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:
You will only have one login account. Registering with multiple accounts is not allowed. Any user found to have more than one account on this site will have all, and any future accounts suspended permanently.
Your email and password must only be used by you. If a post is made under your account, it will be considered that it was posted by yourself.
Your account nickname must not be the same, or contain, listed company names or board members' names.
While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate; rudeness, swearing, insulting posts, personal attacks, or posts which are invasive of another's privacy.
You will not;
discuss illegal or criminal activities.
post any confidential or price sensitive information or that is not public knowledge.
post misleading or false statements regarding the share price and performance. Such posts are deemed as market abuse, and may be reported to the appropriate authorities.
post any private communication, or part thereof, from any other person, including from a member of the board of directors of a listed company. Such posts cannot be verified as true and could be deemed to be misleading.
post any personal details (e.g. email address or phone number).
post live price or level 2 updates.
publish content that is not your original work, or infringes the copyright or other rights of any third party.
post non-constructive, meaningless, one word (or short) non-sense posts.
post links to, or otherwise publish any content containing any form of advertising, promotion for goods and services, spam, or other unsolicited communication.
post any affiliate or referral links, or post anything asking for a referral.
post or otherwise publish any content unrelated to the board or the board's topic.
re-post premium share chat posts on regular share chat.
restrict or inhibit any other user from using the boards.
impersonate any person or entity, including any of our employees or representatives.
post or transmit any content that contains software viruses, files or code designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of this website or any computer software or equipment.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
If you are going to post non-English, please also post an English translation of your post.
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 and Verified Members
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.
Ross I don't know what the relevance of amount or frequency of posts have? When I first started using this site my perceptions were very different to what they are now. Instead of me reading something farfetched & offering an opinion on why I disagree with it, if the point is being made by a particular poster, I have just learned to not engage or respond anymore. I wish more people would take that approach but this isn't my board to police. Everyone has the right to ignore my suggestions :)
And yet you have more posts on here than I do these days!
To be fair though, if you added back my deleted posts, I would edge ahead of you. It has been interesting to see just how low the local rampers have managed to get the deletion bar set (let’s see if this post survives, for example). As I said, the worst thing I have ever called anyone on here is a ramper. But even I get bored with ramper stamping when I can’t get enough of my posts to stick. At least we are moving into a period of more significant news flow, whether that news be good, bad or ugly.
Thus the trap that is set & snares you every time lol. I've learned how to dodge them; it means I spend less time on here replying to things I am really wasting my time replying to because the point will be raised again the next day.
The problem with that approach is that it leaves you almost nothing to engage with! Fair point though. There is not much more to be said this side of the S2 result (even if this is just net pay initially) and some further financial clarification. For the sake of my trade I am hoping that the former comes before the latter!
There are a host of business case reasons that need to be met for a Major to farm in - the asset is only one aspect - be it commercial discovery, or promising and worthy of further exploration:
overall development costs -upto $5 Billion over 4-5 years route to market and transport costs local population/relations politics , rule of law, environmental price of oil profile world market trends and geo politics other project priorities overall reserves and business strategy competition and market position ability to form a consortia to share risk - the JV partners business case requirements etc
each aspect has a weight for consideration - the overall decision is the sum of these and many more aspects
The absence of a farm in - to date - does not make bears right on one point - the attractiveness or not of WPS for example, neither bulls right if a farm in does materialise in time.
No side has therefore been proven right or wrong yet - the drill data is being analysed, the models re calibrated, Gneiss are managing the data room access - we dont know the extent of real interest there may be or how the other factors listed stack up, just that CEG have stated there is interest and some unsolicited - they must have spoken to most in the many years pre P1:)
Fair comment, I guess that teasing an apology out of the local rampers is more about the way they have responded to counter arguments and contrary opinions in the past (arguments and opinions that were then proved right). They have no need to apologise for being continually wrong about CEG but their conspiracy theories, accusations of bad faith and far worse? You would think that at some point they would feel slightly embarrassed by those behaviours. As should those on my side of the argument who stoop to their level, like Irene Krapp (I filtered her a long time ago and when I recently removed my filters to keep an eye on Starchild, I found that she had thankfully disappeared).
The worst thing I have ever called anyone on here is a ramper.
Ross I don't think there is any need for you or for anyone else to apologise for what they think & or believe. Even if regular posters are promising of great things to come & those things don't materialise, no one is speaking on behalf of or making promises for the company.
Assuming the Bahamas license is renewed, and the Percy-1 autopsy meets expectations, what is CEG’s next objective? To get majors in the data room. If they like the data or intrigued with what lies at the Jurassic level, they may want to play.
1. Precedent: in Aug 2018 a major paid $1m for exclusivity. Result: the SP soared and BPC’s MCap hit £156m. This is c20p SP today as there’s c800m shares. It could be argued, if this happened tomorrow, the MCap could go even higher as there were no CERP assets nor Uruguay then.
My ‘cunning’ plan posted yesterday, was a conceptual one and not a prediction. The ideal farm-in will be at the asset level only and for CEG to receive cash towards its $150m back costs. The alternative will be to leverage new shares as incentive. Although dilutive, it doesn’t cost CEG anything, and the SP will rise due to 2 fully funded mega spuds.
Potential ROI could be good to a major (or consortium of investors GNEISS could seek) as CEG will have the capital to spud Uru-1, develop ex-CERP assets, and/or M&A. Nothing will compel the major to keep its shares as they will still own substantial asset level rights.
3. Fact: fully funded mega spuds usually result in massive SP rises leading to the result. The major could sell its shares and recoup capex leading to spuds x 2. This is not fleecing PIs who love to have a flutter with the hope of a 10-20x bagger.
BUT do majors pay cash for non-commercially proven acreage?
Yesterday, according to a self-professed farm-in ‘expert’ who regularly posts negative CEG commentary (and I suspect has no CEG shares), the answer is NO. Perhaps s/he should offer CEG h/er consulting services to put them straight.
a. CEG believes Bahamas can be monetized. If impossible, this implies incompetence, inexperience (for chasing rainbows), or misleading investors.
b. Royalty rates are decent for JV pie sharing.
c. North Cuba is near USA infrastructure.
d. CEG believes a farm-in can be done for Uruguay (probably leverage for the above). It would have been daft to commit $1m for Uru-1 and akin to paying a $1m deposit on a property deal, with no hope of ever getting the $40m funds to complete the purchase.
Bottom line: depending on the Percy-1 autopsy, I believe farm-in deal can be done at the asset and/or share level by leveraging CEG’s asset potential. And an RNS stating a major is in the data room will surge the SP.