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 and have access to Premium Chat. 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.
19:06 well unlike some I have taken profit on occasions (best sell 4.11p) and have also tried not to get over extended here, for me it's not life or death although I can empathise with those for whom it is!
But I enjoy the board (mostly), do actually filter those I think are wasters ,enjoy learning something most days and if its worthwhile am happy to pass on and also correct the odd misstatement :-)
Still invested here and no plans for a divorce just at the moment.
AIM is a very dodgy playground spreads, prices and liquidity can change very quickly and there are plenty of FTSE100 shares that have presented good opportunities for profit recently, with much less risk so that side of my portfolio has received more attention.
Hopefully future news will encourage many to dip their toes in again but with wiser heads, nothing is guaranteed in oil exploration it seems :-)
Hey Brom. Yes that’s me out now after a long slog, cheers for sharing your detailed research throughout, it’s very much appreciated. I’m still watching from the sidelines with intrigue about HRZ developments but this time I need to go with my head and not my heart. Going to save that bottle of icewine just in case, might be back in one day!
Side wall cores always the plan, during the planning there was always an expectation that one of the conventional zones would have been flow tested and given the constrained time (winter season) available I doubt that any thought was given during planning to a possible speculative flow test on the HRZ in any event , besides who would have been paying for it?
Exploration Credits repayment is written into SOA Law and the intention of the legislative is that it will happen even if that is at the minimum repayment levels current, we await the Appeals Courts decision and see what happens in respect of bonds, recent volatility makes it difficult to predict whether the scheme would work or not.
As you are now all out have you drunk that bottle of Icewine yet?
Not really Jiddy. Taking HRZ cores at Charlie was a no brainer, in DWs own words it was a free data point. Fact is they still don’t understand the formation and it is extremely unlikely to flow commercially IMO.. No good at Franklin bluffs pad- just a load of bitumen. and why didn’t they attempt a mini frack / flow test at Charlie 1 either whilst they were at it? If you’re getting cores anyway, why not perf and pump a bit of proppant down there and see if this alleged monster resource flows at all? Maybe these recent cores will be ‘encouraging’, maybe not. Either way someone needs to pay for a drill now. How longs it gonna take to farm out with at oil at ~40$ a barrel? It’s definitely in punt territory now after the largest targets didn’t come in at Charlie 1 and they’ve got limited cash in the bank to fund future drilling ops. Plus there’s no guarantee on tax credits being paid out either. At least Dave gets paid at the end of the day though LOL
my opinion too
gl &atb cat
Why is that?
Ramp one share and deramp another eh D45!
The HRZ is doomed
regards "Unfortunately for HRZ supporters, 88E decided to pursue conventional options when Icewine-2 ran into difficulties."
Is it feasible, that to fund future HRZ exploration, the company perhaps looked at low expenditure conventional opportunities, like Winx & Charlie?
Personally, I don't for a moment, think they have scrapped HRZ. The potential is just too big & afterall, thats why 88e went to Alaska.
Why would they have taken more HRZ core samples at Charlie 1 if that was the case?
I, like you Phrontist, believe that there is more to this than meets the eye.
We can always dream.
Stay Safe, Sane & Healthy. GLA
As I said, my only information on PANR was the Webinar plus a few facts from LSE. It was a rambling multi-person delivery about 80 minutes with some excellent presentation slides. Their land connects to ours, there will be some common geological features.
When a company buys another company they can legally claim the bought businesses history.
I noticed the panel stating conv and unconv but crossed out unconv on my notes when the last speaker stated they were only active on conventional.
Clearly their current profile has a lot in common with us, but a very different history, much based on Great Bear.
I recollect from one slide that they have 4 or 5 Drills behind them. Only one oil flow but confident the others are potential commercial assets.
PB said to me that his plan was for a string of exploration wells going North from Franklin Bluffs and staying next to the highway to minimise development costs and increase the working year period since the highway is kept serviced and open 365 days a year.
Unfortunately for HRZ supporters, 88E decided to pursue conventional options when Icewine-2 ran into difficulties.
17:35 think you will find PANR entered Alaska or at least announced in December 2018. :-)
Although GBP were not listed money was raised from private investors and also GBP had a loan facility with Bank of America which I assume was backed by Exploration Credits (SOA), I seem to recall a figure of US$120M or so being owed to GBP by SOA not sure how much of that is due and as GBP was effectively a private company difficult to assess unless in the PANR take over documents , reference to the Alaska Recorders Office may shed some light but as to all the various activities, mortgages and liens that have occurred since 2010.
Rabito, quality post. Just re-post this at the start of every day, then no-one else will need to post pointless inaccurate rubbish that comes from the aftermath of Wall's latest failure.
Phron 15.33, that is the case and has independently verified by a CPR. Likewise 100bopd is what 88e were looking for from the Charlie 1 flow test. I would point out some people were expecting a 100bopd flow test to take 88e far higher than PANR's market cap, despite PANR having higher NPVs and owning 100% of the ~1Billion OiP (~76.5 Contingent Resource) compared to 88e's 30% of 1Billion OIP at the time.
I believe the point JofHoggit was trying to make is that PANR only entered Alaska at the end of 2019 through acquiring Great Bear who themselves entered in 2010 (not 2006 as you stated). Indeed $200M has been spent however this was not done from cash raises, Great Bear were not listed. A large part of this money (~$80M) was spent on 3D seismic covering PANR's whole acreage, bar the Western leases 88e do not have this so saying they are similar is incorrect.
You will note the very slide you highlighted mentions the potential unconventional resources on their acreage, these were also highlighted by DW in Novembers meeting with shareholders so that's another point which you may have got wrong. Indeed Pantheon's focus in now on conventional as they don't think the unconventional is economical without conventional infrastructure and a higher oil price (this is also noted on the same slide as the $200M figure you quoted).
In regards to cash both companies are in very similar position with about a year of overheads in cash., yet you seem to highlight 88e as having 'plenty'.
We are now both looking for farm outs but I would suggest the figures targeted by the respective BOD's are very different. Part of this (in addition to the size,scale and reduced risk of PANR's resources) is that the Greater Alkaid project can indeed go straight into production but I don't believe 88e's can. Whilst you regularly talk about four potential FO's you never mention the financial aspects of these. I would recommend you look into this and consider the resource potential and COS in comparison to the Premier deal, rather than assuming more data means more value.
Apologies to others for this post but I thought best to highlight information which is incorrect in my opinion.
Jof, I have looked at the document, it is pretty long.
PANR bought out Great Bear.
Jof, all I can say is, look at the PANR Feb Webinar.
At the end, after well over an hour, they have some sound-bite panels on the screen. One of them states that they have invested $200m in Alaska operations.
That is all I know.
The deal was valued at 49m. Of which 2.5m cash and rest in A and B shares. It does confirm that over the years GBP had spent over $200m on the acreage.
Brom, how is Panr SP and MC so high compared to 88E?
Surely the difference is not 1 Oil Flow Test at 100 bopb for them?
Some people suggest that multiple laterals can make that a 2,000 bopd production well.
But surely, if that were the case, why no queue of FO Applicants?
I get from Feb 2020 Panr Webinar, he said they have invested US$200m,
I assume it is from CR's.
I have followed GBP for almost six years, the changes of strategy, the changes in management, the changes in owners, the bullish announcements and the massive lulls when all activity stopped etc
Ultimately as a junior explorer they depended on either going cap in hand to shareholders, borrowing from the bank against security of SOA or trying to get a FO partner.
None of it pleases everybody all of the time and some of it is not always easily available, GBP were heavily exposed to SOA export credits scheme and ultimately PANR took control.
Since we drilled Icewine#1 the only well activity on GBP's leases was the successful flow test ~12m ago of Alkaid-1, I have never been able to fathom how the old GBP even if they had no money had not convinced/found a partner who would have been willing to complete that, after all they had three winters of opportunity, although not part of Otto's original deal you would have thought it would have worth a shot to someone even the drilling + analysis companies.
Life is strange :-)
PANR haven't spent $158m on North slope. They've spent however much they paid in cash or shares to buy the leases /info from great bear + whatever they've spent since.
My point is, there are similarities between PANR and 88E.
Why do they have such a high MC and we have such a low MC?
If we know the answer, then we know how and when our SP will rise.
But my comparison is to stimulate further discussion.
What are my misconceptions?
OK, I take your point, PANR have had accusations thrown at them.
After all, 180p down to 17p is quite something.
But their SP profile is quite similar to ours over last 5 years.
I wrote this following listening to their Webinar from February.
They are obviously concerned about the future, being CR difficulties, low oil price (then), coronavirus, etc
Phrontist, your posts just highlight you have misconceptions about both companies.
And if you think nobody has accused PANR of incompetence you are grossly mistaken.
How about some millions:
Expenditure over MC: 88E – 79.0m-19.5m = £59.5m; Panr – 158.00m - 85.7m = £72.30m
No one has accused PANR of incompetance, etc.
But they have 8 years longer than us, and only recently struck oil.
They have spent £13m more than us as at today.
88E have a major catch-up benefit of 'free' Charlie-1 saving US$23m
We have not seen the full benefit ofCharlie-1 yet with results.
Hopefully followed by enthusiastic FO for next well. or wells.
An uncompleted line, now complete:
Expenditure over MC: 88E – 79.0-19.5=£59.5; Panr – 158.00-85.7=£72.30
Continued, 88E and Panr comparison:
Reliant on future shareholder CR for time being: Both – YES.
First oil production (first revenue): Both 2021 if all goes very well….
We both have excellent Seismic data IP integrated with regional information IP.
We both have Data Room facility / capability for own use and client use.
We are both in the most stable and safe place in the world.
Panr have the edge on nearness to pipeline and highway for lower cost everything.
88E has the edge of much larger long term resources.
Once we get a strike, 88E new MC (£86m to over £100m) will equal or exceed Panr MC.
Then merge with Panr, to become a powerful Alaska exploration / production business.
Create new Share Issue, list on NASDAQ, dream on, ha ha.
FO’s galore, significant share in production revenue, ongoing Drill’s for decades.