Peter Doyle from Horizon Kinetics is taking over Murray Stahls position on the board and will be eligible to be elected in November 2026. He would be shareholder friendly and understands TPL very well.
Boy, those royalties really looked good with WTI in the mid $50s before the Iran War bailed them out. Aside from management having little-to-no edge in acquiring royalties (and if oil price speculation is the angle, there are better ways to do it), your comment helps to prove my point. The volatility of oil prices and the fleeting nature of mineral royalties makes the revenue stream a lower quality one than the rest of the TPL revenue streams.
Your argument is stuck in a 2023 rearview mirror. If you walked into the TPL boardroom today in April and tried to argue that a billion dollars in royalty acquisitions was a mistake because oil used to be in the $50s, you would be laughed out of the room. In January, your 'wasting asset' theory might have had a leg to stand on. But the macro environment has shifted completely. As Churchill said: 'When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, madam?' Apparently, your answer is to double down on a $50-oil thesis while TPL’s bank account is filling up at $96 spot. You’re criticizing management for having 'no edge' while they’ve successfully front-run a generational commodity spike. Being 'right' about the theoretical volatility of royalties is a cold comfort when you’re this wrong about the actual value of the assets. Stop calling it a 'bailout' and start recognizing a win.
Peter Doyle from Horizon Kinetics is taking over Murray Stahls position on the board and will be eligible to be elected in November 2026. He would be shareholder friendly and understands TPL very well.
https://www.texaspacific.com/investors/news-events/press-releases/detail/183/tpl-announces-the-appointment-of-peter-doyle-to-the-board
Boy, those mineral royalties they acquired sure look bad with WTI at spot $96
Boy, those royalties really looked good with WTI in the mid $50s before the Iran War bailed them out. Aside from management having little-to-no edge in acquiring royalties (and if oil price speculation is the angle, there are better ways to do it), your comment helps to prove my point. The volatility of oil prices and the fleeting nature of mineral royalties makes the revenue stream a lower quality one than the rest of the TPL revenue streams.
Your argument is stuck in a 2023 rearview mirror. If you walked into the TPL boardroom today in April and tried to argue that a billion dollars in royalty acquisitions was a mistake because oil used to be in the $50s, you would be laughed out of the room. In January, your 'wasting asset' theory might have had a leg to stand on. But the macro environment has shifted completely. As Churchill said: 'When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, madam?' Apparently, your answer is to double down on a $50-oil thesis while TPL’s bank account is filling up at $96 spot. You’re criticizing management for having 'no edge' while they’ve successfully front-run a generational commodity spike. Being 'right' about the theoretical volatility of royalties is a cold comfort when you’re this wrong about the actual value of the assets. Stop calling it a 'bailout' and start recognizing a win.