We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
23.15
Multiple selection? A novel twist to your skills.
18.37 consistently wrong about anything…that’s it all…off you go back to the other share you dullards
That's great coming from an acknowledged Nuneaton United football fan!!
Ecuagold…..Zero credibility
17.08
I've no recollection of Scot ever "slating " 88e, but has offered his opinion and working.
He has on many occasions asked to be proven wrong, but up until now I don't think anybody has posted a factual theory or calculation to differ?
Ecuagold - Actually laughed out loud. Here for the momentum play, should go to 4p and then the moon ;-)
Scot, I like your resilience and the way you wind certain people up. But we are not investors, we are mostly trader's. 88e is a pile of ****, but is fantastic with the winter hype.
Scot you go into so much waffle and detail on this share and why not to invest in it, calling out such nice and lovely people on this board, yet year after year I make incredible amounts of money investing here. You spend your time slating this share to people who believe in the project, I'll spend my time couting my money every April/May time.
Wot no fundamental investors on this entire thread?
The key quotation from the NN's webinar on Monday which, IMHO, serves to prove the market is massively mis-pricing the upside risk in Alaska this season.
"...we were working on a structure where the party [scot126 - reference to the favoured farm in candidate] would earn a very small percentage Working Interest and they would have the opportunity to, by spending significantly larger investments, to gross that up over three stages to what would have been a 10 digit investment in our company for quite a modest percentage." - Justin Hondris (FD)
Please find below a table of different scenarios to give us a rough guide of the potential implications of this new information. For the purposes of the exercise, I have been conservative by only using $1bn as the "10 digit investment " and I'm varying the figure for "quite a modest percentage."
Scenario 1: "quite a modest percentage" was 40%. In which case the implied valuation of the asset is $2.5bn
Scenario 2: "quite a modest percentage" was 35%. In which case the implied valuation of the asset is $2.85bn
Scenario 3: "quite a modest percentage" was 33%. In which case the implied valuation of the asset is $3bn
Scenario 4: "quite a modest percentage" was 30%. In which case the implied valuation of the asset is $3.3bn
Scenario 5: "quite a modest percentage" was 25%. In which case the implied valuation of the asset is $4bn
Scenario 6: "quite a modest percentage" was 20%. In which case the implied valuation of the asset is $5bn
It is the above table of scenarios which demonstrates the mathematical ***upside risk*** to the NN investment case. IMO, there is no way on earth terms of this magnitude or contracts being drawn up in preparation of same would even be considered if technical due diligence hadn't been examined to the nth degree.
And remember, Bob Rosenthal has been quoted as saying the NN has surpassed the data threshold required to achieve 100% geological CoS. He considers the development CoS to be "between 60 and 70%".
So what? A couple of points.
a) described above is a farm out negotiation which envisaged >$1bn being invested in the NN's asset. This compares to APDC selling 50% of Project Peregrine back to 88E for $14m. These are both facts. For the self-styled EEENF army on Twitter who believe ***erroneously*** Merlin-2 is the most impactful drill in Alaska this season as opposed to Theta West and Talitha, the differential in scale proven by the investment terms within the farm out discussions ought to lead to a profound review of the EEENF army's beliefs.
b) IMO Yukon and Peregrine/Umiat are worth $30m in total right now. Leaves 88E's Project Icewine valued at £300m for 10% of the total asset value being discussed above v's the NN's share being worth $800m today.
It's way past time to do the math on this shared asset, folks. NB 88E and the NN share an asset, a huge asset IMHO. But look at the maps on