Thursday, February 28, 2019

Top 5 Gold Stocks To Own For 2019

tags:GSS,NGD,CME,ORE,NXG,

Focus Financial Partners has registered an amended S-1 form with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding its initial public offering (IPO). No pricing details were given in the filing, although the offering was valued up to $100 million in the previous filing. The company intends to list its shares on the Nasdaq under the symbol FOCS.

The underwriters for the offering are Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, KKR, BMO Capital Markets, RBC Capital Markets, SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, Fifth Third Securities, Keefe Bruyette & Woods, MUFG, Raymond James, Regions Securities and William Blair.

This is a leading partnership of independent, fiduciary wealth management firms operating in the highly fragmented registered investment advisor industry, with a footprint of 56 partner firms across the country.

Its partner firms primarily service high net worth individuals and families by providing highly differentiated and comprehensive wealth management services. These partner firms benefit from its intellectual and financial resources, operating in a scaled business model with aligned interests, while retaining their entrepreneurial culture and independence.

Top 5 Gold Stocks To Own For 2019: Golden Star Resources Ltd(GSS)

Advisors' Opinion:
  • [By Max Byerly]

    Get a free copy of the Zacks research report on Golden Star Resources (GSS)

    For more information about research offerings from Zacks Investment Research, visit Zacks.com

  • [By Joseph Griffin]

    Get a free copy of the Zacks research report on Golden Star Resources (GSS)

    For more information about research offerings from Zacks Investment Research, visit Zacks.com

  • [By Max Byerly]

    Get a free copy of the Zacks research report on Golden Star Resources (GSS)

    For more information about research offerings from Zacks Investment Research, visit Zacks.com

Top 5 Gold Stocks To Own For 2019: NEW GOLD INC.(NGD)

Advisors' Opinion:
  • [By Ethan Ryder]

    Commerzbank Aktiengesellschaft FI raised its holdings in shares of New Gold Inc (Pre-Merger) (NYSEAMERICAN:NGD) by 5.3% during the second quarter, according to the company in its most recent Form 13F filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission. The institutional investor owned 2,015,289 shares of the basic materials company’s stock after buying an additional 101,852 shares during the period. Commerzbank Aktiengesellschaft FI owned about 0.35% of New Gold Inc (Pre-Merger) worth $4,192,000 at the end of the most recent reporting period.

  • [By WWW.GURUFOCUS.COM]

    For the details of Exor Investments (UK) LLP's stock buys and sells, go to http://www.gurufocus.com/StockBuy.php?GuruName=Exor+Investments+%28UK%29+LLP

    These are the top 5 holdings of Exor Investments (UK) LLPSibanye-Stillwater (SBGL) - 45,970,311 shares, 32.51% of the total portfolio. Shares added by 8.09%VEON Ltd (VEON) - 37,657,792 shares, 31.02% of the total portfolio. Shares added by 3.83%Cameco Corp (CCJ) - 5,967,410 shares, 19.32% of the total portfolio. Harmony Gold Mining Co Ltd (HMY) - 13,275,728 shares, 6.26% of the total portfolio. Shares added by 6.84%Novagold Resources Inc (NG) - 5,889,905 shares, 6.21% of the total portfolio. Shares
  • [By Shane Hupp]

    News articles about New Gold (NASDAQ:NGD) have trended somewhat positive recently, according to Accern Sentiment Analysis. The research group ranks the sentiment of media coverage by monitoring more than 20 million blog and news sources in real time. Accern ranks coverage of publicly-traded companies on a scale of negative one to positive one, with scores nearest to one being the most favorable. New Gold earned a news impact score of 0.01 on Accern’s scale. Accern also gave media coverage about the company an impact score of 46.1175522193993 out of 100, indicating that recent media coverage is somewhat unlikely to have an effect on the stock’s share price in the near future.

  • [By Stephan Byrd]

    JPMorgan Chase & Co. downgraded shares of New Gold (NYSEAMERICAN:NGD) from a neutral rating to an underweight rating in a research report released on Wednesday, The Fly reports.

Top 5 Gold Stocks To Own For 2019: CME Group Inc.(CME)

Advisors' Opinion:
  • [By ]

    ​CME Group (Nasdaq: CME) is the world's largest and most diverse futures exchange group, operating in four segments -- the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, the Chicago Board of Trade, the New York Mercantile Exchange and the Commodity Exchange.

  • [By Logan Wallace]

    Cashme (CURRENCY:CME) traded down 0.1% against the dollar during the 24-hour period ending at 14:00 PM Eastern on August 31st. Cashme has a total market capitalization of $0.00 and approximately $0.00 worth of Cashme was traded on exchanges in the last 24 hours. One Cashme coin can currently be purchased for approximately $0.0003 or 0.00000003 BTC on popular cryptocurrency exchanges. In the last week, Cashme has traded 55.3% higher against the dollar.

  • [By Ethan Ryder]

    CME Group (NASDAQ:CME) was downgraded by investment analysts at BidaskClub from a “strong-buy” rating to a “buy” rating in a research report issued on Thursday.

Top 5 Gold Stocks To Own For 2019: Orezone Gold Corp (ORE)

Advisors' Opinion:
  • [By Jim Robertson]

    Finally, Richard Seville, the CEO of Brisbane-based Orocobre Ltd (ASX: ORE) which began lithium sales in 2015 from northern Argentina and also experienced difficulty boosting output, commented that an "inability to access traditional funds has delayed the development of the sector" and that "these projects aren't easy -- so the banks just don't want to go there."

  • [By Shane Hupp]

    Galactrum (ORE) is a PoW/PoS coin that uses the
    Lyra2RE hashing algorithm. It was first traded on December 13th, 2017. Galactrum’s total supply is 2,781,952 coins and its circulating supply is 2,061,952 coins. Galactrum’s official website is galactrum.org. Galactrum’s official Twitter account is @galactrum.

  • [By Stephan Byrd]

    Galactrum (ORE) is a PoW/PoS coin that uses the
    Lyra2RE hashing algorithm. It launched on November 11th, 2017. Galactrum’s total supply is 2,092,679 coins and its circulating supply is 1,372,679 coins. Galactrum’s official Twitter account is @galactrum. Galactrum’s official website is galactrum.org.

  • [By Stephan Byrd]

    Galactrum (CURRENCY:ORE) traded 1.7% lower against the U.S. dollar during the 24 hour period ending at 18:00 PM Eastern on August 31st. Galactrum has a total market capitalization of $866,847.00 and approximately $5,272.00 worth of Galactrum was traded on exchanges in the last 24 hours. One Galactrum coin can now be purchased for about $0.42 or 0.00006032 BTC on major exchanges including Stocks.Exchange and Cryptopia. In the last seven days, Galactrum has traded 12.5% higher against the U.S. dollar.

Top 5 Gold Stocks To Own For 2019: Northgate Minerals Corporation(NXG)

Advisors' Opinion:
  • [By Shane Hupp]

    Shares of NEX Group PLC (LON:NXG) have been given an average rating of “Hold” by the nine ratings firms that are presently covering the company, Marketbeat.com reports. One research analyst has rated the stock with a sell recommendation, four have assigned a hold recommendation and four have assigned a buy recommendation to the company. The average 1 year price objective among analysts that have issued ratings on the stock in the last year is GBX 696 ($9.21).

Tuesday, February 26, 2019

Noted Hedge Fund Says Crypto Hasn't Bottomed Yet

&l;figure class=&q;image-embed embed-1 alignright&q;&g;&l;div&g;&l;img src=&q;https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/5c6b16b631358e1c187eea9c/960x0.jpg?fit=scale&q; alt=&q;Tetras Capital managing partner Alex Sunnarborg&q; data-height=&q;563&q; data-width=&q;773&q;&g;&l;/div&g;&l;figcaption&g;&l;fbs-accordion&g;&l;p class=&q;color-body light-text&q;&g;Tetras Capital managing partner Alex Sunnarborg&l;small&g;Photo credit: Alex Sunnarborg&l;/small&g;&l;/p&g;&l;/fbs-accordion&g;&l;/figcaption&g;&l;/figure&g;&l;p&g;&l;em&g;Alex Sunnarborg is a founding partner of &l;/em&g;&l;a href=&q;https://tetras.capital/&q; target=&q;_blank&q; class=&q;color-accent&q;&g;&l;em&g;Tetras Capital&l;/em&g;&l;/a&g;&l;em&g;, a New York City-based cryptocurrency hedge fund &l;/em&g;Forbes&l;em&g; estimates to have $30 million in assets under management. Tetras is well known for a recent bearish bet it made: It shorted ether in May 2018, a month when the digital currency's average price was nearly $700. Today, ether hovers around $100. Before Tetras, Sunnarborg did a stint in investment banking and founded crypto exchange and research app Lawnmower, which was acquired by CoinDesk in 2017.&l;/em&g;&l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;:&l;/strong&g; How would you describe your investment strategy? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg:&l;/strong&g; In a bull market when everything is going up, especially when bitcoin is going up, altcoins generally will return more than bitcoin. In 2017 when we launched, we were looking to make altcoin trades. &a;lsqb;Altcoins are generally considered any crypto asset other than bitcoin.&a;rsqb; They historically have more volatility and higher betas. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;In a bear market, altcoins are still trading at a higher beta, but to the downside. In 2018, bitcoin fell about 75%, but altcoins fell 95%. It's funny how strongly they're still correlated, yet altcoins have a higher beta. Today, if we're trying to hedge our exposure to this space, before we short bitcoin we look at something with a higher beta. &l;/p&g;&l;fbs-ad position=&q;inread&q; progressive&g;&l;/fbs-ad&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;:&l;/strong&g; You shorted ether in May 2018, when it was trading above $500. Now ether is at $100. Obviously, that went well. Was it your biggest win for 2018? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg:&l;/strong&g; I would say so, yeah. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;:&l;/strong&g; Where's the bottom for ether? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg:&l;/strong&g; It's funny, these cryptos don't have a good way to come to a fundamental value. I can't tell you ether is fundamentally going to bottom at $50. It was at $10 two years ago, right? These assets trade so much relatively to each other, so I think ether's short-term bottom would be in line with bitcoin starting to turn. If bitcoin turned tomorrow and rallied, I think ether would, too. &l;/p&g;&l;div class=&q;vestpocket&q; vest-pocket&g;&l;/div&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;: &l;/strong&g;Over the past few months, we've seen issues with ConsenSys struggling and doing layoffs. Do you think that's a bad sign for the future of Ethereum? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg:&l;/strong&g; Yeah. ConsenSys is an integral piece of the Ethereum ecosystem. All the Ethereum decentralized applications and products it supports have had minimal user growth. A lot of them still haven't launched and are still pretty difficult to use, and the daily active user counts are less than 100. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;Augur has about $40,000 of money at stake across all its prediction markets, but the investors behind Augur have put up tens of millions. It has a market cap of hundreds of millions. There's this massive disconnect between how much money is still tied up in these projects and how much people actually use them. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;I've also noticed some Ethereum developers basically talking about building on some competing blockchains. People are talking about launching on Dfinity or Polkadot. At least at a high level, it does not look or feel good. It looks like a drop in momentum and steam. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;:&l;/strong&g; Are you currently short ether? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg:&l;/strong&g; I don't think I should comment on that right now. We have not held ether since we first published our short thesis in July 2018. We then went short ether, and we have taken that position off three or four times in 2018. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;:&l;/strong&g; Has bitcoin bottomed yet? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg:&l;/strong&g; I don't think so, and I think calling that is very difficult. That's part of the reason I'm really thankful that we're in the position we are right now. We can hedge ourselves, remain more neutral and not have to call that exact price or timing bottom. I'm not confident right now. Our portfolio is relatively neutral—we have cash and short positions. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;:&l;/strong&g; What are you buying and holding? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg:&l;/strong&g; Obviously, I'm a huge proponent of bitcoin. And if the market were to turn right now, what liquid altcoin sector would we even look at? We're very biased against anything that did an ICO, because we think they're pretty much all illegal securities offerings. Just by cutting that out, you are left with a very small handful of assets. A use case I still find interesting, because bitcoin doesn't have that functionality yet, is private transactions. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;:&l;/strong&g; Among privacy coins, which do you like best? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg:&l;/strong&g; I think Mimblewimble and Grin are pretty interesting—the fair launch process, the focus on privacy and the inflation. I think zcash and monero are both still interesting. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;:&l;/strong&g; Can you explain what Grin did to create a fair launch? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg:&l;/strong&g; There's only so many projects that don't launch their blockchain or token without an ICO or some initial funding. Grin tried to use the ethos of bitcoin of saying there's going to be a genesis block, and people are going to start mining the coin. There's no way you can buy it or get access to this coin ahead of time. That's very similar to how monero launched, and both of those attract a lot of interest from people in bitcoin, largely for that reason. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;:&l;/strong&g; What other factors do you look at? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg: &l;/strong&g;Another huge thing for me is the security. So, things like that recent Ethereum Classic 51% attack (when users attacked the blockchain with computing power to spend the same coins twice, undermining the primary function of the blockchain). These blockchains where it's possible to rewrite the blockchain for not that much money relative to how much you could make by double-spending—those are immediately not attractive. Unfortunately, in the crypto space, security and price are generally very correlated. So, as the price of ether falls, it gets less secure. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;:&l;/strong&g; I've seen you tweet about the virtual reality Ethereum-based platform Decentraland. Do you like that project? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg:&l;/strong&g; I find the concept of digital land very interesting, because of its scarcity. I like the concept of digital scarcity. This land asset seems interesting as something I could own and build on, and maybe charge players a fee for. I could sell it to someone else in the future. The value actually makes sense to me. But there's this other token in Decentraland called mana, which was created via an ICO. You have to use mana to buy land. I absolutely hate this token; it's totally unnecessary. I think the ICO was just done to raise money. They sold these tokens, and then essentially, they're backing into what to do with them.&l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;:&l;/strong&g; I've also seen you tweet about EOS and its growing number of transactions. Are you bullish on it? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg:&l;/strong&g; No. The one-year long, $4 billion-dollar ICO seems a little excessive to me. The whole governance system, with 21 block producers that can essentially make, vote, or deny everything, is a weird concept to me. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;&l;em&g;Forbes&l;/em&g;: &l;/strong&g;What should investors be monitoring for signals about where the market is headed? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;strong&g;Sunnarborg:&l;/strong&g; One of the big, fundamental things I want to see is whether the Fidelity crypto trading product actually rolls out in March. And do people actually start to use it? A very similar question: What's the status of trading platform Bakkt? Will it get approved, and are people going to use it? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;And how does the composition of global exchange volume start to shape up from here? Does volume increase on regulated, brand-name platforms—platforms that the next wave of institutions would actually trust? &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;What I'm really looking for in all these comments: Will this market actually clean up? Can we start to trust crypto data more, like trading volume numbers? We need more regulated, trusted players to improve the trading venues, because I think right now the SEC and many people are scared of manipulation, hacks and very shady venues for trading. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;What would be really good for a market bottom to happen would be for every potential bad thing to happen immediately. I would love to see the SEC come down on people really hard. One of the biggest problems in this space is there are so many bad actors, and so many were related to ICOs. The SEC just has such a massive task ahead of them. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;One way to think about the bottom is that it happens when all the bad news gets washed out. At that point the only thing to do is go up, and you can't really talk about any negative catalysts anymore, because they've all happened. &l;/p&g;&l;p&g;Basically, I think we're pretty close to the bottom, and what would help is if some more of that clarity and action came out. It probably would have been helpful for the bottom if the VanEck exchange-traded fund would have gotten totally rejected; if the SEC slapped some more of these people around and essentially maximum pain came onto the market. At that point we would see where, if any, buyers jumped in.&l;/p&g;&l;p&g;&l;em&g;Excerpted from the February 2019 issue of &l;/em&g;&l;a href=&q;https://esp.forbes.com/subscribe?PC=F8&q; target=&q;_blank&q; class=&q;color-accent&q;&g;&l;em&g;Forbes CryptoAsset And Blockchain Advisor&l;/em&g;&l;/a&g;.&l;/p&g;&q;,&q;bodyAsDeltas&q;:&q; They historically have more volatility and higher betas. \nIn a bear market, altcoins are still trading at a higher beta, but to the downside. In 2018, bitcoin fell about 75%, but altcoins fell 95%. It's funny how strongly they're still correlated, yet altcoins have a higher beta. Today, if we're trying to hedge our exposure to this space, before we short bitcoin we look at something with a higher beta. \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; You shorted ether in May 2018, when it was trading above $500. Now ether is at $100. Obviously, that went well. Was it your biggest win for 2018? \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Sunnarborg:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; I would say so, yeah. \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; Where's the bottom for ether? \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Sunnarborg:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; It's funny, these cryptos don't have a good way to come to a fundamental value. I can't tell you ether is fundamentally going to bottom at $50. It was at $10 two years ago, right? These assets trade so much relatively to each other, so I think ether's short-term bottom would be in line with bitcoin starting to turn. If bitcoin turned tomorrow and rallied, I think ether would, too. \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;: &q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q;Over the past few months, we've seen issues with ConsenSys struggling and doing layoffs. Do you think that's a bad sign for the future of Ethereum? \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Sunnarborg:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; Yeah. ConsenSys is an integral piece of the Ethereum ecosystem. All the Ethereum decentralized applications and products it supports have had minimal user growth. A lot of them still haven't launched and are still pretty difficult to use, and the daily active user counts are less than 100. \nAugur has about $40,000 of money at stake across all its prediction markets, but the investors behind Augur have put up tens of millions. It has a market cap of hundreds of millions. There's this massive disconnect between how much money is still tied up in these projects and how much people actually use them. \nI've also noticed some Ethereum developers basically talking about building on some competing blockchains. People are talking about launching on Dfinity or Polkadot. At least at a high level, it does not look or feel good. It looks like a drop in momentum and steam. \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; Are you currently short ether? \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Sunnarborg:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; I don't think I should comment on that right now. We have not held ether since we first published our short thesis in July 2018. We then went short ether, and we have taken that position off three or four times in 2018. \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; Has bitcoin bottomed yet? \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Sunnarborg:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; I don't think so, and I think calling that is very difficult. That's part of the reason I'm really thankful that we're in the position we are right now. We can hedge ourselves, remain more neutral and not have to call that exact price or timing bottom. I'm not confident right now. Our portfolio is relatively neutral—we have cash and short positions. \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; What are you buying and holding? \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Sunnarborg:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; Obviously, I'm a huge proponent of bitcoin. And if the market were to turn right now, what liquid altcoin sector would we even look at? We're very biased against anything that did an ICO, because we think they're pretty much all illegal securities offerings. Just by cutting that out, you are left with a very small handful of assets. A use case I still find interesting, because bitcoin doesn't have that functionality yet, is private transactions. \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; Among privacy coins, which do you like best? \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Sunnarborg:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; I think Mimblewimble and Grin are pretty interesting—the fair launch process, the focus on privacy and the inflation. I think zcash and monero are both still interesting. \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; Can you explain what Grin did to create a fair launch? \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Sunnarborg:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; There's only so many projects that don't launch their blockchain or token without an ICO or some initial funding. Grin tried to use the ethos of bitcoin of saying there's going to be a genesis block, and people are going to start mining the coin. There's no way you can buy it or get access to this coin ahead of time. That's very similar to how monero launched, and both of those attract a lot of interest from people in bitcoin, largely for that reason. \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; What other factors do you look at? \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Sunnarborg: &q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q;Another huge thing for me is the security. So, things like that recent Ethereum Classic 51% attack (when users attacked the blockchain with computing power to spend the same coins twice, undermining the primary function of the blockchain). These blockchains where it's possible to rewrite the blockchain for not that much money relative to how much you could make by double-spending—those are immediately not attractive. Unfortunately, in the crypto space, security and price are generally very correlated. So, as the price of ether falls, it gets less secure. \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; I've seen you tweet about the virtual reality Ethereum-based platform Decentraland. Do you like that project? \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Sunnarborg:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; I find the concept of digital land very interesting, because of its scarcity. I like the concept of digital scarcity. This land asset seems interesting as something I could own and build on, and maybe charge players a fee for. I could sell it to someone else in the future. The value actually makes sense to me. But there's this other token in Decentraland called mana, which was created via an ICO. You have to use mana to buy land. I absolutely hate this token; it's totally unnecessary. I think the ICO was just done to raise money. They sold these tokens, and then essentially, they're backing into what to do with them.\n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; I've also seen you tweet about EOS and its growing number of transactions. Are you bullish on it? \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Sunnarborg:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; No. The one-year long, $4 billion-dollar ICO seems a little excessive to me. The whole governance system, with 21 block producers that can essentially make, vote, or deny everything, is a weird concept to me. \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;: &q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q;What should investors be monitoring for signals about where the market is headed? \n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;bold&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Sunnarborg:&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q; One of the big, fundamental things I want to see is whether the Fidelity crypto trading product actually rolls out in March. And do people actually start to use it? A very similar question: What's the status of trading platform Bakkt? Will it get approved, and are people going to use it? \nAnd how does the composition of global exchange volume start to shape up from here? Does volume increase on regulated, brand-name platforms—platforms that the next wave of institutions would actually trust? \nWhat I'm really looking for in all these comments: Will this market actually clean up? Can we start to trust crypto data more, like trading volume numbers? We need more regulated, trusted players to improve the trading venues, because I think right now the SEC and many people are scared of manipulation, hacks and very shady venues for trading. \nWhat would be really good for a market bottom to happen would be for every potential bad thing to happen immediately. I would love to see the SEC come down on people really hard. One of the biggest problems in this space is there are so many bad actors, and so many were related to ICOs. The SEC just has such a massive task ahead of them. \nOne way to think about the bottom is that it happens when all the bad news gets washed out. At that point the only thing to do is go up, and you can't really talk about any negative catalysts anymore, because they've all happened. \nBasically, I think we're pretty close to the bottom, and what would help is if some more of that clarity and action came out. It probably would have been helpful for the bottom if the VanEck exchange-traded fund would have gotten totally rejected; if the SEC slapped some more of these people around and essentially maximum pain came onto the market. At that point we would see where, if any, buyers jumped in.\n&q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true},&q;insert&q;:&q;Excerpted from the February 2019 issue of &q;},{&q;attributes&q;:{&q;italic&q;:true,&q;color&q;:&q;&q;,&q;link&q;:&q;https://esp.forbes.com/subscribe?PC=F8&q;},&q;insert&q;:&q;Forbes CryptoAsset And Blockchain Advisor&q;},{&q;insert&q;:&q;.\n&q;}]

Sunday, February 24, 2019

Q2 Holdings Inc (QTWO) CFO Jennifer Noel Harris Sells 18,338 Shares

Q2 Holdings Inc (NYSE:QTWO) CFO Jennifer Noel Harris sold 18,338 shares of the company’s stock in a transaction that occurred on Thursday, February 21st. The shares were sold at an average price of $65.18, for a total transaction of $1,195,270.84. Following the completion of the transaction, the chief financial officer now owns 97,167 shares in the company, valued at approximately $6,333,345.06. The transaction was disclosed in a filing with the SEC, which is accessible through the SEC website.

Jennifer Noel Harris also recently made the following trade(s):

Get Q2 alerts: On Tuesday, February 19th, Jennifer Noel Harris sold 7,275 shares of Q2 stock. The shares were sold at an average price of $64.99, for a total transaction of $472,802.25. On Monday, December 3rd, Jennifer Noel Harris sold 20,000 shares of Q2 stock. The shares were sold at an average price of $52.31, for a total transaction of $1,046,200.00.

Shares of QTWO opened at $67.49 on Friday. Q2 Holdings Inc has a 12 month low of $43.41 and a 12 month high of $67.98. The firm has a market cap of $2.94 billion, a PE ratio of -182.41 and a beta of 1.51. The company has a current ratio of 2.96, a quick ratio of 5.62 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.15.

Q2 (NYSE:QTWO) last posted its earnings results on Wednesday, February 13th. The technology company reported $0.08 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, beating analysts’ consensus estimates of ($0.02) by $0.10. Q2 had a negative net margin of 14.68% and a negative return on equity of 12.18%. The business had revenue of $67.20 million for the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $66.77 million. During the same period last year, the business posted $0.05 EPS. Q2’s revenue was up 30.0% compared to the same quarter last year. Equities research analysts forecast that Q2 Holdings Inc will post -0.63 earnings per share for the current fiscal year.

A number of large investors have recently bought and sold shares of the stock. Vanguard Group Inc. grew its stake in Q2 by 32.7% in the 3rd quarter. Vanguard Group Inc. now owns 3,239,978 shares of the technology company’s stock valued at $196,181,000 after buying an additional 798,614 shares during the last quarter. Vanguard Group Inc grew its stake in Q2 by 32.7% in the 3rd quarter. Vanguard Group Inc now owns 3,239,978 shares of the technology company’s stock valued at $196,181,000 after buying an additional 798,614 shares during the last quarter. BlackRock Inc. grew its stake in Q2 by 5.9% in the 4th quarter. BlackRock Inc. now owns 2,683,111 shares of the technology company’s stock valued at $132,948,000 after buying an additional 150,440 shares during the last quarter. JPMorgan Chase & Co. grew its stake in Q2 by 4.3% in the 3rd quarter. JPMorgan Chase & Co. now owns 2,601,464 shares of the technology company’s stock valued at $157,519,000 after buying an additional 106,651 shares during the last quarter. Finally, Franklin Resources Inc. grew its stake in Q2 by 4.1% in the 3rd quarter. Franklin Resources Inc. now owns 1,287,343 shares of the technology company’s stock valued at $77,949,000 after buying an additional 51,252 shares during the last quarter. Institutional investors and hedge funds own 92.85% of the company’s stock.

Several research analysts have recently commented on the stock. DA Davidson lowered shares of Q2 from a “neutral” rating to an “underperform” rating and increased their price target for the stock from $48.00 to $52.00 in a research note on Friday, February 15th. BTIG Research lowered shares of Q2 from a “buy” rating to a “neutral” rating in a research note on Thursday, February 14th. JPMorgan Chase & Co. dropped their price target on shares of Q2 to $62.00 and set a “neutral” rating on the stock in a research note on Wednesday, November 7th. Royal Bank of Canada increased their price target on shares of Q2 to $76.00 and gave the stock an “outperform” rating in a research note on Friday, February 15th. Finally, Stephens upgraded shares of Q2 from an “equal weight” rating to an “overweight” rating and dropped their price target for the stock from $60.00 to $59.00 in a research note on Thursday, January 3rd. One investment analyst has rated the stock with a sell rating, five have assigned a hold rating, eight have given a buy rating and one has given a strong buy rating to the stock. The stock currently has a consensus rating of “Buy” and a consensus price target of $62.71.

TRADEMARK VIOLATION WARNING: “Q2 Holdings Inc (QTWO) CFO Jennifer Noel Harris Sells 18,338 Shares” was first posted by Ticker Report and is owned by of Ticker Report. If you are accessing this piece on another website, it was illegally stolen and reposted in violation of US and international copyright & trademark laws. The legal version of this piece can be accessed at https://www.tickerreport.com/banking-finance/4173475/q2-holdings-inc-qtwo-cfo-jennifer-noel-harris-sells-18338-shares.html.

Q2 Company Profile

Q2 Holdings, Inc provides cloud-based digital banking solutions to regional and community financial institutions (RCFIs) in the United States. It offers Q2online, a browser-based digital banking solution that delivers RCFI-branded digital banking capabilities; Q2 Sentinel, a security analytics solution; Q2 Corporate to support RCFIs to attract and retain larger commercial accounts; and Q2 SMART, a targeting and messaging platform.

Read More: Technical Analysis

Insider Buying and Selling by Quarter for Q2 (NYSE:QTWO)

Saturday, February 23, 2019

Allstate Corp (ALL) Holdings Lifted by HL Financial Services LLC

HL Financial Services LLC raised its holdings in Allstate Corp (NYSE:ALL) by 7.1% during the fourth quarter, according to the company in its most recent Form 13F filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission. The fund owned 9,953 shares of the insurance provider’s stock after acquiring an additional 660 shares during the period. HL Financial Services LLC’s holdings in Allstate were worth $822,000 at the end of the most recent quarter.

A number of other institutional investors have also added to or reduced their stakes in the business. BlackRock Inc. grew its position in Allstate by 10.6% in the third quarter. BlackRock Inc. now owns 27,138,023 shares of the insurance provider’s stock valued at $2,678,525,000 after acquiring an additional 2,608,827 shares during the last quarter. LSV Asset Management grew its holdings in shares of Allstate by 2.4% during the fourth quarter. LSV Asset Management now owns 5,650,351 shares of the insurance provider’s stock worth $466,888,000 after purchasing an additional 130,257 shares during the last quarter. FMR LLC grew its holdings in shares of Allstate by 24.7% during the second quarter. FMR LLC now owns 4,096,814 shares of the insurance provider’s stock worth $373,917,000 after purchasing an additional 811,694 shares during the last quarter. Oregon Public Employees Retirement Fund grew its holdings in shares of Allstate by 8,063.9% during the fourth quarter. Oregon Public Employees Retirement Fund now owns 3,165,142 shares of the insurance provider’s stock worth $38,000 after purchasing an additional 3,126,372 shares during the last quarter. Finally, Bank of Montreal Can grew its holdings in shares of Allstate by 65.3% during the fourth quarter. Bank of Montreal Can now owns 2,957,927 shares of the insurance provider’s stock worth $244,414,000 after purchasing an additional 1,168,707 shares during the last quarter. Hedge funds and other institutional investors own 77.60% of the company’s stock.

Get Allstate alerts:

ALL has been the topic of several research reports. Zacks Investment Research cut Allstate from a “strong-buy” rating to a “hold” rating in a report on Friday, January 18th. Wells Fargo & Co set a $100.00 price target on Allstate and gave the stock a “hold” rating in a report on Thursday, November 8th. William Blair upgraded Allstate from an “underperform” rating to a “market perform” rating in a report on Wednesday, February 6th. ValuEngine upgraded Allstate from a “sell” rating to a “hold” rating in a report on Tuesday, December 18th. Finally, Bank of America reduced their price target on Allstate from $113.00 to $110.00 and set a “buy” rating on the stock in a report on Friday, November 2nd. Eight research analysts have rated the stock with a hold rating and six have assigned a buy rating to the company. Allstate currently has a consensus rating of “Hold” and a consensus price target of $101.27.

Shares of ALL stock opened at $94.57 on Friday. Allstate Corp has a one year low of $77.00 and a one year high of $102.73. The company has a market capitalization of $31.41 billion, a P/E ratio of 11.78, a P/E/G ratio of 1.23 and a beta of 0.82. The company has a current ratio of 0.27, a quick ratio of 0.26 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.33.

Allstate (NYSE:ALL) last announced its earnings results on Tuesday, February 5th. The insurance provider reported $1.24 EPS for the quarter, beating the Thomson Reuters’ consensus estimate of $1.01 by $0.23. Allstate had a return on equity of 14.00% and a net margin of 5.66%. The business had revenue of $8.71 billion for the quarter, compared to analysts’ expectations of $8.66 billion. During the same period in the prior year, the business posted $2.09 earnings per share. The firm’s revenue was up 6.2% on a year-over-year basis. As a group, sell-side analysts anticipate that Allstate Corp will post 9.24 EPS for the current fiscal year.

The business also recently announced a quarterly dividend, which will be paid on Monday, April 1st. Investors of record on Thursday, February 28th will be issued a $0.50 dividend. The ex-dividend date of this dividend is Wednesday, February 27th. This is a boost from Allstate’s previous quarterly dividend of $0.46. This represents a $2.00 annualized dividend and a yield of 2.11%. Allstate’s dividend payout ratio is presently 22.80%.

ILLEGAL ACTIVITY WARNING: This article was first published by Ticker Report and is owned by of Ticker Report. If you are reading this article on another website, it was illegally stolen and reposted in violation of international trademark & copyright laws. The legal version of this article can be accessed at https://www.tickerreport.com/banking-finance/4173481/allstate-corp-all-holdings-lifted-by-hl-financial-services-llc.html.

Allstate Company Profile

The Allstate Corporation, together with its subsidiaries, engages in property and casualty insurance, and life insurance businesses in the United States and Canada. The company's Allstate Protection segment sells private passenger auto and homeowners insurance; specialty auto products, including motorcycle, trailer, motor home, and off-road vehicle insurance policies; other personal lines products, including renter, condominium, landlord, boat, umbrella, and manufactured home insurance policies; and commercial lines products under the Allstate, Esurance, and Encompass brand names.

See Also: What is the return on assets (ROA) ratio?

Want to see what other hedge funds are holding ALL? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for Allstate Corp (NYSE:ALL).

Institutional Ownership by Quarter for Allstate (NYSE:ALL)

Friday, February 22, 2019

Ceragon Networks Ltd (CRNT) Q4 2018 Earnings Conference Call Transcript

Logo of jester cap with thought bubble.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

Ceragon Networks Ltd  (NASDAQ:CRNT)Q4 2018 Earnings Conference CallFeb. 20, 2019, 9:00 a.m. ET

Contents: Prepared Remarks Questions and Answers Call Participants Prepared Remarks:

Operator

Good day, everyone. Welcome to the Ceragon Networks Limited Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2018 Results Conference Call. Today's call is being recorded and will be hosted by Mr. Ira Palti, President and CEO of Ceragon Networks.

Today's call will include statements concerning Ceragon's future prospects that are forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements are based on the current beliefs, expectations and assumptions of Ceragon's management. For examples of forward-looking statements, please refer to the forward-looking statements paragraph in our press release that was published earlier today.

These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially, including risks relating to the concentration of Ceragon's business in certain geographic regions and particularly in India; risks associated with the decline in demand from the single-market segment on which we focus; risks relating to certain guarantees granted by Ceragon on behalf of Orocom to FITEL, in the framework of the FITEL project; risks associated with any failure to effectively compete with other wireless equipments providers; risks associated with a change in our gross margin as a result of changes in the geographic mix of revenue; risks related to the fact that our operating results may vary significantly from quarter-to-quarter and from our expectations for any specific period; risks related to our ability to meet the supply demands of our customers in a timely manner due to the high volatility in their supply needs; risks associated with difficulties in obtaining market acceptance of newly introduced products; risks associated with technical difficulties that may be discovered in newly developed products; and other risks and uncertainties detailed from time to time in Ceragon's Annual Report on Form 20-F and Ceragon's other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, that represent our views only as of the date they are made and should not be relied upon as representing our views as of any subsequent date. We do not assume any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

Ceragon's public filings are available from the Securities and Exchange Commission's website at www.sec.gov or may be obtained from Ceragon's website at www.ceragon.com. Also today's call will include certain non-GAAP numbers. For a reconciliation between GAAP and non-GAAP results, please see the table attached to the press release that was issued earlier today.

I will now turn the call over to Mr. Ira Palti, President and CEO of Ceragon. Please go ahead, sir.

Ira Palti -- Chief Executive Officer and President

Thank you for joining us today. We had a great fourth quarter and 2018 was an excellent year. And we are targeting a fifth year of growth in net income in 2019. We are looking forward to sharing the details with you.

With me on the call is Doron Arazi, as most of you are aware Doron is Deputy CEO and Chief Financial Officer, which means that Doron has two separate time consuming roles. This morning, we announced that Ran Vered has joined Ceragon to assume the CFO role, and he is here with us on the call today. Both Doron and I will continue to do what we have been doing, which is make sure that between the two of us we are maintaining at the executive level key customer channel and supply chain relationships. With Ran as CFO, we'll both be able to bring more focus to our work, so we're very pleased that Ran has joined us. Welcome, Ran.

Turning to our results. We had a very strong finish to the year. The fourth quarter exceeded our expectations for revenue, gross margin and net income. We also had a book-to-bill above one in Q4. The strong finish contributed to 2018 being an excellent year in several respects. In addition to achieving our primary goal of net income growth, our revenue increased about 4%, which is ahead of our original expectations. We were successful in gradually increasing our market share in Latin America, Africa, Asia and some vertical markets in North America.

Gross margin improved and we kept operating expenses within our target range. We also generated close to $10 million in positive cash flow in 2018, which enable us to end the year with even stronger balance sheet. On balance, the organization executed very well and we continue to believe our strategy of managing to the bottom line is the right one for our business. Therefore, we are aiming for 2019 to be the fifth consecutive year of growth in net income. We have not seen any significant changes in demand or overall deployment activity anywhere around the world. We're expecting operators to be moving along the path to 5G this year, before increasing the pace of ordering next year and beyond.

Within this very positive overall picture of our business, we need to mention one caveat. Lack of linearity, which causes lumpiness. Those of you who have followed our business for some time are aware that it is typical for Tier 1 operators to pause orders temporarily during a major deployment. Usually the reason is to bring site acquisition, installation capabilities and equipment inventory into alignment. And it often means when the orders resume, they are larger than they would have been without the pause. As a result, we tend to see lumpy order and revenue recognition patterns as well. Lack of linearity is normal in our business and we need to keep this in mind as we think about each region, the timing of orders and how they combine into the overall picture. Also, it's worth noting, that we have also some potentially large projects in the pipeline. Those could provide some upside to the detailed regional picture we are going to describe for you today.

Turning to the regional update. We'll discuss India first. There seems to be some confusion about our expectations in this region, so we'll try to be as clear as possible. Revenues from India were very high in 2018. In fact, the same high level as 2017 which we did not expect. We expected a pause in order during the first half of 2018 that didn't happen. If it had, 2018 would have been somewhat lower than 2017 having nothing to do with demand or deployment plans or anything else except the timing of orders and revenue recognition.

With India sustaining such a blistering pace in 2018, it seems even more likely that we would soon see a pause in the order pattern, which is why we put a lot of emphasis on the potential lumpiness on our last call. Sure enough orders from India in Q4 were lower. We expect another large batch of orders during the first half, but we don't know the exact timing which creates the possibility that Q1 revenues from India could drop temporarily. The important thing to emphasize is that we expect the overall strength of the Indian market to continue for at least the next several years. We are only talking about the timing of orders and how they cause revenues to be recorded in various reporting periods.

You also are probably wondering how Vodafone/Idea fits into our expectations for the market in India. Nothing has been finalized yet, but we have very strong indications that we are a preferred vendor from the technology standpoint. However, we would not necessarily be able to reach a satisfactory agreement on other aspects such as price or payment terms. There are considerable challenges in this regard before we have a deal that will meet our criteria. If eventually we are able to overcome these challenges, this will generate significantly higher business and revenue from India than our current expectations.

After increasing our market share in APAC during 2018, we expect this region to remain generally strong in terms of ongoing business during 2019. There is a major bidding process going on for a large project in the APAC region where the service provider is preparing for 5G. This is factored into our projections in small numbers and could generate higher revenue than we currently expect toward the late 2019 and into next year.

Africa began to pick up in 2018, and this business looks likely to remain strong this year. Our major customer in Africa along with new customers we brought on board continue to invest in building out 4G in various regions of the continent. Meanwhile, Europe seems likely to remain flat during 2019. 4G technology has been widely deployed across Western Europe and there is no apparent disruptors among the European operators that seems likely to make an aggressive move on 5G that would force the others to follow soon.

In Latin America, we are expecting a very good year that will certainly represent growth over 2018 due to the large project we won in Peru, which is aimed at bridging the digital divide in large rural areas of the country. In Q4, we began shipping to this Orocom project. We also believe our customers in the South Cone will continue to invest as 4G penetration in several countries gradually increases. We also saw a pickup in revenues from North America in Q4, and we expect to sustain these higher levels during 2019. The temporary government shutdown may have had some effect on the T-Mobile/Sprint process, but there are still targeting a closing during the first half.

Any further acceleration of orders from these customers is part of the potential upside we referred to earlier. But we are not building it into our forecast until we have better sense of the post closing plans and the timing. Meanwhile, we continue to target gradual gains in market share in various vertical markets and among smaller operators until we see a 5G related pickup, which we don't expect until 2020.

The trends we see in most geographic regions reflect the various stages service providers are in as they prepare for 5G, so we should talk about how we see 5G affecting wireless backhaul. From a technology and market perspective 5G means, it means orders of magnitude more complexity, to plan a network, to build or densify a network and to operate a network. It means, more sites, perhaps five times more sites. It means more capacity to all the sites. It could be a 100 times more capacity. It means service providers must plan for new and more varied service offerings or what is called use cases. For example, gigabit mobile broadband to support activities, like mobile online game, for example, connecting billions of things from vending machines to parking meters, for example, mission-critical applications requiring very low latency such as self-driving cars, real-time inspection of critical infrastructure and real-time collaborative robotics.

What 5G does not mean is orders of magnitude larger CapEx budgets. So we have to help our customers meet these challenges in ways that are not only simple and fast, but also conserve valuable spectrum assets, minimize expensive real estate for mounting equipment, reduce power consumption and so on. So doing all these things at scale requires innovation in deployment and professional services. It's also important to remember that not every network will suddenly need 100 times more capacity all at once. Different operators and service providers have different needs and are beginning the transition to 5G from different places. So we have to be prepared to meet customers where they are today and give them solutions that will take them where they need to go, at the pace they need to get there in a future-proof way.

Yesterday, we announced our new IP-50 platform that represents a premium solution providing certain additional capabilities which will command a premium in the market. The IP-50 platform is not a replacement for the IP-20. It is an incremental and complementary to our IP-20 offering, because not all networks require the particular capabilities of the IP-50 platform now or in the foreseeable future. Our IP-20 platform is helping customers move along the path from 4G to 5G by providing multiple type of radios, each with multi-core capabilities, delivering high capacity in a variety of configurations including all-outdoor split and all indoor depending on the specific needs of the operators.

So, we are continuing to develop the IP-20 platform offering new releases with higher speeds and more functionality, while we also make the IP-50 premium products available. We believe the IP-50 platform is unique, in that it offers certain advantages that are based on the concept of disaggregation, which in its simplest form means separating the path of innovation among radio technology, networking software and hardware to increase flexibility and available options. The IP-50 leverages software and hardware disaggregation to create an ultra-scalable platform that enables the customer to add capacity and interfaces by simply moving to a larger hardware variant while keeping all the software functionality intact.

Without getting into all the technical details, in addition to offering multi-core technology like the IP-20, the IP-50 offers additional capabilities that include a single radio for all deployment scenarios and routing software capabilities that are separated from the hardware to enable simpler, faster deployments with lowest possible total cost of ownership.

Our first IP-50 products will be showcased at Mobile World Congress next week and we expect to start recognize significant revenue from the IP-50 products beginning next year.

To summarize, we are looking forward to an excellent year in 2019, because we expect higher revenue from North America, Latin America and Africa to compensate for the impact of a temporary pause in India at the beginning of the year. So currently, we are expecting overall revenue to be about the same in 2019 as in 2018, and with a more favorable geographic mix, we are again setting a goal of growing net income for the fifth straight year. And again, generating positive cash flow. And, we intend to do both, while also continuing to invest aggressively in our next generation technology. The next generation of our multi-core technology known as Octacore will enable service providers to address the challenges of a full 5G world. 2019 promises to be a busy, exciting and profitable year, that will provide an excellent transition to 2020 when we expect to see 5G deployments start to make an impact.

Now, I'll turn the call over to Doron.

Doron Arazi -- Deputy CEO

Thank you, Ira. Since you've all seen the press release, I'll just highlight some of the significant items in the report. The fourth quarter was a strong finish to the year and we achieved our primary goal for 2018, which was improving net income. Our primary benchmark non-GAAP net income was up 14.8% to $17.5 million. As Ira noted, revenues grew about 4% for the year, which was likely more related to timing of orders and revenue recognition factors, although we do believe we are gradually increasing our market share.

For those of you on the call who might be new to our story, we managed to the bottom line, not the top line. We look at each deal according to the amount of incremental gross profit it can bring, and we keep stringent control of our operating expenses. We increased our GAAP gross profit by 8.2% in 2018 and our gross margin improved to 33.8%, which was in line with our expectations, despite some higher component costs. Our GAAP operating expenses for the year were also in line with our expectations and higher than 2017, mainly due to foreign currency headwinds, increased R&D investment to continue our technology leadership and performance related compensation expense. Our GAAP EPS in 2018 was $0.28 per diluted share compared to $0.19 per diluted share in 2017. I will further elaborate on the big jump in the GAAP EPS in 2018 when reviewing the Q4 results shortly.

Turning to the details of our fourth quarter, revenues were better than expected and about even with both the third quarter and the fourth quarter of 2017. We saw strength in virtually all regions except India, which was below the very high level of recent quarters, as we ate through the backlog from the large orders received earlier in the year and in Q4 of last year.

Even Europe picked up a little in Q4 compared with the last few quarters. We had three above 10% customers or customer groups in the fourth quarter. One customer in India, a customer group with presence in India and Africa, and a customer group in Latin America. India continue to dominate the breakdown of revenues, but with the more moderate 25% of the total. Aside from India, there were no major changes in the geographic breakdown.

GAAP gross margin was 34.4% and non-GAAP gross margin was 34.7% in Q4, similar to Q3 and an improvement from the same period in 2017, primarily due to a more favorable geographic mix. We believe the trend toward a more favorable geographic revenue mix will continue, which we expect to result in slightly higher gross margin in 2019, with the typical fluctuations from quarter-to-quarter. Turning to operating expenses. Non-GAAP OpEx of $23 million was slightly higher than our target quarterly arrange, due to higher variable compensation expenses, primarily related to our strong business results.

Looking at 2019, we expect operating expenses to remain in our target range of $21 million to $22 million per quarter during the first half of the year and slightly exceeding $23 million per quarter during the second half, primarily due to our investment in our next generation platform, and the expected higher level of revenue. As we have noted in the past, we expect to continue to spend aggressively, but carefully on our next-generation 5G solutions.

Our financial expenses declined sequentially again in Q4, declining from $1.8 million in Q3 to about $900,000 on a non-GAAP basis, due to less exchange rate differences and lower discounting fees. We expect financial expense to range between $1 million to $1.5 million this year, assuming no further significant fluctuations in exchange rates.

I would like to spend a couple of minutes on our tax line in our GAAP numbers, as this caused a big jump in our net income and EPS for Q4 and for the full year on a GAAP basis. In Q4, we recorded income on the tax line primarily due to the need to record a tax asset of $7.2 million on our balance sheet that reflects tax benefits we anticipate as a result of utilizing our NOLs against taxable income in Israel in future years. This also means that we are expected to record higher tax expenses on a GAAP basis in the upcoming years. This tax asset does not reflect the full tax benefit of the approximately $200 million of NOLs that we have accumulated. Therefore, assuming we continue to be profitable in the very long-term, one should expect to see a similar accounting pattern of a tax related income year followed by several years of tax expense.

Bottom line is that this is another indication of our strong performance in the previous couple of years as well as our expectations for continued strength in the upcoming years. On a GAAP basis, we reported $11.6 million in net income and non-GAAP net income of $5 million. This is a very good result and better than our expectations.

Turning to the balance sheet. At December 31st, receivables increased to $123.5 million, with DSOs of 131 days. This primarily relates to another timing issue, and since year-end we have already collected most of the amounts that distorted this DSOs for Q4 relative to our collection expectations. Mainly as a result of the timing of collections we just mentioned, we had negative cash flow of about $5.7 million in Q4. However, for all of 2018, we had positive cash flow of $9.7 million, while gradually reducing our factoring activities by approximately $13 million, which is an even bigger achievement.

We expect to continue to generate positive cash flow in -- sorry, in 2019 as well. At the year-end, we had cash and cash equivalents of $35.6 million with a $40 million unused line of credit, which gives us ample financial flexibility. Although our book-to-bill ratio was above one in Q4, we expect a temporary timing related dip in revenue in Q1. This is primarily due to timing factors related to our business in India, as Ira described on top of typical seasonality.

Since all regions are generally the same or stronger than 2018, in terms of overall demand in activity, we continue to expect revenue for 2019 as a whole to be about the same as 2018, but with a more favorable geographic mix due to a lower proportion of revenue from India related to the timing of orders.

Since we are talking only about timing issues, the lower our Q1 revenues turn out to be the higher we expect revenues to be in the remaining quarters of the year. Our revenues could be higher if some of the projects in our pipeline that are currently counted in our projections at very low amounts or not reflected at all will convert to orders and backlog in time to be recognized as revenue in 2019. We are targeting 34% non-GAAP gross margin in the near-term with some improvement during the second half of 2019. Non-GAAP operating expenses will be slightly higher than 2019 -- sorry in 2019 versus 2018, due mainly to increased R&D investment primarily during the second half. So, as Ira indicated, we're aiming to make 2019 our fifth consecutive year of growth in non-GAAP net income based on a similar level of revenue compared to 2018. We expect this additional net income improvement to be driven by a gradual increase in gross margin, tight control of operating expenses and lower financial expense versus 2018. With continued positive cash flow in 2019, we expect to have a solid foundation for taking advantage of the opportunities related to 5G deployments beyond this year.

Before we open the call to questions, I would like to also welcome Ran to our team and add how pleased I am that he is joining. I will supervise the completion of the 20-F. And Ran and I will work together during the next several weeks on the transition of my CFO duties. He will take full responsibility for Q1, and you will be hearing from him on our first quarter results call in May.

Is there anything you would like to say before we take questions, Ran?

Ran Vered -- Chief Financial Officer

Hello, everyone. I just like to say that I'm very excited to join the Ceragon team. I think we are in great position to take advantage of the transition to 5G technology. And I look forward to contributing as CFO. I'll be speaking with you on the next quarterly results call, and I'm eager to meet those of you I haven't met before. Thanks, Doron.

Doron Arazi -- Deputy CEO

Okay. Now we will open the call for questions. Operator?

Questions and Answers:

Operator

Thank you very much. (Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from George Iwanyc with Oppenheimer. Please go ahead.

George Iwanyc -- Oppenheimer -- Analyst

Thank you for taking my questions and congrats on the solid quarter. When you look at the March quarter, Ira, how much of a downtick do you expect revenue fall below the $80 million line that you kind of have set as the low end of the quarterly run rate?

Doron Arazi -- Deputy CEO

Hey, George, this is Doron. The short answer is yes, but if we are looking back on trends in previous years, if you look on Q1 2017, or even if you go far back to 2016, when there is seasonality and when you don't get the big orders toward the end of the year from India, we expect the numbers to be somewhat in between the numbers of Q1 of 2017 and Q1 of 2016, I believe that we'll be able to end up toward -- closer toward the 2017 numbers.

George Iwanyc -- Oppenheimer -- Analyst

Okay. Thank you. And then, when you look at India, can you tell us where the confidence is that the revenues will come back at strong levels? And how good the visibility is? Is this 2Q, 3Q? Or is it some time just during the second half of the year?

Ira Palti -- Chief Executive Officer and President

It's probably 2Q, 3Q and 4Q. We have very good visibility, as I think we indicated in the call, the timing issues is usually having to do with people needing to align site acquisition, installations, equipment and there are pauses like that, that happen in almost any one of our large installations. We know the almost exact plans of how the progress forwards needs to look like the demand. And this time, it's the alignment of them having more equipment than they were able to do installations. By the way, we talked in the past about the alignment on the other side where we had issues to deliver quickly enough the equipment to meet site acquisition, installation, and the alignment issue is where it is. I think we have very good visibility as in moving forward while discussing with all the customers the specific plans.

George Iwanyc -- Oppenheimer -- Analyst

Okay. And shifting a little bit, Ira. The IP-50, it's a nice looking platform. Can you give us a sense of how that could impact the second half of this year? How that changes your go-to-market? Possibilities for market share gains and how that helps address 5G?

Ira Palti -- Chief Executive Officer and President

We will be introducing the IP from platforms in pieces over the next 18 months. The first pieces will be available at Mobile World Congress and will be available in shipping in the second half. As I indicated on the first part, we do expect significant revenues from the IP-50 only in the first half of 2020, not this year. There are certain areas where this will be part of the mix toward the second half of this year of '19, but only in smaller numbers.

George Iwanyc -- Oppenheimer -- Analyst

All right. Thank you.

Ira Palti -- Chief Executive Officer and President

Now, just as a question on that, one of the reasons for introducing is that usually, planning times and working with customers is a long process. And we are planning with them already the networks for 2020 and beyond. And there's a mixture between the IP-20 and the IP-50 that is required on those networks, and that's part of introducing and making some of the products available at different times.

George Iwanyc -- Oppenheimer -- Analyst

Thank you.

Operator

Thank you. (Operator Instructions) Our next question comes from Alex Henderson with Needham & Company. Please go ahead.

Roger Boyd -- Needham & Company -- Analyst

Hey, thanks, this is Roger Boyd on for Alex. Just a quick one on Africa. Nice to see revenues kind of ramp in there. Can you remind us what the margins look like there in comparison to the rest of your business?

Doron Arazi -- Deputy CEO

I would say that the margins are not too bad. They are not -- obviously, they're not as low as our margins in India. And I would say that if you look at the average corporate, they are not far away from these margins.

Roger Boyd -- Needham & Company -- Analyst

Okay. Makes sense. And then just another quick one. With the shekel, I know you mentioned that you began hedging in 4Q and presumably continue that as it reached kind of 52-week lows. How does that offset the planned increases in OpEx? Have you quantified the benefit you receive from that?

Doron Arazi -- Deputy CEO

Yeah. So, just to remind you, we usually hedge a portion of our shekel exposure during the year. And once we finalize the budget and it is approved we hedge the latter. So obviously, relative to previous year, the exchange rate in which we were able to hedge the expenses, the shekel expenses is higher than the exchange rate we had last year. However, the increased investment in R&D, especially relating to our next-generation chipset, is impacting the R&D level that we expect. So to a certain degree, it ate some of our potential reduction in the OpEx.

Roger Boyd -- Needham & Company -- Analyst

Okay. Makes sense. That's good for me. Thanks.

Operator

Thank you very much. Our next question in queue will come from Michael Staiger with Odeon Capital. Please go ahead.

Michael Staiger -- Odeon Capital -- Analyst

Hey, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. You're focused on growing net income in 2019. Is there a range we should expect? And would this also be reflected in the free cash flow generation? And then one follow on would be, if you overcome some these challenges in India in 2019, is there sort of a revenue growth range you expect from India? Thanks.

Doron Arazi -- Deputy CEO

So, let me start with the first question first. We are not indicating a specific number of increase to the bottom line. But I think as a reference, if you look back at the achievements of this year relative to previous year, this should probably be a good ballpark. In terms of cash flow or free cash flow, yes, indeed we intend to continue generating free cash flow and we don't see any reason why not to do that. Let's just not forget that usually, or what we intend to do is to use our cash for increasing our business. So the bottom line is that, as long as we continue with this plan and we don't see any huge pickup or any, I would say, strategic moves in which we will have to spend more cash, our free cash flow is going to increase according to our plan in 2019.

Regarding India, so as we were trying to explain, India is very volatile because of the behavior of the operators. And we are very, very careful in giving indication where -- whether the revenue or the business from India will grow in a certain year or will go down because of this volatility. So my preference is not to comment specifically on any growth in India, but just say that we are highly confident that based on what we see now, we can make 2019 in terms of total revenue quite similar to 2018.

Operator

Thank you very much. (Operator Instructions) And next in queue is Gunther Karger with Discovery Group. And your line is open. And pardon me your line is open, please check your mute key.

Gunther Karger -- Discovery Group Inc. -- Analyst

Hello? Okay. Good morning and afternoon actually. Two comments. First of all, I want to congratulate the team for executing the long-term strategy. I've been following the Company for some years and you've done a great job in executing your plan. Congratulations. Secondly, my question...

Ira Palti -- Chief Executive Officer and President

Thank you, Gunther.

Gunther Karger -- Discovery Group Inc. -- Analyst

Yeah, and lastly, in industrywide, that has not been observed generally. So this is a unique accomplishment. The question is vertical markets. Could you care to make any comments on vertical markets?

Ira Palti -- Chief Executive Officer and President

I'll comment on vertical markets by saying that, we do put an effort on vertical markets, mainly in the North America and European business, a large proportion of both our North America and European business comes from different vertical markets. We do make progress in some of those mainly around, what we call, industrial and ISPs. We are targeting public safety application, which we won a few, and continuing to push there to gain market share with those in other places. We also focus and we had a nice initial successes, but in small numbers in all sorts of maritime type of applications. So it's a very segmented niche markets, and we need to work in a lot of those segments and in some of them we do -- did gain market share during 2018.

Gunther Karger -- Discovery Group Inc. -- Analyst

Thank you.

Operator

Gunther, we're ready for the next question in queue.

Gunther Karger -- Discovery Group Inc. -- Analyst

No, that was one my question. And thank you very much.

Operator

Okay. Thank you very much. We do have another question that's coming -- that's from David Allen with Woodbury Financial. Please go ahead.

David Allen -- Woodbury Financial -- Analyst

Good morning. Good results guys. Two quick questions. Number one is, can you talk about the competition in terms of landscape? And number two is, the cost structure for the 20 products versus the 50 product which you're anticipating coming out basically and I guess in the spring. Thank you.

Ira Palti -- Chief Executive Officer and President

So I'll talk about competition in general. We do have and I don't think the competitive landscape have changed significantly over the last year or even longer than that, although we see some of our competitors weakening because it's in some of the markets, it's where we gained market share. I've seen some of them weakening, some of it is public, some of it is less than public on the table. But we still have -- do have strong competition both from other specialists and the large generalist out there.

As a comment, and this is a question I'm being asked once in a while lately is, what does the Huawei ban effect -- have an effect on us? It does contribute in some places, but in other places, sometimes it balances out with them being a little bit more aggressive as we move forward and we still need to see how this develops in different markets and with different operators.

As going back to your question around the cost basis, there is a difference in the cost basis between the two, but there is also significant functionality difference between the two of them. But if we look at the needs and value generation and the total cost of ownerships from the operators as we move forward, the IP-50 in -- where it's targeted in, in 5G networks will continue to offer reduced total cost of ownership or significant additional value to our customers over the IP-20.

Operator

Thank you very much. (Operator Instructions) And allowing a few extra moments here, I'm showing no additional questions in the queue. Please continue.

Ira Palti -- Chief Executive Officer and President

So I'd like to thank everyone who has joined us on this call. I'd like to welcome Ran again to the team here. And we will be exhibiting in Hall five in Mobile World Congress next week. So anyone of you who plans to be in Barcelona, please, we would love to welcome you to our booth, show both the current product and the IP-50 products and have further discussions as we move along. Thank you very much, and have a good day.

Operator

Thank you. And ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude your conference call for today. We do thank you for your participation and for using AT&T's Executive TeleConference. You may now disconnect.

Duration: 45 minutes

Call participants:

Ira Palti -- Chief Executive Officer and President

Doron Arazi -- Deputy CEO

Ran Vered -- Chief Financial Officer

George Iwanyc -- Oppenheimer -- Analyst

Roger Boyd -- Needham & Company -- Analyst

Michael Staiger -- Odeon Capital -- Analyst

Gunther Karger -- Discovery Group Inc. -- Analyst

David Allen -- Woodbury Financial -- Analyst

More CRNT analysis

Transcript powered by AlphaStreet

This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability.

Thursday, February 21, 2019

Unit Corp (UNT) Q4 2018 Earnings Conference Call Transcript

Logo of jester cap with thought bubble.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

Unit Corp  (NYSE:UNT)Q4 2018 Earnings Conference CallFeb. 21, 2019, 11:00 a.m. ET

Contents: Prepared Remarks Questions and Answers Call Participants Prepared Remarks:

Operator

Welcome to the Unit Corporation's Fourth Quarter 2018 Earnings Call. My name is Sylvia and I'll be your operator for today's call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. Please note that this conference is being recorded.

During the course of the conference call today, the speakers may make statements that constitute projections, expectations, beliefs, or similar forward-looking statements. The Company's actual results could differ materially from the results anticipated or projected in such forward-looking statements. Additional detailed information concerning the important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the information given today is readily available in today's press release under the heading Forward-Looking Statements.

Additionally, during the conference, the Company will be discussing certain non-GAAP financial measures. The reconciliation of those non-GAAP measures to GAAP measures can also be found in today's press release. This document is available on the Company's website.

I will now turn the call over to Larry Pinkston, President and CEO. Mr. Pinkston, you may begin.

Larry D. Pinkston -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you, Sylvia. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us this morning. I have with me today, David Merrill, Les Austin, Frank Young, John Cromling, and Bob Parks. Each of these will be providing you with updates about their areas of responsibility. We will take questions at the end of the call.

Just a few words about 2019 going forward. With the drop in the -- with the 40% drop that we had in West Texas crude price in December through January, it's had a very clear reaction in operator capital expenditure plans for 2019. According to the Baker Hughes land rig count data, the rig count has dropped by 33 rigs from the peak to valley to-date, essentially returning to the end of third quarter levels we have, and it appears that other operators have pared back their capital expenditure plans until the picture becomes clear as to the direction the commodity prices are headed. We run multiple iterations for our budget in preparation for presenting our plans for 2019. As always, our focus is to maintain the very strong balance sheet, which is the principal reason anticipated cash flow is a basis upon which we determine our capital expenditure plans each year.

I now would like to turn the call over to David to cover 2018 operation.

David T. Merrill -- Chief Operating Officer

Thank you, Larry, and good morning, everyone. As Larry stated, our capital plan for 2019 is in line with our anticipated cash flow. The commodity swings recently experienced have resulted in us establishing the capital budget range from $336 million to $422 million for 2019. This represents a reduction of 27% to 8% year-over-year with the upper end of the capital range requiring commodity prices to improve throughout the year. If commodity prices do not improve, we will trend to the lower end of the range.

As noted in our press release this morning, our capital budget allows us to estimate year-over-year production growth of 2% to 5%. Despite the fourth quarter commodity price challenges, we continue to make progress on several fronts. Our oil and natural gas segment worked through some production delays, while still achieving its year-over-year production guidance. The segment was also able to drill and complete very strong new wells in our Penn sands prospect area, which has led us to make some bolt-on acquisitions in Western Oklahoma, which Frank will discuss in further detail in a minute.

Our contract drilling segment was able to deploy our 12th and 13th BOSS drilling rigs during the first quarter of 2019. And for our midstream business, the completion of two organic projects will provide for incremental growth opportunities going forward.

I'll now turn the call over to Les Austin.

G. Les Austin -- Chief Financial Officer

Thanks, David. We reported a net loss attributable to Unit for the fourth quarter of $77.8 million or $1.49 per diluted share, which includes a pre-tax non-cash write down of $147.9 million associated with the removal of 41 drilling rigs from our fleet. Adjusted net income attributable to Unit for the quarter, which excludes the effect of non-cash derivatives and this non-cash write down was $13.8 million or $0.27 per diluted share. Our non-GAAP financial measures reconciliation is included in our press release.

For the oil and natural gas segment, revenues for the fourth quarter decreased 5% from the third quarter of this year with lower oil and NGL prices, offset by increased natural gas prices. Equivalent production decreased 1% in the fourth quarter from the third quarter of this year. Operating costs for the fourth quarter decreased 3% from the third quarter of this year, primarily due to lower production tax expense, partially offset by increased LOE.

For the contract drilling segment, revenues for the fourth quarter increased 5% over the third quarter of this year due to 3% higher day rates during the quarter, offset by 1.1 fewer rigs operating in the quarter. Operating costs for the fourth quarter were 12% higher compared to the third quarter of this year due to increased employee costs and indirect and drilling G&A expenses.

For the mid-stream segment, revenues for the fourth quarter decreased 4% from the third quarter of this year, primarily due to decreased liquid recoveries and decreased volumes transported, combined with decreased liquids and condensate prices. Operating costs for the fourth quarter increased 1% over the third quarter of this year because of increased purchase prices.

We ended the fourth quarter of 2018 with total cash and cash equivalents of $6.5 million and long-term debt of $644.5 million. Long-term debt consists entirely of our senior subordinated notes, net of unamortized discounts and debt issuance costs. The Unit credit agreement borrowing base remain unchanged and undrawn at $425 million and the $200 million availability under our Superior credit agreement was undrawn as well. Our net leverage ratio was 1.8 times at the end of the fourth quarter.

Our 2018 capital expenditures, excluding acquisitions of $31 million, were $458 million. We anticipate our 2019 capital expenditures will be between $336 million and $422 million. This range is in response to the current commodity price environment and is designed to be within anticipated cash flow and proceeds from non-core asset sales, if any. Of the total capital expenditure budget, $271 million to $315 million is reserved for the oil and natural gas segment compared to $338 million for 2018, $30 million and $65 million will be used for the drilling segment, compared to $75 million for 2018, and $35 million to $42 million will be used for the mid-stream segment compared to $45 million for 2018.

At this time, I will turn the call over to Frank for our oil and natural gas segment update.

Frank Young -- Senior Vice President of Exploration and Production

Production for 2018 was 17.1 million barrels of oil equivalent, which was at the low end of our anticipated production rate going into 2018 at 17.1 million to 17.4 million Boe. The primary reasons for being at the low end of our production guidance were unanticipated delays in production in the Texas Panhandle due to post fracture stimulation of frac plug and drill outs, as well as two laterals that had to be redrilled after completion hardware failure, and an anticipated requirement to shut in wells during the commissioning of a third party interstate pipeline in Western Oklahoma, and lowered NGL recovery in our Gulf Coast area due to brand new wells producing drier gas than anticipated.

In late September 2018, Unit drilled the Schrock 22/15 number 1HX, the first Red Fork extended laterals drilled in Oklahoma in our Penn sands prospect area. The IP30 for this well was over 2,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day with an oil cut of about 80%. After four months, the well is still producing 1,650 barrels of oil equivalent per day with an oil cut of about 40%.

In addition, we brought on a second Red Fork lateral in late October, the Frymire 1-18H which had an IP30 of 850 barrels of oil equivalent per day that was primarily wet natural gas with some oil. Well cost for one-mile Red Fork laterals are about $6 million and for two-mile laterals about $7.5 million. Following these exciting well results, we acquired offsetting oil and natural gas assets in December, located primarily in Custer County, Oklahoma for $29.6 million. The acquisition added approximately 8,700 net acres to our Penn sands area, including 44 proved developed producing wells, and about 2.6 million barrels of oil equivalent of proved reserves.

Of the acreage acquired, approximately 82% is held by production. This acquisition provides Unit approximately 20 to 30 potential horizontal Red Fork drilling locations which are anticipated to have a significant percentage of oil in the total production stream. Unit currently has one rig drilling Red Fork horizontal wells in this area, with plans to add a second rig for the second quarter. At mid-year, the Red Fork drilling program will be reassessed in light of well results and commodity process to decide that the program will continue for the second half of 2019.

In our Southern Oklahoma Hoxbar Oil Trend or SOHOT play in western Oklahoma, primarily in Grady County, we continued drilling horizontal wells in the oily Marchand sand. We are having success picking up smaller chunks of acreage at a reasonable cost in this play that will allow us to add a second rig to our drilling program in the second quarter. We will also reassess this drilling program mid-year in light of commodity prices to determine how many rigs, if any, we will continue to run this in the second half of 2019.

Activity also continued in the non-operated portion of the stack play in Western Oklahoma during the fourth quarter, and we expect this activity to continue throughout 2019. For 2018, we participated in 65 stack wells with an average working interest of approximately 4%. Results from this drilling program have been good. Offset well results near our operated dry gas stack area have impressive flow rates and reserves, and we look forward to potentially beginning an operated drilling program once Cheniere's Midship Pipeline is commissioned in the fourth quarter of 2019, and realized gas prices improve.

In our Texas Panhandle Granite Wash play, we continued our one rig drilling program in our Buffalo Wallow Field. The results from our first two Granite Wash G extended lateral wells in the field have been good, with initial rates from each well exceeding 10 million cubic feet equivalent per day of gas and NGLs. After four months of production, one of these wells continues to produce in excess of 10 million cubic feet equivalent per day while the other well, which is only producing from about 35% of the lateral due to an obstruction in the lateral, has declined to about 4.5 million cubic feet equivalent per day. We plan to do a work-over on this well at some point in 2019 to remove this obstruction, and at that time, we expect the well's production to significantly increase.

We are continuing with this drilling program through the first quarter of 2019, before moving the rig to our more oily Western Oklahoma assets. Once Cheniere's Midship Pipeline is commissioned, which is projected to be in the third or fourth quarter of '19, and realized gas prices improve, we expect to move the rig back to this field to continue with our drilling program. Fortunately, our land position in this area is largely held by production, allowing us to drill when pricing is most optimal. All the gas produced from Buffalo Wallow Field is gathered and processed by Superior, Unit's mid-stream subsidiary. In our Wilcox play located primarily in Polk, Tyler, Hardin and Goliad counties, Texas -- in Southeast Texas, we continued our development drilling and recompletion program in the Gilly Field during the fourth quarter.

Additionally, we drilled a successful delineation well in our Shoal Creek prospect, that has continued to increase in production since coming online in October, and is currently producing approximately 8.5 million cubic feet equivalent per day of wet gas and oil. We will continue delineating this prospect in 2019. We anticipate completing approximately 13 vertical wells during 2019, with five of them being exploration or delineation wells, and eight being development wells. One of the delineation wells will be the much-anticipated Wolf Pasture number 1, which will be the first delineation well on our Cherry Creek prospect located approximately 7 miles southwest of the Gilly Field. In addition, we plan to complete approximately 10 behind pipe gas and liquid zones during 2019.

At this time, I'll now turn the call over to John for the Drilling Company update.

John Cromling -- Executive Vice President of Drilling for Unit Drilling Company

The contract drilling segment experienced the effects of the commodity price fluctuations during the fourth quarter with rig utilization dipping slightly. Despite the challenges of fluctuating operator activity levels, we were successful in closing in on the completion of our two latest BOSS drilling rigs. Our rig utilization decreased throughout the quarter from 34 to 32 rigs, and currently we have 32 rigs operating. All 13 of our loss rates are now operating with nine of them under long-term contracts. Our 12th BOSS rig was placed into service in January, and is operating in Wyoming. The operator for this rig also extended contracts on two other BOSS rigs that are currently drilling for them.

Our 13th BOSS rig was recently placed into service, operating in the Permian. 11 of the 19 SCR rigs presently working are under long-term contract. While we have several additional SCR rigs that are excellent candidates for refurbishment as the market dictates, it is important to note that all the above projects are being funded by operating cash flow, and within the CapEx budget we tested mid-year in 2018.

The average day rate for the fourth quarter was $18,047, an increase of $458 per day over the third quarter. The average total daily revenue before intercompany eliminations was $18,230, a slight increase from the third quarter. Our total daily operating cost before intercompany eliminations increased by $558 for the fourth quarter as compared to the third. The increase was primarily result of higher indirect costs. The average per day operating margin for the fourth quarter before elimination of intercompany profits was $5,859, which is a decrease of $432 from the prior quarter. Our non-GAAP reconciliation can be found in today's press release.

At this time, I'll turn the call over to Bob for the Superior Pipeline update.

Robert Parks -- President and Manager

Thank you, John. Following a record year of operating profit in 2017, the mid-stream segment had another outstanding year in 2018. We had a 24% increase in gas liquids sold volumes year-over-year, driven by higher processed volumes at our Cashion and Hemphill facilities as a result of new well connects in each system. I'll now provide an update on several key mid-stream assets.

At our Pittsburgh Mills gathering facility in Pennsylvania, during the fourth quarter of 2018, our average total gathered volume declined to approximately 129.7 million cubic feet per day. This decrease in gathered volume was due to declining volume from the seven infill wells that were connected late in the second quarter of 2018. We completed construction of a new pipeline to connect another new well pad and completed a compressor station upgrade as well.

This new well pad includes seven wells which have been connected to our Kissick compressor station located on the southern portion of our gathering system. We began receiving gas from the first two wells on January 24, 2019 and the additional five wells began production in February. The flow from these new wells will peak out at 130 million cubic feet per day as they are being connected to production equipment. Once all the wells are on the production equipment, we expect them to produce around 100 million cubic feet per day for an extended period of time.

At our Hemphill facility in the Texas Panhandle, the average total throughput volume increased to approximately 75 million cubic feet per day for the fourth quarter of 2018 and total production of natural gas liquids was approximately 301,500 gallons per day. During the fourth quarter, we connected five new wells in the Buffalo Wallow area, and since the beginning of 2018, we've connected a total of 13 new Buffalo Wallow wells. These new wells contributed to our overall increase in throughput volume on this system. Unit Petroleum continues to operate a rig in this area and we anticipate connecting additional wells in 2019. The Buffalo Wallow compression station expansion project was completed and we have the flexibility to add additional compression capacity in order to accommodate future volumes.

At our Cashion processing facility located in Central Oklahoma, the average throughput volume for the fourth quarter of 2018 increased to approximately 49 million cubic feet per day and natural gas liquids production increased to approximately 246,900 gallons per day. This is an active area for us during 2018, and since the first of last year, we connected 22 new wells to the Cashion system.

We expect to continue to connect additional wells in 2019. This system is operating at full processing capacity and we are adding an additional 60 million cubic feet per day processing plant to the Cashion system. This 60 million cubic feet per day plant has been relocated from our Bellmon facility to the reading site on the Cashion system. The $20 million plant and compressor project is currently under construction and will increase the total processing capacity on our Cashion system to approximately 105 million cubic feet per day. The construction of this new processing plant compressor station is anticipated to be completed and operational by the end of the first quarter of 2019.

In summary, we had a successful year and are pleased with both our operational and financial results for 2018. As previously mentioned by Les, we established a $200 million stand-alone credit facility for Superior, which in combination with the sale of 50% interest in the mid-stream business to outside investors in April 2018 will further enhance our ability to grow our segment. Results for the fourth quarter of 2018 showed positive increases in several key areas and with the completion of the expansion project at our Cashion and Hemphill systems, we feel we are well positioned for continued growth in 2019 and beyond.

I will now turn the call back over to Larry for his final comments.

Larry D. Pinkston -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thank you, Bob. We began 2019 focused on growing all of our business segments, while maintaining our capital expenditures in line with cash flow. We are very excited about some of the results we have seen in all of our core plays in particularly in the Penn sands area. We have been successful heading to this position at a very reasonable acreage cost, and with the majority of the acres added being held by production. One of our strategies has been to position to allow our cash flow non-acreage explorations dictate our development phase.

We are pleased to get our 12th and 13th BOSS rigs deployed as scheduled during the first quarter of 2019 and we had ordered the long lead time components for our 14th BOSS rig last fall. At this time, completing that rig will likely depend -- will be dependent on obtaining a long-term contract. We are optimistic on growth in our mid-stream segment as we continue to progress on our organic prospects.

At this time, I'd like to turn the call over for questions.

Questions and Answers:

Operator

Thank you. We will now begin the question-and-answer session. (Operators Instructions) And our first question comes from Marshall Adkins from Raymond James.

Marshall Adkins -- Raymond James -- Analyst

Good morning, guys. Larry, you mentioned that -- pretty clear that you're going to spend within cash flow, which certainly is one objective, I think, that investors are looking to see these days. But another is a path to excess free cash flow generation and real returns over the cycle. So comment on, let's say, oil prices go up and your volumes continue to increase, is there a path to generating excess free cash flow and if there is, do you pay down debt? Do you give that cash back to shareholders in some form? Just comment overall structurally on that aspect of your thought process?

Larry D. Pinkston -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Well, Marshall, I mean, all those are definitely part of the whole consideration. I think the defining moment in those will be, when our cash flow and/or our investment program has reached the size that you can -- we can have good growth, not 20% kind of growth, but good growth in our E&P division. We're adding few BOSS rigs to our rig fleet and then meeting the opportunities on our mid-stream rather than trying to ramp up to grow production by 20% or grow rigs multiple times more than even on a spec basis. I think, at that point in time, you look at either paying down debt and/or returning in some form cash to the shareholders. And that's different than most -- than previous cycles. We've always tried to ramp up as most of the industry has tried to ramp up production well beyond what would be, I guess, i.e. normal expected production growth, reserve growth, rig growth. So, yes, I mean, are those in consideration? Sure, they are. We don't see that. We'd like to be able to see that, but that would be a stretch to be able to see that happen in 2019.

Marshall Adkins -- Raymond James -- Analyst

Right. So just to make sure I'm clear. It sounds like going forward versus historical, I guess, norms for the industry as a whole, your objective going forward is, yeah, let's get growth, but let's not spend every dime of cash flow when we do get favorable commodity prices which course I expect to see in the next couple of years, but let's put some of that away in some form or another. Is that a fair way of characterizing your thoughts?

Larry D. Pinkston -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Yes, sir. You hit the nail on it. Yes.

Marshall Adkins -- Raymond James -- Analyst

Perfect. Shifting gears over to the, if I could, just to the E&P side real quick. It was a little bit -- reading the press release, it sounds like the Penn sands prospect with the Red Fork laterals are totally different than the SOHOT. It's generally in the similar area of Oklahoma, but it's a totally different play. That's correct -- or is that correct is my question?

Frank Young -- Senior Vice President of Exploration and Production

Yeah, Marshall, that's right. The Penn sands play is a prospect area that encompasses more than just one geological interval. One of those is the Red Fork interval which the acquisition targeted. In SOHOT, we're targeting only the Hoxbar interval and within that just the Marchand sand right now because the Marchand sand is oily. The one consistency between the two prospects is that we are focused on adding acreage where we can drill oily -- oil wells rather than wells that are primarily natural gas.

Marshall Adkins -- Raymond James -- Analyst

Right. Okay. I got it. And you were pretty clear in your comments on kind of evaluating first half and then you go from there. One last one for me, if I could. John, on the rig side, you wrote down a bunch of rigs. It sounds like you still got 20 or so SCRs working today. You got maybe another 24 or 25 stacks still, you talked about holding those for potential upgrades. Any thoughts on the cost of upgrading those and the likelihood of upgrading those versus just continue to put money into new BOSS rigs?

John Cromling -- Executive Vice President of Drilling for Unit Drilling Company

Yes, we will always consider the upgrades. I think the upgrades that we are going to see -- let me mention first, of those stacked rigs, some of them already have all the upgrades done, but they are located in North Dakota. And so there's still the possibility of relocating those rigs to the Permian or to the Mid-Continent area. Most of the upgrades, I think, we are going to see now are just additional walking systems, additional 7,500 meg systems and we will continue to do that as those rigs are needed. So I don't think we'll see a major refurbishment of a complete rig like we've done in the past. Going forward, we would rather use that larger amount of money for additional BOSS rigs.

Marshall Adkins -- Raymond James -- Analyst

Got it. Thanks, guys.

Larry D. Pinkston -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Thanks, Marshall.

Operator

Our following question comes from Neal Dingmann with SunTrust.

Neal Dingmann -- SunTrust Robinson Humphrey -- Analyst

Morning, guys. Maybe question for Frank. Frank, on those two Red Fork wells, why just the difference if you could just talk about sort of the color on both of those two?

Frank Young -- Senior Vice President of Exploration and Production

The area where we made the acquisition is in an oilfield that had been developed vertically. And within that field, the vertical wells had differing amounts of oil cuts. And when we drilled the Frymire well, it was in a part of the field that was more gassy. To be honest, we were expecting more oil production than we got, although not as much as the Schrock. So the vertical wells in that section may have done a better job upgrading the oil reserves than what we had thought they did. The Frymire is still an economic well, but it's just not as oily as we had hoped, but the vertical drilling done in that field, gives us a pretty good indication of where to drill the wells that are going to be more oily.

Neal Dingmann -- SunTrust Robinson Humphrey -- Analyst

Got it, OK. And then just over on the rig side, it's nice you continue to expand the BOSS fleet. Just your thoughts and I think I've asked you this before, just on bidding activity, your thoughts on being able to roll out any more of those? I assume, if you did, it would have to be under sort of a contract before you'd bring the 14th, 15th out, but maybe just talk about how you're seeing just inquiries in general? Thank you.

Frank Young -- Senior Vice President of Exploration and Production

Well, we still see excellent reception to our BOSS rigs. Even though we just have 13 right now, we've been able to keep those busy. The performance has been everything that we've advertised it to be. So as we continue to perform like that, we think the market will still be good for them. And we have two or three months before all the components arrive that we had already ordered, and then time to finish the rig. So, we feel pretty confident that we have been able to obtain another long-term contract for 14th.

Neal Dingmann -- SunTrust Robinson Humphrey -- Analyst

Good to hear. Thank you, all.

Operator

(Operator Instructions) We have no further questions at this time.

Larry D. Pinkston -- President and Chief Executive Officer

Well, thank you, everyone for joining us this morning. That concludes all of our comments, and we hope to see many of you all in the upcoming conferences that we'll be attending. Thank you very much.

Operator

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's conference. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Duration: 33 minutes

Call participants:

Larry D. Pinkston -- President and Chief Executive Officer

David T. Merrill -- Chief Operating Officer

G. Les Austin -- Chief Financial Officer

Frank Young -- Senior Vice President of Exploration and Production

John Cromling -- Executive Vice President of Drilling for Unit Drilling Company

Robert Parks -- President and Manager

Marshall Adkins -- Raymond James -- Analyst

Neal Dingmann -- SunTrust Robinson Humphrey -- Analyst

More UNT analysis

Transcript powered by AlphaStreet

This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability.