focusIR May 2024 Investor Webinar: Blue Whale, Kavango, Taseko Mines & CQS Natural Resources. Catch up with the webinar 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.
Taxi
Sorry I did not get back to you on this. I am not 100% sure of the intricacies so did not want to give guidance.
Take this generalization with a pinch of salt , more opinion than fact.
Escrow is a hold on shares that the owner holds, it means they cannot be sold with out permission from a third interested party. In the ELKO case say, 88e had to approve the sale before it could transact, but Elko would have been the owner. This of course can have a cloud of invisibility thrown over it through nominee holdings etc
19:50
Taximan57 - do you mean something like stock being held in escrow by a law firm or a bank? If that's the scenario you have in mind then I would have thought the shares would be held in the law firm or bank's nominee account.
There's no such thing as a Texas BOE. How can you post on this thread with such confidence when you don't know something as simple as this? Seriously?
Look up 88E's guidance on oil:gas ratio produced. Yes, such guidance exists....do the research. Dead easy to find. Think Google how much gas equates to a US barrel of oil. Then do some maths.
I did ask Older a question regarding escrow but he missed it, maybe someone else can help. If a beneficiary of shares being held in an escrow account was listed as holding a number of shares would the escrow shares be within that total?
I dont have the knowledge nor the time to look up specifics regarding what is in a barrel of Texas oil. I'm sure you will tell me soon enough. As for the $10m, after work overs, the two new wells, and potentially new drill sites it is well within the realms of reality even @ 64%. Self funding 88E.
Scot, not sure where the lie is? The figure of $3M is net to 88E and I said 2025 onwards for the additional.
MadEnglish, sorry but I was referring to the two new wells expected in Texas. They would take the total bopd up to 675 best scenario, but not including further wells as they also have more options there.
I agree on the horizontal Phoenix and would expect similar numbers, I just think someone else will be doing it.
Taxi - You're talking at least 1080 bopd (horizontal) on the current numbers they have but as both RNAs stated the flow was increasing on both wells so the 50 & 70 ( x9 for horizontal ) are absolutely minimums.
GLA & ATB
18:42
Taximan57 - this isn't like you. That post timed at 18:42 is a bare-faced lie. For goodness sake, Taximan57, It's right there in the new presentation pack.
1) 88E is targeting GROSS production from Longhorn of 600-675boepd by the end of 2024. Two questions, Taximan57.
- a) What's 88E's percentage ownership of the Texas assets? It's not 100%, it's 64%.
- b) There's a big difference in dollar value between a barrel of oil and a barrel of oil equivalent. Do you know that,
Taximan57? What's the guided ratio of oil:gas contained within those Texas barrels? You need to look that up and
work out the value of 88E's 64% share of the production of 600-675 boEpd and revert back to us. I suggest you
withdraw your post so you don't un/intentionally misinform your fellow forum members.
2) Do you think it's acceptabel for you to misrepresent 88E's management's formal guidance. I quote: "Net 88E cashflows
of c.US$3m expected in 2024, provide funds towards exploration and appraisal."
Yet more obfuscation from 88E management. Will c.US$3m dividend from Texas cover 88E's G&A/lease payments/listing costs/travel/office rent? Will it leave anything for future operations if 88E has to pick up the tab for a defaulting Burgundy?
No, thought not. This forum has got to do better. Have whatever hopes and dreams you heart desires but for goodness sake, the facts are right there in the presentation pack today.
This guy can’t be married can he
Scot - are you a used car salesman????
Your constant, rambling posts are so tiresome and repetitive. if people want to buy PANR they will - no one needs the drivel that you endlessly post.
You are obviously paid,as no-one would waste such personal time on such a tedious subject.
Soon, Scot won't have any influence towards buyers and sellers. Can't wait.
Scot,
Can you give the shortened version.
18:12 and 18:23
Ayecuramba & chrisev1 - infantile rudeness as usual. Tiresome but you do you.
- Do either of you calculate 88E is, or will shortly be, insolvent?
- Do either of you assess the flow test data points to commerciality being declared?
- Do either of you believe a downdip, lower classification 88E barrel in the ground should be valued by the stockmarket at a premium to an updip, higher classification PANR barrel in the ground?
- Do either of you feel it's time to ponder why Ashely Gilbert didn't support the fundraise at 0.23p in Q4'23?
- *If* it turns out Ashley Gilbert and other 88E employees sold £200k worth of performance rights in January '24, will both of you be a) furious b) shocked and furious c) shocked and furious and rushing to contact the Chairman to ask what the hell is going on d) think everything is groovy and it's all the fault of an imaginary gang of boiler room scoundrels working with their market maker mates?
I hope and trust a large number of forum members acknowledge that, whilst they might dislike reading my posts, they acknowledge that I don't seed the forum with lies or made up fantasies. I'm addressing those folk now.
I "get" that some 88E shareholders think 'revenge' when they see the names scot126, olderwiser, rabito79 and others. Some have started posting lies and made up gibberish on PANR forums. Thus I am compelled to point out the following in the starkest of terms.
I fear 88E is insolvent or is about to become insolvent. The only way IMO to stave off insolvency in the very short term is to raise fresh equity capital. If such a cash raise is being considered, it will not be at 0.21p. It will have to be priced at a sufficient discount to attract new capital who will see that the Hickory-1 flow test data doesn't look too clever. There's also the impending vote on consolidation to consider.
I assess that 88E has drilled its final well in Alaska as operator. 88E needs to recapitalise itself and Namibia will become the primary narrative on which the investment case will be reconstructed. That's if the company survives this current cash crunch.
Net, net, net? A fundraise is, IMHO, heading your way. It will be done at a steep discount IMHO. Your Alaskan assets will be diluted massively.
If you like these Alaskan assets, the market is offering you a mathematically bizarre opportunity to swap your exposure to the same asset by selling a lower quality 88E barrel for 16.4p and buying a higher quality PANR barrel in the same formation for 14.5p. For those fundamental investors who remain here, this strategy offers the best mathematical option to see your knowledge of the Alaskan assets rewarded.
I would not have posted this content in such a blunt fashion had it not been for the guys spreading made up nonsense and straight out lies on other forums. I don't lie for my own financial benefit. I find it contemptible to do so. I haven't done it on this forum, you know that. Make of this what
If they get both new wells in play and reach 675bopd they are looking at nearly $10m pa, 2025 onwards, with additional targets for drilling on acreage.
Scot how big is your short? Why else would anyone not invested write these essays to scare punters off?
'Net 88E cash flows of ~US$3M expected in 2024' and expected to be more once two new wells in play, subject to successful workovers on 5 others.
Scott,
Just the three parts. Most is just long winded rubbish. I wish I could print it out - I ran out of toilet paper.
No... Just the usual blater, enjoy your PANR holding :-)
[Part 3, continued from part 2 below]
There is no market maker conspiracy. The market makers don’t have enough capital to play the character of the evil puppet master hiding behind the curtain moving the share price like a pawn on a financial chess board. I’d be surprised if they’re permitted to apply much more than £20k of their firm’s capital on 88E at any one time. Please accept the fact the SP is where it is because a large number of your fellow shareholders around the world have read the results, interpreted them, digested them, accepted them….and then decided to sell all or part of their holding. As for buyers? If they’ve done a little reading and worked out the company is worryingly low in cash…..well, why wouldn’t they wait on the sidelines until that matter is addressed by the BoD?
I hope this post has assisted some of you. /end
[Part 3, continued from Part 2 below]
[Part 2, continued from Part 1 below]
The flow test results are what they are. I fully appreciate they're disappointing to shareholders but denying their veracity or refusing to acknowledge the facts are not going to help anyone, or the company for that matter.
This point is a tad more esoteric. Clear your minds for a moment....be prepared to consider a theory which you possibly hadn't been prepared to countenance until now.
Ok, the SP today isn't wrong or a conspiracy by market makers or the results of a nasty short attack by evil posters like scot126. No, the SP was actually wrong ***BEFORE*** Hickory-1 was drilled, ***BEFORE*** before Hickory-1 was flow tested. How so? Ever since the Dave Wall days and the US OTC punter tsunami of 2021 88E’s stockmarket valuation has contained a large and wholly irrational speculative element caused by a shareholder base which is, ON AVERAGE, disinterested in the fundamentals of the 88E investment case. Whether forum members like it or not, the science is incontestable. PANR’s volume *and* quality of oil in the shared reservoirs is at least 8-10x greater in scale ***and*** the quality of those barrel is higher (better perm and porosity, producibility, shallower, lower Dmax => classed as commercial). To my astonishment, a downdip lower classification 88E barrel at Phoenix is still, *even after* the flow test results, trading at a mathematically unjustified premium to a fully diluted, updip, higher classification PANR barrel in the ground.
Please don’t cry out in fury and wish my family ill-health and all that horrible stuff. The 88E mkt cap was irrational back in 2021, it was irrational before the flow tests started and it’s completely ludicrous now we know the results and the company’s cash position.
Keep the open mind a little longer please. If you bought 88E shares above 0.21p, then it was *your purchase* which was irrational. It was *your purchase* where you (unwittingly?) paid for a share with an unjustified speculative element contained within it which was completely divorced from the fundamentals of the investment case. Once you acknowledge it was the *purchase price* where you made an error it becomes far easier to acknowledge the market’s reaction to the flow test results.
The flow test results forced a large number of 88E shareholders to confront head on some facts which they had either *hoped* would never arrive; or had feared would arrive but shoved their head in the ground; or had miscalculated badly the risk of these results if they had attempted to analyse the potential outcomes in advance of the operations.
[Part 2, see above for Part 3]
The cash at hand on 31/3/24 was AU$17.5m or US$11.3m. 88E informs us the gross cost of this winter's operations at Hickory-1 is US$14.5m. 88E's share of the costs (c.75%) is US$10.9m. If Burgundy assess the flow test results are poor, they will default on their 25% share of the costs. People will recall the difficulty Burgundy had in sourcing finance for their share of *drilling* Hickory-1 last year. The final instalment from Burgundy *for last season's costs* only arrived in mid-February '24. My *opinion* at time of writing is that it is a probability Burgundy will default on their 25% share of the flow test costs and their 25% share of the Working Interest will revert back to 88E.
88E, as the operator, is contractually responsible for paying the full gross cost of US$14.5m. 88E management has unhelpfully (but unsurprisingly) not informed shareholders how much, if any, of the US$14.5m bill has been paid by the 88E to the contractors in Alaska. Very simple maths suggests 88E are today looking into the face of insolvency.
Why hasn't a member of this forum itemised 88E's future financial commitments for the next 6, 12, 24 months? What's the G&A in the period? What are the lease payments? What has 88E committed to invest into the Namibian project, and when is the deadline for payment? Yes, there's a US$5m debt facility in Texas but has anyone confirmed with 88E management whether Longhorn may only draw on it for capex costs related to the workover program or to fund the two new wells?
And after all those perfectly reasonable questions of fact listed above, there are still posters on here urging forum members to hoover up the shares???? These posters know fine well what is coming down the tracks towards shareholders. Their behaviour is highly questionable.
sharebel is possibly the most prolific on this forum when it comes to repeating, ad nauseam, the cultish chant that the flow tests results were positive, great, excellent, good news, etc, etc. This is anti-science gibberish. If sharebel and others were correct, 88E would have issued a correction saying the stk barrel figures were typos. Or their NOMAD would have forced them to issue a correction. Or they would have devoted a slide in their presentation deck to taking shareholders through the results in easy to follow tiny steps. What's been issued by the company or NOMAD? Nothing. Nothing.
[Part 1, see above for Part 2]