punten ikut nambahin Pak Okta, kalo untuk kasus BUMI ini, kalo tambang kan perencanaan nya jangka panjang. peningkatan aktifitas keruk tanah biasanya berada pada suatu tren yang ajeg. kadangkala tergantung medannya yang lagi dikeruk bisa terjadi rasio kupas tinggi-rasio kupas rendah dari yang diperkirakan di proyeksi tren kupas tanah. kadang jika misalnya memang lagi keruk bagian yg susah, secara kas si produsen sudah bayar ke operator tambang (operator tambang dibayar berdasarkan volume tanah yang dikupas) lebih besar, sehingga secara temporer rasio kupas tanahnya besar diatas proyeksi normal. tapi nantinya rasio kupas tanah akan berkurang ketika tinggal diambil di bagian yang lebih mudah. saat bagian yang lebih mudah ini diambil prinsip accrual terjadi (benefit ketemu dengan cost). sehingga deferred expense bisa dibiayakan dan dikeluarkan dari sisi aset di neraca. nah khusus untuk BUMI ini, kita perlu mendalami apakah offset akun deferred cost dengan biaya ini dilakukan karena secara accrual memang benar sudah ketemu antara extra cost dengan extra benefitnya (terjadi penambahan produksi signifikan dan rasio stripping yang menurun). atau memang estimasi rasio kupas tanah "wajar" pada plan pengembangannya yang salah dan harus direvisi (yang tadinya dikapitalisasi di aset seharusnya dibiayakan karena asumsi rasio kupas tanah wajarnya kekecilan)
secara free cash tidak ada masalah, yg perlu dikonfirmasi apakah kenaikan biaya karena rasio kupas tanah ini memang akan menjadi tren jangka panjang atau hanya one-time event aja. untuk perkiraan stripping ratio sendiri memberikan kontribusi yang lumayan di pro-forma perkiraan laporan keuangan BUMI ke depan. analis yang paling handal sih biasanya punya akses ato pengamatan langsung ke lapangan untuk mengkonfirmasi hal-hal ini. menimbang apakah kejadian yang direspon ke harga bersifat permanen ato temporer. Bet saya sih ini temporer. buang short-term player sekaligus meminimalkan dispute pajak. short term pain, long term gain. unless emang bener strip ratio BUMI yang "asli" lebih tinggi dari apa yang dikasih dalam guidance saat ini. On 1 March 2010 15:45, Armando Anthony <armando.anth...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Gini Mbah, > > Definisi yang mbah posting dibawah ini sudah bener. Coba nanti saya baca > LK-nya biar jelas, karena "Deferred Expense" itu kan "Biaya yang > ditangguhkan". Kalau dia sudah dibayar didepan memang akan menjadi semacam > Prepaid (spt Prepaid Insurance), jadi memang uangnya sudah keluar duluan, > yang bisa diamortisasi dan setiap tahun diespensekan. > > Tapi kalau itu menajdi biaya yg ditangguhkan (biasanya erat kaitannya > dengan pajak) yg masuk dalam sisi liability (deferred tax, etc) biasanya > harus sudah dicadangkan dlm Neraca (B7 seringkali tidak mencadangkan ini. > Kalaupun mencadangkan, biasanya at minimum). Ketika itu dibayarkan, maka > jurnalnya harus dibalik dan menjadi beban Expense di P/L > > salam, > Okta Ismojo > ------------------------------ > *From:* jsx-consultant <jsx-consult...@centrin.net.id> > *To:* obrolan-bandar@yahoogroups.com > *Sent:* Mon, March 1, 2010 3:25:55 PM > *Subject:* RE: [ob] FW: BUMI potential bad news - Untuk Penggemar BUMI > > > > Pak Armando, > > *Deferred expense refers to an item that will initially be recorded as an > asset but is expected to become an expense over time and/or through the > normal operations of the business. *Deferred expenses are sometimes > called prepaid expenses, and it is through the use of this term that I > believe it makes it easier to understand why it is initially an asset but is > later transferred to an expense item. > > Jadi perusahan engga perlu DUIT LAGI buat menurut definisi Deferred Expense > diatas, cukup > > MEMBEBANKAN secara accounting saja, itu menurut pendapat embah. Gimana pak > ? > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* obrolan-bandar@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:obrolan- ban...@yahoogrou > ps.com] *On Behalf Of *Armando Anthony > > *Sent:* Monday, March 01, 2010 2:59 PM > *To:* obrolan-bandar@ yahoogroups. com > *Subject:* Re: [ob] FW: BUMI potential bad news - Untuk Penggemar BUMI > > > > > > Deferred Expense itu SEBELUMNYA malah belum terjadi Mbah, tapi SUDAH > DICATAT dulu di Balance sheet bahwa nantinya Akun Deferred itu akan menjadi > expense pada saatnya. Jadi kira2 semacam provisi (provision) gitu mbah. > > Kalau itu sudah menjadi Expense, itu berarti cost yg sudah di berikan > provisi sudah bener2 menjadi expense dan menjadi beban P/L. Pengaruh pada > Cash Flow akan menajdi significant kalau itu sudah menajdi expense. > Terutama pada Cash Flow in Operating Activities pada Indirect Method > > salam, > Armando > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* jsx_consultant <jsx-consultant@ centrin.net. id> > *To:* obrolan-bandar@ yahoogroups. com > *Sent:* Mon, March 1, 2010 2:40:31 PM > *Subject:* Re: [ob] FW: BUMI potential bad news - Untuk Penggemar BUMI > > > > DEFERRED EXPENSE berarti expense itu sudah terjadi SEBELUMnya, rite ?. > Jadi ini cuman masalah accounting TREATMENT yg tidak > berpengaruh pada Free Cash Flow atau Valuasi. > > Bener engga kang Ocoy ?. > > BADAI koreksi BUMI yg UTAMA sudah terjadi pada wave A, > dan saat ini tenaga dari badai koreksi sudah melemah. > > Tapi karena pasukan Bull BELUM MUNCUL maka pasukan Bear > bisa mengendalikan harga tanpa volume dan perlawanan. > > Wave counting BUMI yg baru sudah embah buatkan di www.invest2000. net > > --- In obrolan-bandar@ yahoogroups. com <obrolan-bandar%40yahoogroups.com>, > "Herman" <power8...@. ..> wrote: > > > > Ini pak newsnya > > > > jadi bukan mau nampungin barang > > > > Saya sama sekali ngak hold posisi di BUMI even dia market mover > > > > > > Subject: FW: (BN) Tata Power Falls After Profit Drops on Coal Expenses > > > > > > > > > > folks, bumi related expenses reflected in tata's earnings. > > > > > > +----------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -- > > > ---+ > > > > > > Tata Power Falls After Profit Drops on Coal Expenses (Update1) > > > 2010-02-26 06:12:53.318 GMT > > > > > > > > > (Adds analyst's comment in fourth paragraph.) > > > > > > By Gaurav Singh and Natalie Obiko Pearson > > > Feb. 26 (Bloomberg) -- Tata Power Co., India's largest non- > > > state electricity generator, declined the most in seven months > > > in Mumbai trading after reporting an 82 percent slump in profit > > > from writing off expenses at coal mines in Indonesia. > > > The stock fell as much as 5.7 percent to 1,197 rupees, the > > > biggest drop since July 6, and was at 1,217.95 rupees at 11:28 > > > a.m. local time. The Mumbai-based utility's shares have gained > > > 66 percent in a year, lagging behind the 82 percent advance in > > > the benchmark Sensitive Index. > > > Net income, including that of units, fell to 925.7 million > > > rupees in the quarter ended Dec. 31 from 5 billion rupees a year > > > earlier, Tata Power said yesterday. The company took a 3.7 > > > billion rupee ($80 million) charge related to deferred coal > > > extraction expenses, and said production cost would rise by > > > $1.42 a metric ton, an increase of about 5 percent. > > > "That is big," said Abhineet Anand, a Mumbai-based > > > analyst with Antique Stock Broking Ltd. "In terms of valuation, > > > if the overall cost of production is somewhere between $36 to > > > $38 per ton, then you increase that by another $1.50, that > > > directly hits your profit after tax." > > > The Tata Power group includes the company's mining assets > > > in Indonesia and local distribution and trading units. Tata > > > Power holds 30 percent stakes in two Indonesian coal mines owned > > > by PT Bumi Resources. > > > > > > For Related News and Information: > > > Tata Power news: TPWR IN <Equity> CN <GO> > > > Top India stories: TOP IN <GO> > > > Top energy stories: ETOP <GO> > > > > > > --Editors: Amit Prakash, Alex Devine. > > > > > > To contact the reporter on this story: > > > Gaurav Singh in New Delhi at +91-11-4179- 2019 or > > > gsing...@... > > > Natalie Obiko Pearson in Mumbai at +91-22-6612- 9107 or > > > npears...@.. . > > > > > > > > > To contact the editor responsible for this story: > > > Clyde Russell at +65-6311-2423 or crusse...@.. . > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: ANDIK MUSTIKA > > To: obrolan-bandar@ yahoogroups. com <obrolan-bandar%40yahoogroups.com> > > Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 11:20 AM > > Subject: Re: [ob] FW: BUMI potential bad news - Untuk Penggemar BUMI > > > > > > > > sekarang kayaknya banyak yang strees bin frustasi pak...jadi dibawah 2000 > itu mungkin... > > > > hofully... > > wkwkwkwkwk.. gue stress juga kali ya.. > > > > --- On Sun, 2/28/10, Djokro Wijaja <stocksucker@ ...> wrote: > > > > > > From: Djokro Wijaja <stocksucker@ ...> > > Subject: Re: [ob] FW: BUMI potential bad news - Untuk Penggemar BUMI > > To: obrolan-bandar@ yahoogroups. com <obrolan-bandar%40yahoogroups.com> > > Date: Sunday, February 28, 2010, 8:00 PM > > > > > > > > > > Perjalanan msh jauh, ini saja ane baru pake 10% heheheh ... kalo GAK > MURAH GAK BELI :D > > > > Di bawah 2000 mah nunggu orang stress bin frustasi jual dulu heheeheh,... > . > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 10:50 AM, ANDIK MUSTIKA <ahmust...@yahoo. com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > ane tunggu di bawah 2000 saja pak... > > > > --- On Sun, 2/28/10, Djokro Wijaja <stocksucker@ gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > From: Djokro Wijaja <stocksucker@ gmail.com> > > Subject: Re: [ob] FW: BUMI potential bad news - Untuk Penggemar BUMI > > To: obrolan-bandar@ yahoogroups. com > > Date: Sunday, February 28, 2010, 7:42 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > Good ! , mustinya 2050 dapet, di bawah itu pun GAK NOLAK .... mumpung > duit msh fresh di rekening nih, gatel tangan pencet BUY terus heheheeh ..... > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Herman <power8...@gmx. net> wrote: > > > > > >  > > > > News untuk BUMI > > > > > > > > ‎​- BUMI: some potential negative news out. India's TATA reported > earnings that were down 82%YoY due to a USD 76m deferred strippin charge in > their 30% owned coal subs (KPC+Artutmin) . As BUMI owns the other 70%, BUMI > could show as much as USD 250m in the same charges for FY09. This would > obviously substantially lower earnings (and tax liability, which might be > the main reason), and would come as a negative surprise. > > > > > > > -- Each piece, or part, of the whole nature is always an approximation to the complete truth, or the complete truth so far as we know it. In fact, everything we know is only some kind of approximation, because we know that we do not know all the laws as yet. Therefore, things must be learned only to be unlearned again or, more likely, to be corrected.......The test of all knowledge is experiment. Experiment is the sole judge of scientific “truth”. - Richard Feynman
