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.
Scot, I thought those rights issues were for selected institutional investors? Not open to the public or directors? I'm sure at least one of them was restricted as I took up one of the raises last year. It may have been a different type as I'm sure I also had free shares along with the raise.
As for Ashley Gilbert and other directors not involved, we have no idea of their financial situation and I found it ludicrous that one of your select few suggested that management forego their wages for shares. I'm sure their bank would love shares instead of cash to pay for the mortgage etc. He also cashed in some of his superannuation in 2022-23 so he may have had a need for cash. It is not mandatory for staff to purchase shares.
Investment banking career :) and your on a bulletin board 24/7 on aim. Oh man it gets better. If you knew anything about investing you would not be on here 24/7.
05:59
Taximan - your post timed at 05:59 is correct.
"Munnie, Dr Stephen Staley holds 14,342,717 shares, and all directors have share options outstanding."
The trouble is that he's the only 88E employee who has invested a single Aussie dollar to buy 88E shares. There are other very concerning signs that 88E insiders are not remotely aligned with 88E shareholders.
For example, MD Ashley Gilbert elected to take his first bonus in cash rather than shares. He then sold £200k worth of performance rights in early 2023. Worryingly, after Hickory-1 had been drilled and logged, cuttings analysed, etc in 2023, a further 84m performance rights were sold in early 2024 prior to flow testing activities commencing. Reading the Annual Report it is difficult to construct a scenario where Ashley Gilbert wasn't the seller or one of the sellers.
Standing back and looking objectively at Ashley Gilbert's decisions since joining 88E, it hardly paints a picture of confidence in 88E's assets or investment case, does it? And the BoD has hardly enforced a remuneration structure which ensures the executive team is financially aligned with external shareholders. Not good.
Something else really struck me at the time of the rights issue in August '23 and the November '23 fundraise. Dr Staley invested £4757 in the rights issue but no-one else associated with 88E invested a single dollar at 0.31p per share. Worse was to follow in the December fundraise. Not a single employee or director thought 88E was worth investing in when the new shares were priced at only 0.23p.
During my investment banking career I mostly dealt with instos rather than PIs. During fundraising roadshows for SMID cap corporates, there was rarely a meeting where the fund manager didn't enquire if management was supporting the fundraise and if so, what was the amount of their intended investment.
I wonder whether forum members will look back on 88E insiders' personal investment decisions and wonder if they should have paid more attention to the message being sent?
Another reason for tiny sells and buys is to find what the real share price is with your own dealer. I do it as the quotes i get are often BS. so i buy or sell a few pence worth to get a more accurate price.
However I do agree the market is manipulated and it should be stopped.
Shorting should be illegal. That way would see people investing in the market not betting against it. Investment would bring growth and that makes money for us all.
I'm with you Uscita, it's social enough on here without having to meet people face to face with drink in their hand. I would like to attend an AGM at least once. I have various other companies but I live too far from mainstream.
No am I heck. I've never understood why people want a social aspect in relation to their supposed investments. It's a massive red flag.
Uscita you in the picture? I'm afraid I live some distance from London.
I think Wall led a merry life at the expense of shareholders.
Hah! 88e: The Next Generation
Maybe you could organize one then?
Here's the last one:
http://88ewiki.wikidot.com/private-investors-page
Before my time Uscita ;)
Not keen for a big ol' meet up down the Globe then Taximan?
Uscita you may have been right when D Wall was in charge, but this is the first time 88E have raised oil to surface. Surely you can see that this is different from the past? Share price has taken a tanking thanks to lack of trust recently but I am hopeful that a corner will be turned very soon.
RedBeardOil, not true, they owe 75% of that Aus17M so under Aus13M, enough in the bank to cover that and Namibia and a bottle to celebrate. Lets not forget also that the 20% paid included Burgundy's 25% so another US$725,000
For years its been blindingly obvious this company is a complete sham. It doesn't have shareholders it has fans. It's really quite weird.
Taxi man 5:33 Not True! The company has an accrued debt of 80% of the Flow test cost of US$14.5 million so about $17million Aust. Put simply they will need a CR asap. This company is all smoke and mirrors! Ever trust them always read and understand.
DYOR.
Munnie, Dr Stephen Staley holds 14,342,717 shares, and all directors have share options outstanding
Namibia payment due by 1st June 2024 of $920,000 which covers full commitment for 2024. 88Ehas enough in the bank to cover this so still no debt.
Thank you Cardinal3
Its not a taunt its a genuine question . You are so self righteous.
Older . I did not lie . You need to stop that crap .
The mother of all placings is coming here. And as expected, down it will go, and it wont be pretty.
If folk will not listen to the data and the wisdom of Olderwiser and Scot then there is no helping you.
4 barrels over 16hrs is not a successful flow test, so a massive placing needed to fund any further development, and 88 will be insolvent long before that if they dont get their skates on and raise capital... which they will almost certainly now try and do.
Oh, question... do any of the directors own shares or did any participate directly in recent capital raise? The answer is no. How curious.
Sharebel
Instead of posting huge amounts gibberish, focused on personalities, and conspiracy theories about MM holding share prices back.
Why dont you put your energy into something meaningful . like the truth behind 4 barrels in the tank v a 50bopd flow rate
Imagine the positive effect you would create if you could demonstrate that 50 bopd was a sustainable rate v the one quarter bbl per hour 4 barrels in 16 hrs calculates to
Ausnsw
When you tell a lie, dont be so nerve wracked when it gets called. Wriggling away from your lie, by recasting it as an assumption, is a poor excuse
As to your question I tend to ignore Taunts, as they are meaningless to knowledge acquisition
But here goes, yes PANR dropped from its high, and yes it was still good value there.
The reason it dropped was a dishonest sustained short attack that was able to exaggerate a few unclear results, such as the high GOR (12k to 14K/bbl) displayed in the Alkaid long term flow test, that had an IP 30 of 505 bpd of salable liquids v the expectation of 750 bpd of oil.
All of which has subsequently proven to be no problem, so no basis on fundamentals for the beat down
So in fairness, should you not also be commending those same posters that commented on the extra ordinary value PANR held at 10p ,20p, 30p and probably 40p, 50p, £1, £2 and so on
Decided to look in here and bet that the only ones posting would be the 3 amigos Aussie boiler room paid poster crew on behalf of an Oz fund shorting and voila here they are writing essays galore! Desperate times for them require desperate measures! It’s actually quite funny we’re all relaxing living our lives and they’ve spent all evening here after spending all day well they both disappeared for a while I guess to get in a few hours kip zzzzz then 3 others took over and now here they are back again! You guys just make me want to buy even more! IMHO DYOR
Answer to taximan, yes. The escrow is effectively a nominee account.
You have hit a nerve now older . Do not call me a liar. I assumed you filtered me as you still have not answered why you werent warning people on the Panr board about buying in at 130p .