  “Operating” after tax EPS is calculated to be $7.40 for Q1-19 vs $5.29 for Q1-18.  Implies 39.8% growth.

Lower than normal “operating” margins stay with us.  Looks like an 82.0% margin on “operating” earnings in Q1-19 vs 90.6% in Q1-18.  Expenses over the same time peried (implied from data provided in the release) are estimated to be up 192%.

I’m impressed by the figures quoted immediately below.  Production growth marches on!

Oil and gas royalty revenue was $33.2 million for the first quarter ended March 31, 2019, compared with $26.5 million for the first quarter ended March 31, 2018, an increase of 25.1%. Crude oil and gas production subject to the Trust’s royalty interests increased 58.5% and 119.6%, respectively, in the first quarter ended March 31, 2019 compared to the first quarter ended March 31, 2018. While crude oil and gas production increased in the first quarter ended March 31, 2019 compared to March 31, 2018, the prices received for crude oil and gas production decreased 16.7% and 46.7%, respectively, over the same time period.

q1 vs q1

margin

The last column in the exhibit above should read 1Q19.

General Cook Video Posted

TrustTPL.com link

Transcript

Overall good showing from the General. Confidence inspiring from a “level head” perspective. Will make the vote harder for some.

One needs to remember that much of what Cook talks about would never have been discussed in a public forum absent the proxy challenge from the WHITE card.

If nothing else, this video will have future use as a sleep aid.

Is there a scenario where we get Oliver and the General? Probably puts 20% on the stock in the following weeks if so.

Cat and Mouse on NOBO List

Re:   Demand to Inspect Books and Records of Texas Pacific Land Trust

Another tone deaf move.

It’s common practice to share NOBO lists.

But noooooo….

While you failed to provide us with the legal authority we requested, your latest letter claimed that “there is no legal impediment in providing to Mr. Oliver a NOBO list.” Again, we respectfully request your legal analysis underlying the foregoing statement. Alternatively, we would be comfortable providing the NOBO list and related materials to you if, in addition to a customary confidentiality agreement, you provide the Trust and its shareholders with an indemnity against claims that the sharing of these materials with you was not legally permissible. If this is acceptable to you, we can work together with your counsel to prepare the documentation.

In closing, we note that you have excellent outside legal counsel, who should be fully able to provide the legal authority – if there is any – we have requested. Rather than do so, you have instead spent a full week preparing a press release regarding this issue, which you filed as “proxy solicitation materials” with the SEC. This suggests that you are more interested in manufacturing a controversy than working with us in good faith to identify a legally permissible manner to share the requested materials with you.

Please advise if you are willing to work constructively with us on this. We hope you can appreciate our primary goal of protecting the privacy and interests of all TPL shareholders.