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.
Ford...the post to which you refer is basically correct
Yes, I did make such 'predictions'
I have made many predictions re E&Ps over many years...
As several people well know, my track record has been 'OK'
No guarantees
DYOR
Caveat Emptor
Etc
Regards
GRH
A very worthwhile exercise GRH. If I’m being honest as an amateur I expected a larger increase in CHARS share price following their recent good news. The present EV and prospect of $300m additional spending helps to at least in part educate me. 75% retained field equity and very a conservative approach to debt in PRED is very reassuring. As for PG , from what I have seen he is more than capable of the usual PR stuff but I like to think a lower profile serves his purpose of proving up more before an early approach is made that really undervalues what we have but tempts the impatient. Thank you for your assistance.
I also eagerly await your response to 13:48pm.
States something along the lines of a prediction that you made!
GLA
Since reading footandmouth 15:56! I have eagerly awaited your response GRH, it didn’t disappoint. I really would love to say that I enjoy all the posts here and appreciate the in depth and greater knowledge than I have. Really love this board and find it inspiring.
Have a great evening.
GLA
Afternoon all
FootandMouth
Forgive me...the correct comparison is not how many more shares they have in issue
it is what is their ENTERPRISE VALUE (EV) when compared to that of PRD?
For anyone still unclear
(after all my droning on over many months about what might sound to be an arcane measurement but is REALLY vital to understand)...
and whilst its a bit more complex ...
basically...to work out EV... just look at the respective m/caps
and ADD nett debt
or take away nett cash
PRD m/cap is about £17m
CHAR's is about £77m (roughly 4.5 x greater)
Now take away from PRD their nett cash position
now ADD to CHAR their nett debt position
it is an ugly ...brutal ...way of comparing things
but it is hard reality
as you correctly say...
DEVELOPMENT costs are at least one ORDER OF MAGNITUDE greater for CHAR
I have nothing whatever against CHAR
but the mismatch is stark
ATB
Regards
GRH
BillyRay thank you. 25 times our development costs and 2.5 times as many shares in issue. Superb reservoir characteristics from east to west over the whole Rharb basin . How big is this for PRD ? Is it conceivable that we won’t be a target for takeover ? What would the major shareholders take to relinquish Morocco ? The scale relative to MC is frankly unnerving.
I was gong to ask if anyone had watched/ listened to it.
I thought it was an excellent presentation and well structured. At the end there were also a Q&A session. In that there were several questions about the terms with ONYHM which (I imagine) would be very similar to PRDs. Duncan Wallace (?) answered these all clearly and it would pay any PRD holders to understand these also as they may have the same questions.
He also explained the reason that a flow test on 'dry gas' had not been performed. And this company is willing to continue with a 2-3 year development plan at a cost of $300m without one. This was also explained clearly as well.
There was so much mentioned in it. Only wish from myself would be that PRD was able to put something along these lines together as it would be a tremendous boost.
Afternoon all
I just had a listen in to the CHAR presentation following the recent Anchois drilling campaign. A couple of things stood out as potentially relevant for us PRD holders:
1. The Anchois reservoir characteristics are excellent and are similar to the data we were given for the MOU-1 well, namely porosity of 25-30% and permeabilities of 100’s mD to over 1 Darcy.
So the reservoir characteristics seem to be superb from east to west over the whole Rharb basin (it made me think of GRH’s post on ‘DARCIES’ from last September when he predicted such characteristics!)
2. The recent CHAR RNS’s had mentioned ‘fast-tracking’ the Anchois development so I was assuming that the date for first gas might be brought forward. However, it wasn’t and the CEO stated again that first gas from Anchois will still be the ‘end of 2024, maybe into early 2025’ (and that’s with a ‘fair wind’). That’s quite some way off and shows again the merits of PRD’s onshore licences with the plan for first gas in H1 2023 (as per IMC presentation from Sept). Plus, the cost of development for Anchois was reiterated at around $300M compared with ~$12M for a CNG development of our MOU-4 fan. So we’re much quicker and cheaper to first gas. Also, the CHAR CEO refused to rule-out further fund raises and, as we know, Paul is keen to avoid any further dilution if at all possible.
So the metrics for CHAR look OK but I’m still firmly of the opinion that PRD looks like the much better option.
All IMO of course.