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.
Bully1985..i think if most oil exploration companies did this they would be bankrupt in no time..
its a less risk strategy doing the tried and tested way.
pr1 was doomed from the start of spud unfortunately.
they should never have tried to do it alone..
"That being said you appear to hold the belief that commercial oil would of been found if they just kept drilling"
No there was only ever a 30% chance of finding commercial oil if drilled to TD, by not doing so it substantially reduced the cos to probably single figures and therefore what was the point?
My belief is that they ran out of money but drilled just enough (70% TD) to prove up a wps that would ultimately satisfy a farm out partner.
Antha its my understanding that because it was an all share merger, no cash changed hands as no cash purchase was made neither were assets bought.
M&A charges totalled $12m. I don't know whether that was paid 50/50 by each company or if it was relevant to the equity swap or if it was one payment made by the combine company.
I don't know if that voids your second question. That being said you appear to hold the belief that commercial oil would of been found if they just kept drilling. Have I understood that correctly?
Bully how can a company drill a well if they don't have sufficient funds in place to pay for the well/rent the equipment?
Unless they still do deals with handshakes & giving ones word to promise to pay?
Does anyone know the actual final cost of BPC acquiring the Cerp assets?
We know the reason why was to have a Plan B if P1 wasn't commercial which is where we are now BUT what if we never had the Cerp assets therefore saving £M's in acquiring them, surely we could have used that money to have kept drilling to TD which would then have had a greater chance of finding commercial oil, I know that means there was a 70% chance of going bust but to fall at the last hurdle though lack of funds is just bad planning unless of course a farm out was the plan all along.