This account is pending registration confirmation. Please click on the link within the confirmation email previously sent you to complete registration. Need a new registration confirmation email? Click here
NEW YORK (
TheStreet) -- Rumors of a pending
SandRidge Energy(SD) takeover seem difficult to believe, despite shares spiking on the chatter Friday.
Here are four reasons why SandRidge does not seem like a takeout candidate in the near-term:
SandRidge shares trade at roughly 8X EBITDA. Compare that to
Apache(APA), which trades at 3X EBITDA in the independent exploration and production sector.
In general, 8X EBITDA is at the top end of the independent exploration and production valuation range.
Brigham Exploration was acquired last year by
Statoil(STO) it was right as oil prices cratered in October.
Oil prices remain at the risk-premium high end of the range right now, adding to the valuation case against a buyer being willing to step in and pay a hefty premium for SandRidge at this time
The SandRidge Philosophy
SandRidge CEO Tom Ward used to be the chief operating officer at
Chesapeake Energy(CHK - Get Report). If there is one thing that Chesapeake CEO Aubrey McClendon is known for it's his hold over the company and his preference for one-off joint ventures and asset monetization deals, as opposed to any lock, stock and barrel sale.
TheStreet asked McClendon at the end of 2011 if he would consider selling the company outright, he said no, and his plan was to transition the company in 2012 from asset acquisitions to asset development.
Since Ward comes from the McClendon school of E&P management, several analysts said Friday that they think Ward has more to do in the years ahead before a takeout would be on his radar. Most analysts believe Ward is looking to build a much larger company and refine the asset base before the CEO will seek an exit strategy.
The SandRidge Portfolio Makes for a Complicated Transaction
Another way in which SandRidge mirrors Chesapeake is in building up a collection of diverse assets and seeking to monetize those assets through joint ventures and royalty trusts, and other arrangements that tie up the assets in multiple ways with multiple partners. This strategy has led to criticism of Chesapeake that even if the company wanted to be acquired, it's far too complicated to make for an attractive acquisition.