Open Orphan pharma spin-out Poolbeg Pharma present at London South East's October live event. Watch the full video 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 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.
Hi Reaper007 - just checking something. Did you realise I was responding to disgraceful and baseless accusations levelled by joghobbit on Monday 11:35 and Mon 10:51 who in turn was following on from GS's g0bbledyg00k post about "hedging" (doesn't look like GS knows what hedging is??? Needs to watch Wolf of Wall Street a few more times) and me acting unethically.
So, Reaper007, if you didn't know I was responding to some disgraceful and filth-ridden posts by jefhobbit and GS, now you do. If you *did* know I was responding to them, how else should I have responded? Surely it is GS and jefbobbit who have submitted the "unfortunate post(s)"????
Mon 14.27- very unfortunate post. To all others VGLA
Nope, jefhobbit, and nor do I have an interest in any of the LLCs or Limited Companies listed. You're massively barking up the wrong tree here, jefhobbit, because I really am just a vanilla PANR shareholder, albeit one who has the necessary professional experience to do a comparative analysis and to confirm valuations are waaaaayyyyyy out of kilter between PANR and its southern neighbour. And you know it, jefhobbit, you absolutely know it and it's eating you up.
I have tremendous sympathy for the founders and funders of Great Bear as I do for all the other Alaskan E&P companies who were treated disgracefully by the SoA when the Governor announced a moratorium on repayments due under the exploration tax credit scheme. My sympathy extends to companies, such as 88E, who also suffered as a result of the State's appalling decision.
Something has just occurred to me. Jefhobbit - is your personal animosity towards Ed Duncan because you also lost money from backing GB early on? Or did he just steal your girl when you were teenagers? Either which way, would it not be wise to let go of your antipathy so that your financial interests are not affected negatively? Sounds like it may be colouring your judgement and conduct?
Meanwhile, back to the fundamentals and questions you keep on evading. It's really you who is the "low life", isn't it, jefhobbit. For weeks you've refused to answer my reasonable and polite query concerning the percentage of the southern neighbour's mkt cap you ascribe to each of the three main project locations, being Umiat/Peregrine, Yukon and Icewine. Also, not a peep from you about the odd information emanating from the southern neighbour which appears to suggest there are no plans to flow test Merlin-2 in the event that the data from the logs suggests it would be recommended ordinarily. What possible reason is there for such a departure from the Alaskan E&P SOP? How else is 88E to add value for its shareholders at Merlin-2 if they don't have a plan to flow test the well? Do they not have sufficient funds? Are funds pre-committed elsewhere? It's all most odd indeed, isn't it jefhobbit? All the while, you rely on that blind loyalty from the shareholders of PANR's southern neighbour so that you can trade the peaks and troughs as you've admitted. You truly are a low life, jefhobbit. Shame on you.
GS look up 'Ursa Major Holdings' here....https://www.commerce.alaska.gov/cbp/main/Search/Entities
are you on that list Scott?
What on earth are you going on about, jefhobbit???? I am a PANR shareholder and have no interest whatsoever in Great Bear or Farallon. Why on earth would I be happy with the selling from CHONS if it could be avoided???? That's just complete gibberish.
I feel sorry for the GB founders and funders because the decision by the SoA to default on the exploration tax credit scheme has had an awful effect on their financial investment just as the fundamentals of the assets are being unveiled and proved up.
How you turn that into some half-witted conspiracy theory is beyond me??? Oh, and "my" group are all City guys on the sellside and none of them have any interests in GB whatsoever. I am a PANR shareholder - fact. That is the full extent of my exposure to PANR, GB, Riverstone, Farallon, SoA, BoAM or anyone else involved in Alaska O&G.
Oh, and by the way......"your" is possessive and "you're" is a contraction of "you are". Hope that helps.
So that's why your here Scott, talking this up to all and sundry so your pals can continue to sell. 'Protecting your group' as you call it in your previous posts. What a low life.
Excellent explanation Scot. Thank you
The central point is that Farallon are not equity investors but are lenders
And lenders want their money back
Without knowing the actual legal agreement between GB and Farallon, it is impossible to assess the future dynamics of selling here particularly as financing the well programme remains outstanding
To GS and the person who recommended his post. I know one of the GB founders reasonably well and have met some of the GB funders in person.
To all other readers of this bulletin board. The historical description of the relationship between Farallon, the GB founders and funders and the State of Alaska exploration tax credit rebate scheme is accurate and matters of recorded fact. The SoA defaulted on the tax rebate scheme in late 2015. Don't believe me? Google it. The total amount owed to O&G exploration companies under the scheme was circa $750m at its peak,
By the time of the merger with PANR, it is thought that the GB founders and funders debt to Farallon was in the range of $30m- $40m. Farallon swapped debt for equity at the time of the merger so PANR had and continues to have zero debt on the balance sheet. Farallon maintained a charge over the PANR equity allotted to the GB founders and funders and it is from that tranche of stock which has been sold by CHONS throughout 2021. Again, don't believe me? Then read the merger documents and follow the course of the conversion of non-voting shares to voting shares and their subsequent sale.
GS is plain wrong on this matter. He's clearly angry about something and is either unwilling or incapable of fact-checkimg me. What shareholders decide to do with their shares is their business but please do not place any reliance whatsoever on GS's posts of yesterday when considering your investment.
I'm guffawing now. Jesus Scot, I'm guessing you are not a teacher! Ffs speak Inglish. I thought my explanation was enough.
BTW. Scot is deep into this share up to his gunnels I expect. Most sensible investors in highly risky stocks do not expose themselves beyond maybe 1 or 2% of their portfolio.
Scot is upset now because he was exposed to contradiction of legally binding bulletins. Which he had no idea how to explain. So he takes it out on bulletin board Robin Hoods. Who simply want to steal from the rich twits to give to the poor.
Scot is in 'with the in crowd' or so he says. He protects the ones who should be paying their own debts. He said below. Read it.
I'm concerned about Scot so don't upset him pls.
Just let him go away of his own accord.
I never sold my shares in PANR. I'm still invested. Bit I will NOT stand by while pillocks defend GB not paying their own debts whilst instructing Farallon to to sell shares. It IS complete and utter hedging at its worst. I fxxing hate 'hedging in any form. And so should any private investor.
Don't bother answering Scot, your time is done here.
(continued from below)
4) Don't worry about Goldstinger and his befuddled reply. The TR-1s are neither 'drivel' nor do they contain legal 'lying'. GS felt chastened and his ego was bruised as I tried, and patently failed, to explain the dynamics within CHONS to him. Instead of thanking me for taking the trouble to attempt to explain it to him, and perhaps opting to admit he had more questions as he still didn't fully comprehend what was going on he opted to show that his feels were hurt and posted some abusive content instead. Of course, it's your call if you choose to read his posts.
Good luck with whatever you decide to do with your investments.
1) the reason you see these TR-1 notifications after Farallon (via the CHONS holding vehicle) has sold circa 1% is that the Rules require a large shareholder to advise the company (and thus the market) every time their holding either falls through a whole number percentage figure, or rises upwards through a whole number percentage (providing the shareholder in question owns >3% of the ordinary shares on issue). In the latest example, Farallon advised the company they'd sold shares such that they moved through the whole number of 19% and finished at close of play on that date at 18.83%. In summary, that's all perfectly normal and Farallon are actually pretty disciplined at getting their paperwork in on good time.
2) Your concern about Farallon selling. After the merger between Great Bear and PANR in January '19 Farallon, via the CHONS holding vehicle, were not permitted to sell stock until a lock in period of two years had expired. They've been selling shares throughout 2021 in a fairly steady and disciplined manner, although lacking somewhat in finesse.
But why is the largest shareholder selling? Since the State of Alaska defaulted on its exploration tax credit repayment obligations in late 2015, Farallon provided the cash required to keep Great Bear solvent. At the time of the PANR/GB merger, Farallon swapped its debt (secured on the GB leases) for equity in the listed, post-merger PANR. (NB PANR has zero debt on its balance sheet) The GB founders/funders and Farallon were allotted shares in PANR as part of the merger and they're held by a vehicle called CHONS. Within CHONS exist contractual agreements by the GB founders/funders to repay their debt to Farallon in cash by a certain date(s). If they are unable to repay that debt in cash, Farallon holds a charge over the GB founders/funders PANR shares. Sadly for the GB founders, they have not been able to repay the debt owed to Farallon within the required timeframe. Accordingly, Farallon has exercised its right to sell the shares originally allotted to the GB founders in lieu of the cash repayment.
3) Of course I can understand why this can be viewed with concern by newcomers to the PANR investment case. "Does the largest shareholder not know exactly what's going on under the bonnet? If the largest shareholder still wants to sell stock despite the vast majority of market analysts/commentators waxing lyrical about the progress made by PANR in 2021 then what does this say?" I get it. The thing is, the Farallon selling of 2021 is, sadly for the GB founders and funders, an inevitable consequence of events which occurred in 2015 and 2016 when the State of Alaska and its voters behaved atrociously, IMHO, opting to maintain the Residents' Annual Dividend which in turn led to the State defaulting on its exploration credit repayments.
That's great to know, I can't seem to get my head around it. ?? So confusing. We all still feeling good, getting nice and cold up there now. ?? GLA.
Hi Greedy4P. Don't worry, it's very easy to think that Great Bear are instructing Farallon to sell shares. But it seems that TR1s, according to some on these boards, are filled with drivel. Apparently GB are crying about the sale of these shares. The only reason 'they' are selling is because they are indebted to Farallon, who want debts repaid.
Yes, I found the concept weird, especially the lying 'legal' nature of it all. Don't worry, be happy, it's only money.
Scot126 will explain far better than I can but whatever you do don't rattle his cage. He bites.
I have noticed over the past few weeks/months that Great Bear has been regular sellers, usually about 1%, at a time.
Their holdings seem to be currently 18.83%
I would have thought they would be close to & have knowledge about the potential of the oil find, so it slightly concerns me that they continue to be sellers, seemingly drip feeding their shares into the market.
I have had shares in pantheon now since 2016, but am just an amateur investor really.
Anyone have any thoughts as to why Great Bear are sellers? If they believe there is a profit to be made they could be buyers not sellers