I'm not sure what you mean by "THAT Kevin Graham," but you might want to look again at TAG's release on Thursday, this time with a calculator in hand. All of this is in their full report for the quarter.
Run the numbers and see that sales of oil are down by a third in the last quarter. While the first bulleted point in TAG’s release highlights an increase in production revenue of 62%, this is comparison of six month periods. But this is a quarterly report! The news release does not offer comparisons of Q2 to Q1. You have to figure that out for yourself (by reversing the calculation) or refer to the detail in the financial statements. You’ll see that, for Q2, they’re down from Q1 significantly in both oil revenues and total revenues. Oil sales at 741 barrels per day are down in Q2 from 1120 barrels in Q1.
More importantly, production revenue total, at $9.62 million, is also down from $11.82 million. These numbers line up with the percentage declines described for the unnamed company in Graham's article. Of course, he can speak for himself, but I think his point would be that, although the numbers can be calculated, and are in the detail of the quarterly report, they should also be presented in the news release in the spirit of transparency.
The last quarter wasn’t as good as the previous quarter, by quite a spread. Plain and simple. Leaving that fact out of the news release is pretty selective disclosure, I think. Of course, if you read news releases with a calculator in hand, you can see the full picture. It’s important to understand that gains in reported boe’s are driven here by gains in gas sales, offsetting significant declines in oil sales.
The problem with this offset is that it’s based on a meaningless 6 to 1 ratio of gas to oil in the boe formula. You'll find that this is, in fact, the ratio used here, as explained in the footnotes to TAG's financial statements. I'm not sure which window you're referring to when you say that this ratio "went out the window years ago." Using this 6 to 1 ratio, the company reports 1617 boes/day in Q2, up from 1473 in Q1. The gas portion of this moves from 353 in Q1 to 876 in Q2, accounting for the overall gain, but this is based on a ratio you cannot use in any realistic calculation of value. Adjusted for price, the gas portion would be just 209 versus 91 in Q1. The total price-adjusted boe’s move down from 1211 in Q1 to 950 in Q2. This represents a decline in boe’s adjusted for price of more than 21% in the most recent quarter.
How you shine a light on a subject makes all the difference in how it is viewed.